I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Heritage Advisory Panel will be held on:




Meeting Room:



Tuesday, 17 February 2015


Board Room
Ground Floor Board Room
Auckland Town Hall, Queen Street


Heritage Advisory Panel









Cr Mike Lee



Elizabeth  Aitken-Rose



David Beamish



Graeme Burgess



Leyton Chan



Rob Enright



Sally Hughes



La Roche John



Jim Mathers



Allan Matson



Jane Matthews



Dr Ann McEwan



Graeme Murdoch



Bill Rayner



Sherry Reynolds



David Veart



Lorraine Wilson



(Quorum 10 members)




Katherine Sowry

Democracy Advisor


12 February 2015


Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8133

Email: katherine.sowry@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz








·         Provide advice to the council in relation to:

-     the direction and content of strategies, policies and initiatives

-     any matter that the panel considers to be of particular interest or concern to the historic heritage of Auckland.

·         To deliver advice for improving the promotion and management of historic heritage of the Auckland region.

·         Advise Auckland Council on council processes and mechanisms for engagement with the historic heritage community, including owners of heritage buildings in Auckland.

·         To recommend historic heritage expert membership and provide advice to the Auckland Urban Design Panel.





To provide a forum for the consideration of issues affecting historic heritage of the Auckland region and provide advice to the council.





The priorities for the panel include:


·         Historic Heritage Plan

·         Issues relating to the Unitary Plan

·         Council processes

·         Input into the Auckland Urban Design Panel.





The panel’s spokesperson is its chairperson.



Heritage Advisory Panel

17 February 2015



ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

4          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

5          Auckland Civic Building                                                                                               6

Dr. Robin Skinner, and Dr. Julia Gatley.

6          2015 work program and approach                                                                               7

7          Heritage Incentives                                                                                                        9

8          Correspondence regarding the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) Presentation                                                                                                                 23

9          Heritage Manager’s verbal update on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan progress

10        Consideration of Extraordinary Items



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 Heritage Advisory Panel:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 18 November 2014, as a true and correct record.


4          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.”







5          Auckland Civic Building

Dr. Robin Skinner, Dean of the Faculty of Architecture and Design at Victoria University of Wellington and Dr. Julia Gatley, Senior Lecturer School of Architecture and Planning at The University of Auckland to speak to the Heritage Advisory Panel meeting on the topic of the Civic Building.

Dr. Julia Gatley is also presenting under her capacity as chair of DOCOMOMO New Zealand – the New Zealand branch of the international working party on the DOcumention and COnservation of buildings, sites and neighborhoods’ of the MOdern MOvement.

The Chairperson of the Heritage Advisory Panel has approved Dr. Robind Skinner and Dr. Julia Gatley’s request to speak at public input on the topic of the Civic Building.


Heritage Advisory Panel

17 February 2015



2015 work program and approach


File No.: CP2015/01140



To provide a basis for discussion on optimising the effectiveness of the Heritage Advisory Panel (HAP).

Executive Summary

Matters to be considered

·    Role of panel

·    Focus of panel

·    Improving the panels effectiveness

What is the role of the HAP?

·    Global role as set out on the Council website for all advisory panels to identify and communicate to council the interest and preferences of the community( heritage )

·    Provides heritage community with a knowledgeable forum to bring issues of concern and for judicious advice to made to council around those issues

·    To provide advice to Council that assists Auckland to be a national leader in heritage management

·    To provide critical thought challenge to Council on heritage issues and projects.


Focus of HAP

The inaugural panel focused on policy development matters relating to the Auckland Plan and the Unitary Plan. With the Auckland Plan and associated plans being adopted and the Unitary Plan being in the formal hearing process there is now much less new policy development work being undertaken by Council

Potential 2015 Foci for Panel

·    Place for public raising of issues of concern to heritage community e.g. St David’s Church(November meeting) and DOCOMOMO New Zealand regarding Auckland Civic Building(February 2015 meeting)

·    Building capacity- skills and experience- follow up on work undertaken by sub group end of 2013.

Officers are currently working on the following items and advice may be sought from the panel at the appropriate time.

·    Pre 1944 Survey Results

·    Incentives - Reviewing criteria and focus of Council heritage  grants

·    Legislative impacts that impact on Heritage

·    Sites of significance/value to Mana Whenua

·    Critiquing approaches to heritage projects e.g. St James



Matters that may improve the panel’s effectiveness

·    Frequency of meetings -it is proposed to have six meetings, generally every two months, with set agendas

·    The greater use of small working groups particularly when there is stronger membership around key themes could increase the panel’s effectiveness and garner more of their expertise

·    Issues brought before the panel – should have a clear purpose and be clear about what the question(s) are for the panel- otherwise risk of little added value in a matter being taken to the panel.



That the Heritage Advisory Panel:

a)      agree on three areas of work that they wish to investigate.



There are no attachments for this report.



Noel Reardon - Manager Heritage


Heritage Advisory Panel

17 February 2015



Heritage Incentives


File No.: CP2015/01157



1.       To seek the panels advice on the proposed approach for Heritage Incentives.

Executive summary

1.       In July 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee (RSP) endorsed the planned steps to develop Auckland Council’s approach to Heritage Incentives.

2.       A draft approach was presented to the panel in 2014 and addresses both natural, cultural and historic heritage incentives.

3.       This latest draft (Attachment A) provides a framework designed to encourage proactive and effective management of our natural, historic and Māori cultural heritage.

4.       Incentives encourage private investment in heritage, support best practice and regulatory approaches (for example, in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan [PAUP]), create pride in heritage protection and conservation, generate goodwill and foster better relationships between the Council and land/property owners of heritage assets. The wider community and future generations also benefit from an investment in something they value.

5.       The draft Heritage Incentives Approach (Attachment A) consists of the following:

-     Objectives and policies that frame the delivery of incentives schemes (tool-kit) and guide outcomes;

-     Principles to guide the effective implementation of incentive tools and to reflect our values for our decision –making, monitoring and evaluation;

-     Incentive schemes (tool-kit), which outline the range of tools for implementation identified as effective and feasible to support successful outcomes for natural, historic and Māori cultural heritage.

6.       In preparing the proposed approach, the Council undertook a comprehensive literature review to understand what kinds of incentives work in cities around the world. We also held interviews with past grant administrators and recipients to understand how incentives have been structured and used; and carried out public consultation, including surveys and workshops, with a diversity of heritage and environmental groups. Finally, a multi-criteria analysis was prepared to help compare the relative benefits of non-regulatory incentives.

7.       A number of Hui were held with Auckland’s Mana Whenua to identify issues with past approaches and solutions that would be more responsive to Māori aspirations as kaitiaki and enable more effective co-management of incentives for Māori heritage. A project working group has provided in-put into the draft Heritage Incentives Approach attached. This is currently being reviewed by the wider Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum. Minor amendments are expected from this final review.

8.       The key messages from all engagement, research and analysis is that:

-     a combination of incentives is required, not “one size fits all”,

-     specific, measurable outcomes and targets are important to ensure incentives are effective, efficient and can be monitored, and

-     regulatory and non-regulatory mechanisms are interlinked.

9.       This proposed approach for Heritage Incentives will replace all legacy council methods for non-regulatory incentives and provide one consistent approach for Auckland Council. To date, there has been some consolidation of these various approaches, including the adoption of the Community Grants Policy to provide for (amongst other things) regional and local grants for natural, historic and Māori cultural heritage management.

10.     The Heritage Incentives approach is intended to guide the continuing work of Council staff, for example, for the delivery of the grants programme for heritage acquisition fund and technical advice and information to land and property owners for heritage assets within the existing funding envelope. The approach can also inform future funding allocation through the Long Term Plan (LTP) and future annual plan budgets. For example, it is an opportunity to consider rates relief schemes that are currently in operation and need re-evaluation during 2016. This can also be achieved through the implementation of pilot projects to allow evaluation for future recommendations.

11.     If this approach is approved, an implementation plan will be established with future tasks that give effect to the policies outlined, including a monitoring and evaluation programme of schemes as they are developed.



That the Heritage Advisory Panel:

a)      provide advice on the content and scope of the Heritage Incentives Approach included in Attachment A.








17 February 2015, Heritage Advisory Panel, Auckland Council's Approach to Heritage Incentives.




Raewyn  Sendles - Biodiversity Specialist


Noel Reardon - Manager Heritage


Heritage Advisory Panel

17 February 2015



Heritage Advisory Panel

17 February 2015



Correspondence regarding the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) Presentation


File No.: CP2015/00313




1.       To inform the Heritage Advisory Panel of the correspondence and received letter of thanks from Matt Felgate, Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI).


2.       Correspondence arising from the last meeting was sent and recorded in the minutes.

3.       A letter of thanks from Matt Felgate, AMETI has been attached to the agenda. The letter accepts the Heritage Advisory Panels invitation for AMETI to speak to the Heritage Advisory Panel twice a year.




That the Heritage Advisory Panel:

a)      receive the correspondence from Matt Felgate, Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative.








17 February 2015, Heritage Advisory Panel, Thanks for positive feedback re. AMETI Public Input





Katherine Sowry - Democracy Advisor


Heritage Advisory Panel

17 February 2015