Agenda of Auckland Development Committee

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 Auckland Development Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 13 February 2014, 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 3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days 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.

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

6 Local Board Input

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

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

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

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.”

8 Notices of Motion

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

Auckland Development Committee

11 March 2014

Housing Strategic Action Plan - Stage 1 - Update and Next Stage

File No.: CP2014/03259

Purpose

1. To update the Auckland Development Committee on progress of the Housing Action Plan.

2. To outline areas of focus over the next six to nine months.

3. To outline potential next stages of the Housing Action Plan (stage 2).

Executive Summary

4. The Housing Action Plan (Stage 1) adopted by council in December 2012 has 12 priority areas and 32 actions (with an additional four sub-actions). This report updates the Committee on progress against these.

Progress against the existing 32 actions identified in the Housing Action Plan

5. To date there has been significant progress on the actions with six being completed, 24 substantially underway and the remaining five having been commenced. The report provides detail on the progress and status of these actions.

Priority areas over next 6 – 9 months

6. Over the next 6 – 9 months there is a focus on 6 key areas and this report provides a summary of these.

Proposal in respect of Stage 2

7. There have been a number of developments over the past year that have contributed to decisions on stage one of the Housing Action Plan and the potential Stage 2 work programme, notably the Auckland Housing Accord and new housing legislation.

8. The Housing Project Office (HPO) was established to integrate within one office housing policy and the establishment of special housing areas, together with consenting and approvals for qualifying developments within SHAs.

9. It is proposed that in light of these developments, a review be undertaken on whether to proceed with additional work originally envisaged as part of stage two of the Housing Action Plan, and that this be reported back to the Auckland Development Committee in June 2014.

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland Development Committee:

a) endorse the future priorities set down in the report in respect of stage one.

b) review stage two of the Housing Action Plan in light of progress on stage one and the development of the Auckland Housing Accord including the establishment of the HPO, and a further report on whether to proceed with additional work be submitted to the Auckland Development Committee by June 2014.

c) circulate this report to all local boards and the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) for their information.

Background

10. Directive 11.1 of the Auckland Plan states that Auckland Council will “Develop and deliver on a multi-sector Housing Strategic Action Plan to achieve the required increase in housing supply, including options to increase affordable housing for first home buyers”.

11. The purpose of the Housing Strategic Action Plan was to have a multi-sector commitment to improve the delivery of quality of affordable housing. Given the scale and complexity of housing issues, it was agreed that the HSAP be carried out in two stages:

i. Stage 1 focused on Directive 11.5 of the Auckland Plan, which committed council to working with others to urgently investigate and use the whole range of possible housing development vehicles, policy and regulatory tools, that would increase the supply of affordable housing in Auckland

ii. Stage 1 also focused on improving the quality of existing stock, particularly in the area of retrofitting as stated in Directive 11.4 “Encourage and incentivise retrofitting of existing housing stock. (The second part of the directive to “require new housing to be sited and design to meet best practice urban design and sustainable housing principles” was included in the development of the Unitary Plan.).

iii. The Housing Action Plan adopted by Council in December 2012 is the outcome of Stage 1. The Housing Action Plan (Stage 1) has 12 priority areas and 32 actions. This report updates the Committee on progress against these.

iv. Stage 2 was to focus on other critical housing issues, and the contribution of other sectors, in which Council can act as facilitator and catalyst to bring parties together. Stage 2 was deferred to allow progress to be made against Stage 1 of the Housing Action Plan.

12. Following the adoption of the Housing Action Plan there have been a number of developments in the housing area. The council entered into a Housing Accord with central government, the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act (HASHA) was promulgated and the Housing Project Office was established.Discussion

13. This report provides an update on:

1. Progress against the existing 32 actions identified in the Housing Action Plan

2. Priority areas over next 6 – 9 months

3. Proposal in respect of Stage 2

Progress Against Actions

14. There were 12 Priority Areas within the Housing Action Plan which were translated into 11 workstreams. Within these workstreams there were 32 actions (and an additional four sub-actions).

The status of these actions is as follows:

Completed - six have been completed – these being:

· Action 4 – Amendment of ACPL SOI to ensure that the mandate, targets and accountability for delivery of housing outcomes are in place.

· Action 10 - Investigate ways rating policy could be changed or improved to incentivise development of undeveloped land in existing urban areas and greenfields.

· Action 11 - Investigate if unregulated investment is a driver of the Auckland housing market and assess whether this contributes to suggested property speculation or land banking and what useful and practicable regulatory options could be applied

· Action 16 - Investigate the opportunity to capture part of the windfall gain made by landowners resulting from the public decision to re-zone land to urban or to substantially up-zone land in order to fund infrastructure or affordable housing.

· Action 17 - Test an inclusionary zoning regulation, for informal feedback as an addendum to the draft Unitary Plan in March 2013.

· Action 22 - Maintain a minimum of 95 percent building consents issued within a statutory timeframe and 95 percent of code of compliance within the statutory time frames when residential building activity increases. This is being achieved.

15. Substantially Underway - 24 are substantially underway – these being:

· Actions 1, 2, 3 4a, 4b, 4c, 5, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30

16. Commenced - five have commenced - these being:

· Actions 7, 8, 18, 31 and 32

17. Detail on the progress, the current status and outcomes of these various actions are detailed within Attachment A.

Priority Areas over next six to nine months

18. Over the next six to nine months the following key priority areas will be focussed upon:

· Priority Area 1 – Workstream 1 - Driving Housing Opportunities on Council Land – Action 4b Place Management

· Priority Area 1 – Workstream 2 – Coordinating Opportunities for Housing for the Elderly– Action 5 - Property Portfolio Review and Social Housing (for Older Persons)

· Priority Area 4 – Workstream 4 - Financing Infrastructure

· Priority Area 8 – Workstream 8 - Improving the Quality of Existing and New Housing

· Priority Area 9 – Workstream 9 - Māori Housing and Papakainga

· Priority Area 10 – Workstream 10 - Housing for Pacific Peoples

Priority Area 1 – Workstream 1 - Driving Housing Opportunities on Council Land – Action 4b Place Management

19. The Place Management Housing Study is due to be awarded to a consultant/consortium in early March 2014.

20. The scope of the project is split into two parts:

1) Site Specific:

a) The preparation of a concept plan for a specific council-owned vacant site in Manukau at 13 Barrowcliffe Place following a financial and non-financial feasibility assessment of the ability to deliver a mixed tenure/mixed income development on this site.

b) An assessment of the options, feasibility, costs and benefits of implementing a place management organisation compared to utilising any other management models or adopting a ‘no management’ option.

c) Advice and recommendations on a development pathway (including potential partnership options) should council seek to develop the site, a decision in part which will be based upon the advice provided by this study (the outcome of 1.a and 1.b above).

2) Assessment Model

a) The development of a financial and non-financial feasibility model which can be used by council for the analysis of other council (or non-council) owned sites / projects to determine their viability for mixed tenure/ mixed income developments.

b) This study is scheduled to be completed by end of June 2014 and will be used to inform place based development opportunities.

Priority Area 1 – Workstream 2 – Coordinating Opportunities for Housing for the Elderly– Action 5 - Property Portfolio Review and Social Housing (for Older Persons)

21. The Property Portfolio Review is undertaking a strategic review of the service property portfolio to enable decision-making that supports the objectives of the Property Strategy and delivery of the Auckland Plan. Included in this assessment is a strategic review of the social housing portfolio.

22. Auckland Council is yet to develop policy for social housing to clarify the existing and future role of council, set priorities for social housing and streamline the management of the rental unit assets. This policy development is due to start in 2014 and will cover purpose, provision, eligibility and rental. The recommendations of this review will inform the LTP process and the Social Housing Asset Management Plans.

23. Key dates for this review are:

· Complete review of optimisation recommendations - 7 March 2014

· Draft report circulated internally – 10 March 2014

· Draft report submitted to Portfolio Review Steering Group (PRSG) meeting - 3 April 2014

24. The HPO is part of this review in relation to the applicability of Special Housing Areas and the implication for this action within the Housing Action Plan.

Priority Area 4 – Workstream 4 - Financing Infrastructure – Action 15 – Cost of Growth Study

25. The study’s main objective is to provide research-based support to the strategic delivery and implementation of Auckland Plan and related housing strategies and initiatives. It is envisaged that the Cost of Growth (CoG) analysis will provide practical input to the decision-making process including but not limited to integrating infrastructure planning and prioritisation, land supply management, and financial policy development.

26. Expected outcomes include an improved focus on efficient use of public resources and correct financial policy pricing signals for the delivery of Auckland’s future urban growth.

27. This study is well underway and the consultants, The CIE and ARUP, are expected to have completed the analysis in May 2014.

Priority Area 8 – Workstream 8 - Improving the Quality of Existing and New Housing

28. Significant progress is being made to trial a landlord WOF scheme. A draft WOF method has now been developed and is being field tested in Auckland, Tauranga, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin. Assessments have now begun on the 25 rental properties in Auckland participating in the trial.

29. Key milestones over the next few months are:

· Quarter 1 – complete 25 property assessments

· Quarter 2 - Report back on results of field testing

· Quarter 3 - Scope larger pilot study to test potential scheme

· Quarter 4 - Begin pilot study

Priority Area 9 – Workstream 9 - Maori Housing and Papakainga

30. Good progress has been made in getting Priority 9 – papakāinga and housing for Māori underway.

31. A stocktake of existing and potential papakāinga has been completed and an initial hui held with iwi organisations (both mana whenua and mataawaka) interested in housing development. A Tāmaki Māori Housing Forum is being set up under the umbrella of the national peak body for Māori housing – Te Matapihi He Tirohanga mo te Iwi.

32. The following initiatives are proposed over the next year:

Tamaki Māori Housing Hui held

Develop papakāinga/Māori housing project plan

Identify any papakāinga/Māori housing SHAs for inclusion in Tranche 3

Second Tamaki Māori Housing Hui held

Council represented at National Māori Housing Conference - May

Development Contributions Subsidy Fund for papakāinga/Māori housing established

Input into Long-term Plan process

Priority Area 10 - Housing for Pacific Peoples

33. Council alongside other external partners and 60 ‘families’ over the next three years will produce and deliver a Pacific Co-designed Financial Wellness Program to prepare Pacific people for home ownership. The initial stages of this work involve:

· Stage 1 - scoping has already taken place.

· Stage 2 - February to April 2014 will identify and select participants and three will be taken through to Stage 3

· Stage 3 - co-design and start in May 2014 with completion by January 2015

34. Part of this process will look at partnerships to deliver housing including the possibility of a Pacific housing provider.

Proposal in Respect of Stage 2

35. While Stage 1 was focused on council’s role in housing, Stage 2 was envisaged to focus upon the contribution of other sectors, in which council could act as facilitator and catalyst to bring parties together.

36. There are a number of developments over the past year that have impacted upon the Stage 1 and potential Stage 2 work programme.

37. The Auckland Housing Accord and recent HASHA legislation has set the direction for further initiatives to improve housing affordability in Auckland. The outcome has meant that the Housing Project Office (HPO) was established to facilitate the identification of Special Housing Areas (SHAs), and to fast track the implementation of approvals and consenting for qualifying developments.

38. This has impacted on most areas of the Housing Action Plan. For example, priority area 7 on regulatory processes covers innovation. This area of work will be expanded in practice as the HPO is delivering in a new regulatory environment. The HPO takes a whole of council approach, with dedicated staff from councils CCOs, Auckland Transport and Watercare Services Limited and council asset managers e.g. stormwater. Emphasis is on having one council-wide portal through the HPO for qualifying development consents and SHA approvals and plan variations. Co-ordination of infrastructure delivery (at the same time; in the same place) is a key component of the “one-stop shop” HPO portal.

39. Similarly priority 6 on inclusionary zoning has expanded to include some interim affordability requirements in the Special Housing Areas governed by HASHA legislation.

40. The Government and council are also working together through the monthly Joint Officials Housing Working Group Meetings.

41. Equally, council is working closely with the private sector on a number of issues from infrastructure to affordability in both the HPO as well as in other parts of council.

42. Effectively Stage 2 as originally envisioned is already occurring and therefore the need for a Stage 2 of the Housing Action Plan based on the roles of other sectors is not as relevant. In addition there is already a large body of work that needs to be carried out to complete Stage 1.

43. It is therefore recommended that the HPO review the future scope of the Housing Action Plan Stage 2 in relation to current progress, future priorities and provide a further recommendation to the committee by the end of June 2014.

Consideration

Significance of Decision

44. The recommendations in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy

Local Board Views

45. The Local Board Chairs’ and members’ views have been sought during the drafting of the Housing Action Plan – Stage 1 via workshops. Individual boards have been engaged further where specific actions affect their local board areas e.g. when sites were selected for the Place Management Study

Māori Impact Statement

46. Affordable housing is identified as an issue of significance for the Independent Māori Statutory Board. Te Waka Angamua – Māori Strategy and Relations department, has been consulted on in the drafting of the Housing Strategic Action Plan – Stage 1. Affordable and quality housing is crucial for Māori well-being and realising their aspirations. Appropriate solutions need to be found for both mana whenua and mataawaka.

47. In undertaking the workstreams and actions within the Housing Action Plan, the HPO has been working with TWA, IMSB, iwi, mana whenua, urban Māori trusts, mataawaka organisations, council, central government and others to identify opportunities for papakāinga and other types of housing and social infrastructure for Māori.

Consultation

48. As this project is about implementing the Auckland Plan, no specific public consultation is planned. There was engagement with relevant external agencies, iwi, mana whenua, mataawaka, business, property and community stakeholders. The public is consulted on specific regulatory policy mechanisms through the Unitary Plan process, including the March 2013 Addendum to the Draft Unitary Plan.

Financial and Resourcing Implications

49. The implementation of the Housing Action Plan will be delivered within existing staff resources and approved budgets. It is also noted that the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) are co-funding the Cost of Growth Study.

Legal and Legislative Implications

50. There are no legal or legislative implications arising from this report. However, the HSAP will support council’s requirement to address cultural, economic, environmental and social well-being across council activities as required by the Local Government Act 2002; and ensure that activities improve the well-being of communities as directed in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009.

Implementation Issues

51. The Housing Action Plan is an action identified in the Auckland Plan and this report to confirm its scope allows progress to be made.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment A - Summary of Actions Progress	15

Signatories

Authors

Allan McGregor - Manager SHA Masterplanning

Authorisers

Ree Anderson - Project Director for Housing

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Auckland Development Committee

11 March 2014

Approval of Plan Change 260 - Orakei Point to the Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Isthmus Section)

File No.: CP2013/27684

Purpose

1. This report seeks final approval of the Auckland Development Committee to make Proposed Plan Change 260 – Orakei Point operative, following the resolution of appeals

Executive Summary

2. Plan Change 260 is a plan change initiated by the former Auckland City Council to enable the comprehensive mixed use development of the Orakei Point peninsula. It seeks to rezone 5.9ha of land at Orakei Point to a combination of 1.2ha of Open Space 2, and 4.7ha of site-specific Mixed Use zone.

3. The Plan Change was publicly notified on 18 January 2010, and following a hearing on submissions received, the council’s decision to approve the plan change with conditions was issued on 8 April 2011.

4. Four appeals were received, as well as section 274 party notices. All appeals have been resolved. One appeal was resolved by way of a consent order, while the remaining three appeals were subject to an Environment Court hearing. The decision of the Court was to approve the plan change subject to certain amendments, which resolved the appeals.

5. The Committee can now approve the Plan Change to be made operative and take full legal effect.

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland Development Committee:

a) approve Plan Change 260 – Orakei Point to the Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Isthmus section) in accordance with Clause 17 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

b) authorise the Manager Planning Central and Islands to complete the statutory processes under Clause 20 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 to make Plan Change 260 operative in the District Plan.

Discussion

6. Proposed Plan Change 260 sought to rezone 5.9ha of land at Orakei Point to a combination of 1.2ha of Open Space 2, and 4.7ha of site-specific Mixed Use zone.

7. The plan change originated from the development of a master plan for Orakei Point involving key stakeholders and the community. The plan change and supporting technical reports were prepared, and presented to the former Auckland City Council for adoption and notification as a plan change.

8. The overall intention of the plan change is that a development lid be placed over the railway corridor at Orakei Point, and the covered area be utilised for roads, plazas, commercial and residential use with open space and walkways around the periphery. Key features of the notified plan change were:

· provision of up to 84,000m² gross floor area of mixed use development, comprising 64,000m² of residential (about 700 apartments), a maximum of 10,000m² each for retail and office activities, and a maximum of 1,750 parking spaces

· maximum building heights, public open space areas, and special tree protection areas

· assessment criteria particularly focused on high quality urban design, connections with public transport, open space and sustainability

· a comprehensive package of development controls to limit the overall height and bulk of the built form to within defined envelopes, and to ensure specific features on the Master Plan are achieved

· a staging table to secure certain public amenities and infrastructure prior to development of each precinct

· four overlay plans applying development controls i.e. maximum heights, site intensity and staging, veranda cover, and traffic and pedestrian links, to the land.

9. The Proposed Plan Change was publicly notified by the former Auckland City Council on 18 January 2010. A total of 470 submissions and 8 further submissions were received.

10. The Council approved the Plan Change, with a number of key amendments, summarised below:

· a requirement that within 60 days of the plan change becoming operative, the developer must have control or ownership over the land and the airspace above the railway such that the plan change can be implemented, otherwise the land reverts to its existing zoning

· new rules to address the noise effects of rail activities on residential accommodation

· a modest reduction in total gross floor area (from 84,000m² to 80,000m²), and a requirement for a minimum of 5,000m² for each of retail and office activities to be provided

· deletion of the provision exempting subdivision in the Orakei Point Mixed Use Zone from the requirements for esplanade reserve in the District Plan.

11. Orakei Point Trust, KiwiRail, Ports of Auckland, and Kings Plant Barn lodged appeals against specific aspects of the decision.

12. The appeal by Kings Plant Barn was resolved through consent order of the Environment Court on 3 October 2012. The consent order provided for the exclusions of outdoor areas associated with garden centres from the definition of gross floor area, and the outdoor area of a garden centre for the display and sale of products from the screening of outdoor areas rule.

13. The appeal by Orakei Point Trust sought greater flexibility in the staging of development, and opposed the removal of the exemption from the esplanade reserve requirement in the District Plan. Orakei Point Trust subsequently withdrew its appeal relating to the removal of the exemption.

14. The appeals by KiwiRail and Ports of Auckland related to concerns about the impact of freight trains upon future residents i.e. noise, vibration, and reverse sensitivity.

15. The resolution of the appeals by consent order and decision of the Environment Court has resulted in a number of changes to the council’s decision including:

· a revised masterplan, with smaller buildings, a secondary road network added to the main link road, larger shared spaces and plazas, and increased veranda cover along key pedestrian connections

· amended order of staging of the development precincts, bring forward a new railway station building and plaza in the first stage of development. These changes do not trigger the need for additional traffic and road improvements

· a requirement to vest an esplanade reserve with a minimum depth of 20m in Council

· reverse sensitivity covenants, and new internal noise standards for buildings to mitigate the adverse effects of rail noise

· greater protection for trees within the special tree protection areas by way of resource consent for works which will result in removal of more than 5% of the canopy of any tree, or the removal of three or more trees, or the significant adverse effects on three or more trees.

Consideration

Local Board Views

16. On 2 April 2014, a report will be brought to the Auckland Development Committee to provide an overview of the Orakei Bay Village development proposal and possible implications for Auckland Council. As part of the development of this report, a briefing has been arranged to enable officers to seek Orakei Local Board views on the proposed development and to discuss the Local Board's ongoing involvement in the implementation of Plan Change 260.

Maori Impact Statement

17. The following iwi groups were notified of Plan Change 260 in accordance with the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 – Ngati Paoa Whanau Trust, Ngati Whatua o Orakei Maori Trust Board, Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki Tribal Trust, and Ngati Maru Runanga.

18. No submissions were received from these iwi groups on the plan change. Iwi will be notified of the plan change becoming operative.

General

19. Making the plan change operative is the last phase of the RMA process for the Plan Change.

Implementation Issues

20. The recommendation to approve and make Plan Change 260 operative is consistent with council’s policies and strategies, and does not trigger the significance policy.

21. Pursuant to Clause 17 of the First Schedule of the RMA, the council can now approve the plan change as operative under Clause 20 of the First Schedule of the RMA.

22. There are no significant implementation issues. There will be administrative tasks to update the District Plan.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Plan Change 260 - Orakei Point for approval	29

Signatories

Authors

David Wong - Principal Planner - Planning Central Islands

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Auckland Development Committee

11 March 2014

Approval of Plan Change 64 Matakana Village to the Auckland Council District Plan (Rodney Section) 2011

File No.: CP2014/01662

Purpose

1. To recommend that Plan Change 64 Matakana Village to the Auckland Council District Plan (Rodney Section) 2011 (District Plan), is approved and made operative.

Executive Summary

2. Plan Change 64 Matakana Village to the Auckland Council District Plan (Rodney Section) 2011 has been progressed through public notification, submissions and further submissions and a hearing. The decision on Plan Change 64 was released on 20 June 2013 and three appeals were lodged. All appeals have now been withdrawn.

3. Final approval of Plan Change 64 by the Council is now required under Clause 17 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991, to enable the plan change to become operative.

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland Development Committee:

a) approve Plan Change 64 Matakana Village to the Auckland Council District Plan (Rodney Section) 2011, pursuant to Clause 17 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991, as attached in Attachment A.

b) authorise the Manager Planning North/West to complete the statutory processes under Clause 20 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 to make Plan Change 64 Matakana Village operative in the Auckland Council District Plan (Rodney Section) 2011.

Discussion

4. Plan Change 64 aims to implement the Matakana Village Sustainable Development Plan (adopted 2006) by introducing the Matakana Village Overlay Area, which sets out new objectives, policies and rules specific to Matakana. The new provisions affect the residential, business and countryside living zones, and aim to protect and enhance the small rural village character. The plan change also makes some minor zone changes and introduces two new scheduled activities (Scheduled Activity 348 and 351).

5. Scheduled Activity 348 places restrictions on the erection of buildings, earthworks and subdivision in flood prone areas. Scheduled Activity 351 affects sites on Leigh Road, by restricting the location of buildings and landscapes, and limiting the minimum site size to 1,000m².

6. Three appeals were received on the decision, and 10 section 274 parties joined the appeals. Court assisted mediation was held on 22 October 2013, and private discussions with the appellants and s274 parties also took place. Appeals were made by the following parties:

· Blue Star Holdings Trust

· Brick Bay Investment Trust and Others

· Matakana School Board of Trustees

7. The appeal by Blue Star Holdings Trust sought clarification on the location of the easement for an access strip affecting 1335 Leigh Road shown on Appendix 9K of the plan change. Council officers explained that the location of the easement reflected the access strip identified in a recent Consent Order which related to this property. The appellant was satisfied with the response and withdrew its appeal.

8. The appeal by Brick Bay Investment Trust and Others, and Matakana School Board of Trustees sought to rezone and area of land behind Matakana Primary School, from Countryside Living Town to residential, and to amend the planning provisions to allow for a carpark to establish next to the school, and to rezone an area of land for public open space. The main issues raised during Court assisted mediation and private negotiations related to wastewater constraints and impacts on the wider traffic network due to the significant number of dwellings that would result from the appellants request to rezone land from Countryside Living to residential. The appeals were withdrawn after the Court assisted mediation held on 22 October 2013.

Consideration

Local Board Views

9. The Rodney Local Board was consulted prior to Plan Change 64 being publicly notified. The local board was in support of the plan change and no issues were raised.

Maori Impact Statement

10. Plan Change 64 has arisen out of the Matakana Village Sustainable Development Plan process which involved extensive consultation. Iwi were consulted throughout the development of the Matakana Village Sustainable Development Plan, which included various meetings with iwi (Ngati Manuhiri and Ngati Whatua Nga Rima O Kaipara) and involvement in the submission, further submissions and hearing process. The plan change has now been through the required consultation process in accordance with the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991, including full notification of affected landowners and iwi. Iwi involved in the public notification process included:

· Ngati Manuhiri

· Ngati Whatua Nga Rima O Kaipara

· Te Uri O Hau

11. No concerns or issues were raised by the above iwi.

General

12. The recommendation to make Plan Change 64 Matakana Village operative is consistent with the Council’s policies and strategies, and does not trigger the significance policy.

Implementation Issues

13. There will be some administrative costs associated with making Plan Change 64 operative and consequential upgrading of the District Plan. These costs are provided for in the Regional and Local Planning departmental budget.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Plan Change 64 - Matakana Village	111

Signatories

Authors

Wendy Robertshaw - Planner

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Chairperson	Penny Hulse
Deputy Chairperson	Chris Darby
Members	Cr Anae Arthur Anae	Cr Calum Penrose
	Cr Cameron Brewer	Cr Dick Quax
	Mayor Len Brown, JP	Member Josie Smith
	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Bill Cashmore	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Cr Ross Clow	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr John Watson
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr Penny Webster
	Cr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO	Cr George Wood, CNZM
	Cr Denise Krum
	Cr Mike Lee
	Member Liane Ngamane