Agenda of Hearings Committee

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

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

Tuesday, 23 August 2016

2.00pm

Room 1, Level 26
135 Albert Street
Auckland

Hearings Committee

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Cr Linda Cooper, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Penny Webster
Members	Cr Anae Arthur Anae
	Cr Chris Darby
	Cr Calum Penrose
	Mr David Taipari
	Cr Wayne Walker
	Mr Glenn Wilcox
Ex-officio	Mayor Len Brown, JP
	Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse

(Quorum 3 members)

Louis Dalzell

Democracy Advisor

17 August 2016

Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8135

Email: louis.dalzell@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

TERMS OF REFERENCE

The Hearings Committee will have responsibility for:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:

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

Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987;

Gambling Act 2003;

Sale of Liquor Act 1989;

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

Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

Members of the public

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

Those who are not members of the public

General principles

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

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

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

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

Members of the meeting

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

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

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

Independent Māori Statutory Board

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

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

Staff

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

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

Local Board members

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

Council Controlled Organisations

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

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Apologies 7

2 Declaration of Interest 7

3 Confirmation of Minutes 7

4 Local Board Input 7

5 Extraordinary Business 7

6 Notices of Motion 8

7 Appointment of independent commissioners: Auckland Transport Notice of Requirement and application for resource consents for the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative Stage 2A project 9

8 Appointment of independent commissioners for resource consents associated with the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road Intersection Improvement Project, Orakei 15

9 Appointment of independent commissioners for applications for resource consent associated with the discharge of treated wastewater into the Waiuku Estuary by the proposed Southwest Sub-Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant 21

10 Appointment of independent commissioners: resource consent application to carry out additions and alterations and covert to a childcare centre, a heritage listed, former church building at 218-220 Beach Road, Campbells Bay 25

11 Appointment of Hearing Commissioners: Applications for resource consent by Brookby Quarries Ltd to expand quarry operation at 146 Kimptons Road, Brookby 37

12 Noting the urgent decision of 8 August 2016 to appoint independent commissioners 43

13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

14 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 51

C1 New resource consent appeal: Kendall v Auckland Council - 4 Greenhithe Rd, Greenhithe 51

C2 New Resource Consent Appeal: Cowie Street Residents Association Incorporated & Others v Auckland Council - Sarawia Street, Laxon Terrace, Cowie Street and Newmarket Park, Newmarket 51

C3 New Resource Consent Appeal: Norsho Bulc Limited v Auckland Council - Lot 4 DP 166787 and Lot 2 DP 422009 Blackbridge Road, Pine Valley 52

C4 Resource Consent and Notice of Requirement Appeals: Chambers and others – Runciman Water Reservoirs 108 Runciman Road, Pukekohe East 52

C5 Resource Consent Appeals: Status Report 23 August 2016 52

1 Apologies

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

2 Declaration of Interest

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

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

3 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Hearings Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 19 July 2016, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Local Board Input

Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give 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.

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

5 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

6 Notices of Motion

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

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

Appointment of independent commissioners: Auckland Transport Notice of Requirement and application for resource consents for the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative Stage 2A project

File No.: CP2016/15279

Purpose

1. To appoint independent commissioners to make a recommendation and decisions under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) on a Notice of Requirement (NoR) and an application for resource consents for the Auckland Transport (AT) Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) Stage 2A project.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Transport as a requiring authority, has lodged a NoR for a designation and an associated application for resource consents for the AMETI Stage 2A project. The project enables the construction, operation and maintenance of a multi-modal transport corridor comprising a busway, bridge, cycling and pedestrian facilities between Panmure and Pakuranga together with ancillary activities including works to mitigate adverse effects (such as effects on cultural values). See map at Attachment A.

3. The council has agreed to accept and publicly notify the NoR under section 168 of the RMA, and the application for resource consents pursuant to section 88 of the RMA. The proposal is to be publicly notified later in 2016.

4. In accordance with the Hearings Committee policy, officers recommend that the committee appoint independent hearing commissioners as the proposal is considered to be significant and because AT is an Auckland Council Controlled Organisation.

5. It is recommended that the commissioners be appointed to hear and make a recommendation under section 171 of the RMA on the NoR and determine the application for resource consents under section 104 of the RMA.

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a) appoint three independent commissioners for the Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative Stage 2A project by Auckland Transport, to hear and make:

(i) a recommendation on the Notice of Requirement under section 171 of the Resource Management Act 1991; and

(ii) a decision on the application for resource consents under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

b) delegate authority to the chairperson appointed under (a) above to make a recommendation on the NoR and / or determine the application for resource consents in the event that a hearing is not required for either part of the project.

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

Comments

Background

6. The AMETI project is designed to improve alternative modes of transport for the eastern suburbs beyond the reliance on private vehicles and to assist in easing the congestion on roads. Together with improved bus priority, AMETI will support enhanced connections to the city, as well as to the eastern suburbs, and will result in a higher level of integration between all transport modes.

7. The designation, F14-38 Auckland Manukau Eastern transport initiative - Panmure Phase 1A (an early phase of the wider Phase 1) was confirmed in November 2011 in the Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Isthmus Section). The works for Phase 1A have been completed and involved improvements around Panmure rail station, replacement of the Ellerslie-Panmure Highway and Mountain Road bridges, and realigning Mountain Road to intersect with Jellicoe Road opposite Pleasant View Road in Panmure. The Chair (independent commissioner Leigh McGregor) of the AMETI Phase 1A NoR hearing also held delegated authority and approved the Phase 1A regional consents.

8. The designation, F14-39 Auckland Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative - Panmure Phase 1 (Mt Wellington Highway to Morrin Road) was confirmed in January 2013 in the Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Isthmus Section). The AMETI Phase 1 project was lodged with the Council as a combined NoR and application for resource consents and was reported on by officers as a joint section 42A RMA hearing report. The hearing panel was made up of independent commissioners Leigh McGregor (Chair), William Kapea, Nigel Mark-Brown and David Hill.

AMETI Stage 2A project

9. The AMETI Stage 2A project includes the reconfiguration of the Panmure roundabout to a signalised intersection, provision of a new 2.4 kilometre long dedicated busway from this intersection along Lagoon Drive, across the Tamaki River, and along Pakuranga Road to the intersection with Ti Rakau Drive. The project will also provide for shared and dedicated cycle and footpaths, stormwater treatment devices and landscaping. The works will require widening of Lagoon Drive and Pakuranga Road (on the northern side), and an additional bridge across the Tamaki river on a parallel alignment with the existing Panmure Bridge.

Notice of Requirement

10. Auckland Transport, as a requiring authority, has lodged a NoR for a designation for the AMETI Stage 2A project to enable the construction, operation and maintenance of a multi-modal transport corridor comprising a busway, bridge, cycling and pedestrian activities between Panmure and Pakuranga and ancillary activities including works to mitigate adverse effects (such as effects on cultural values).

Application for resource consents

11. Auckland Transport has also applied concurrently for resource consents under the following Plans and National Environmental Standard: the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air, Land and Water; the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Sediment Control; the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Coastal; the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan; and the National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health.

12. Resource consents are required for the following activities:

Land use consent (Ref: R/LUC/2016/675 and 49524) for:

· Earthworks, roading, tracking, trenching;

· Earthworks on or within 50m of a site or place of value to mana whenua;

· Earthworks within the 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) floodplain; and

· Soil disturbance pursuant to the National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health.

Coastal permit (Ref: R/REG/2016/677 and P49525) for:

· Construction, occupation and use of the Coastal Marine Area (CMA) for temporary and permanent construction for stormwater outfall structures, temporary staging structures, an additional bridge across the Tamaki River on a parallel alignment with the existing Panmure bridge, coastal works, disturbance of the foreshore and underwater noise from construction.

Coastal permit – historic heritage (Ref: R/REG/2016/678 and P49526) for:

· Construction, occupation and use of CMA within the Historic Heritage Extent of Place overlay for maintenance of the swivel span of the first Panmure bridge in the Tamaki River, for the temporary construction of the bridge and stormwater outfall structures and for the permanent bridge and stormwater outfall structures.

Stormwater diversion and discharge permit (R/REG/2016/680 and P49527);

Discharge of contaminants to land / water permit (R/REG/2016/681 and P49528); and

Water permit – groundwater diversion (R/REG/2016/682 and P49529).

13. The application for resource consents are being assessed overall as a discretionary activity.

14. The council has agreed to accept and publicly notify the NoR and application for resource consents for the AMETI Stage 2A project from Auckland Transport. The proposal is likely to be publicly notified later in 2016.

15. Officers recommend that the committee include, in part for consistency, commissioners previously involved with the AMETI Phase 1 project. In addition to a Maori values expert, officers also recommend that commissioners with relevant experience in coastal, heritage, planning, or landscape / urban design matters be appointed. Officers consider the AMETI Stage 2A project to be low risk in terms of stormwater design / management and will not require the technical expertise of an engineer on the panel of hearing commissioners.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16. The Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board and the Howick Local Board have been briefed by the Resource Consent Department’s Major Infrastructure Projects team, inviting internal comments. Additionally, AT has held regular meetings with the local boards on the AMETI project. No formal comment from the local boards on the AMETI Stage 2A project has been received by officers at the time of writing this report.

Māori impact statement

17. Auckland Transport’s Cultural Values Assessment and Mana Whenua Engagement Statement identifies the mana whenua groups with interests in the project area as:

· Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Tribal Trust;

· Ngāti Maru Rūnanga;

· Ngāti Paoa Trust Board;

· Ngāti Tamaoho Trust;

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua;

· Ngāti Whanaunga Inc Soc;

· Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei; and

· Te Akitai Waiohua.

18. Auckland Transport’s engagement with mana whenua for the project has been facilitated by the application of their Maori Engagement Framework. Monthly hui have been the primary engagement tool, applying the Maori tikanga (process) of kanohi ki te kanohi (face to face) to understand the relationship that mana whenua have with the land. Maori value assessments and specific issue based workshops on design, stormwater, landscaping and archaeology are other methods that have been employed by Auckland Transport to identify and acknowledge the mana whenua values within the AMETI Stage 2A footprint, and to discuss and address mitigation of effects on cultural values, in particular in regard to the Mokoia Pa and bridge sections of the project.

19. The NoR and application for resource consents have not yet been publicly notified at the time of writing this report so no formal submissions from mana whenua authorities or groups have been received.

Implementation

20. The procedure for assessing the NoR is set out in sections 168-179 of the RMA, while the procedure for assessing the application for resource consents is set out in sections 88-104.

21. There are no financial or legal implications beyond those normally associated with the appointment of hearing commissioners. The costs for processing the NoR and application for resource consents, including any notification and hearing / commissioner costs, are recoverable from Auckland Transport.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	AMETI Stage 2A project extent	13

Signatories

Authors

Craig Cairncross - Principal Planner

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

Appointment of independent commissioners for resource consents associated with the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road Intersection Improvement Project, Orakei

File No.: CP2016/16959

Purpose

1. To appoint independent commissioners to hear submissions and make decisions on resource consent applications by Auckland Transport for the upgrade of the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road intersection.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Transport (AT) has applied for a package of resource consents associated with the upgrade of the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road intersection. The applications include coastal works, reclamation, discharges of stormwater and soil contaminants and vegetation works.

3. The application package has been submitted to the Hearings Committee to appoint commissioners as the project is regarded as potentially contentious due to the public profile of the project. Staff recommend that independent commissioners are appointed, as the applicant is a Council Controlled Organisation. The application package is to be notified on 18 August 2016.

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a) appoint three independent commissioners to hear submissions and make a decision under section 104 of the Resource Management Act on the associated applications for resource consents R/LUC/2016/3297, R/REG/2016/3298, R/REG/2016/3299, R/REG/2016/3307 & R/REG/2016/3493 for the upgrade of the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road intersection.

b) delegate to the chairperson appointed in (a) above the authority to make decisions on the resource consent applications should no submissions be received or a hearing not otherwise be required.

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

Comments

4. AT has sought resource consents for the upgrade of the Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road intersection (see Attachment A).

5. The proposal covers an area of 1.25ha and includes both current road reserve and the Coastal Marine Area (CMA). In order to accommodate the modified road layout and avoid significant works to existing coastal Pohutukawa, AT proposes to undertake 1750m²(approx.) of reclamation beside both Ngapipi Road and Tamaki Drive.

6. The works will also include earthworks across the site, works to vegetation and the construction of new stormwater infrastructure. The finalised road corridor will feature a new signalised intersection, with modified traffic and cycle lanes, as well as bus stops and improved pedestrian areas. No works are currently proposed to the bridge across the entrance to Hobson Bay.

7. The proposal is driven by AT and the community’s desire to improve the safety and functioning of the current intersection. At present, Tamaki Drive typically carries 30,000 vehicles per day and the intersection operates poorly given its design. Unsafe vehicle movements also put at risk cyclists travelling from the East, while pedestrian movements are limited by the lack of crossing facilities.

8. Consents have been sought under the following planning documents:

· Auckland Council Regional Plan: Coastal;

· Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air Land Water;

· Auckland Council Regional Plan: Sediment Control;

· Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus Section);

· Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan; and

· Sections 87B and 89(2) of the Resource Management Act (for land use activities on reclaimed land).

9. Consent matters include:

· Reclamation of the CMA;

· Discharge of soil contaminants during construction;

· Establishment of new impervious surface areas;

· Alterations to vegetation, including removal trimming and dripline works;

· Mangrove removal; and

· Earthworks within the Sediment Control Protection Area.

10. Overall, consent has been sought for a non-complying activity.

11. The consent applications are to be notified on 18 August 2016 with submissions closing on 15 September 2016. Submissions are expected, given the fully notified status of the applications and type of activity proposed.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. The report invites the committee to appoint independent hearing commissioners, which is not a matter within the delegated authority of local boards.

13. AT have advised that they have engaged with the Ōrākei Local Board since 2013 and Council officers are aware of the board’s interest in the application.

Māori impact statement

14. The applicant has advised that its staff have directly engaged with 12 mana whenua entities with three Māori Value Assessments prepared by mana whenua.

15. In addition, all mana whenua entities associated with the Ōrākei Local Board area are to be notified on 18 August 2016 of the applications.

General

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

17. The public profile of this AT project, its location within the Coastal Marine Area and the undertaking of reclamation suggest the possible contentious nature of these applications.

18. Therefore, staff recommend that the Hearings Committee, in accordance with the Hearings Committee Policy, should appoint the independent commissioners as decision makers for these applications. It is recommended that the commissioners who are appointed have planning, coastal ecology/ processes, engineering and mana whenua values expertise.

Implementation

19. Following the decision to appoint a hearings panel and if submissions have been received and submitters wish to be heard, staff will set a hearing date. The hearing would likely occur in late 2016/early 2017.

20. In the event that no submissions are received, it is proposed that the decision on the resource consents be made by the chairperson of the appointed Hearings Panel.

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Project Plan	19

Signatories

Authors	Tim Hegarty - Senior Planner - Major Infrastructure Projects
Authorisers	Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

Appointment of independent commissioners for applications for resource consent associated with the discharge of treated wastewater into the Waiuku Estuary by the proposed Southwest Sub-Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant

File No.: CP2016/16902

Purpose

1. To appoint independent commissioners to hear submissions and make decisions on resource consent applications by Watercare Services Limited for the discharge of treated wastewater and coastal occupation in the Waiuku Estuary.

Executive summary

2. Watercare Services Limited (Watercare) has applied for coastal discharge and occupation permits associated with the discharge of treated wastewater into the Waiuku Estuary. The treated wastewater will be sourced from a proposed sub-regional wastewater treatment plant (SWWWTP) located at the current Waiuku Wastewater Treatment Plant.

3. The application package has been submitted to the Hearings Committee to appoint commissioners. As the project is regarded as potentially contentious, staff recommend that independent commissioners are appointed, due to the council’s involvement as the applicant (Watercare being a council-controlled organisation), the scale of the project and its potential impact on the Manukau Harbour. Staff also recommend that the commissioners who are appointed have planning, coastal ecology/ processes, wastewater and mana whenua values expertise.

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a) appoint three independent commissioners to hear submissions and make a decision under section 104 of the Resource Management Act on the associated applications for resource consents R/REG/2016/2749 & R/REG/2016/ 2751 of the occupation of the CMA by a new outfall structure and the discharge of treated wastewater into the Waiuku Estuary.

b) delegate to the chairperson appointed in (a) above the authority to make decisions on the resource consent applications should no submissions be received or a hearing not otherwise be required.

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

Comments

4. Watercare has sought coastal permits for the construction of a new coastal outfall structure within the Waiuku Estuary, as well as the discharge of treated wastewater into the Estuary.

5. The proposal is the first stage in the reorganisation of Watercare’s wastewater assets in Auckland’s south-west. Currently, separate Watercare plants operate at Waiuku, Clarks Beach and Kingseat, with a large-scale privately owned plant also operating at Kingseat.

6. Watercare’s plants were inherited from Franklin District Council and offer differing types of wastewater treatment and effluent quality, with subsequent impacts on environmental values and Watercare’s ability to effectively operate them.

7. In addition, the south-west area is identified for significant growth, given the planned development of Waiuku, Clarks Beach, Glenbrook and Kingseat. In order to improve operation performance and address population growth, Watercare proposes to consolidate the sub-region’s wastewater treatment at a new plant, located on the site of the existing Waiuku Treatment Plant.

8. Watercare proposes to seek further consents and notices of requirement, as required, for the new plant and associated network once the current discharge and coastal occupation permits have been determined.

9. The outfall structure will be located adjacent to the Clarks Beach Golf Course and will run for 120m into the Waiuku Estuary, with discharge occurring within the main channel. It will be constructed using both combined horizontal directional drilling and trenching method, with pre-assembled pipeline sections lowered to a secure position 1m below the seabed.

10. The discharge will run at an average dry weather flow of 6750m³ per day with a maximum peak weather flow of 27,000m³ per day. While the design of the new plant has not been confirmed, treatment is likely to be based on the use of biological nutrient reactor and membrane filtration technology, as well as UV disinfection.

11. Consents are sought under the following planning documents:

· Auckland Council Regional Plan: Coastal; and

· Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

12. Overall, consent has been sought for a discretionary activity.

13. The consent applications were notified on 4 August 2016 with submissions closing on 1 September 2016. Submissions are expected, given the fully notified status of the applications and the type of activity proposed.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14. The report invites the committee to appoint independent hearing commissioners, which is not a matter within the delegated authority of local boards

15. Watercare have advised that they have engaged with the Franklin Local Board since 30 June 2015, including option analysis for wastewater treatment in the south-west.

Māori impact statement

16. The applicant has advised that its staff have directly engaged with five mana whenua entities, these being Ngati Te Ata, Ngati Tamaoho, Te Akitai, Te Kawerau a Maki and Te Ahiwaru.

17. Watercare has also used its Kaitiaki Forum to inform other mana whenua entities of the project and design.

18. In addition, all mana whenua entities associated with the Franklin Local Board area were also notified on 4 August 2016 of the applications.

General

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

20. The scale of the project, its location within the Coastal Marine Area and the proposed activity suggest the possible contentious nature of the project.

21. Therefore, staff recommend that the Hearings Committee, in accordance with the Hearings Committee Policy, should appoint the independent commissioners as decision makers for these applications. It is recommended that the commissioners who are appointed have planning, coastal ecology/ processes, wastewater and mana whenua values expertise.

Implementation

22. Following the decision to appoint a hearings panel and if submissions have been received and submitters wish to be heard, staff will set a hearing date. The hearing would likely occur in late 2016/early 2017.

23. In the event that no submissions are received, it is proposed that the decision on the resource consents be made by the chairperson of the appointed Hearings Panel.

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Tim Hegarty - Senior Planner - Major Infrastructure Projects
Authorisers	Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

Appointment of independent commissioners: resource consent application to carry out additions and alterations and covert to a childcare centre, a heritage listed, former church building at 218-220 Beach Road, Campbells Bay

File No.: CP2016/15998

Purpose

1. To appoint independent commissioners to make decisions under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) on a publicly notified application for resource consent.

Executive summary

2. The council has received an application from Adrian Rowan for resource consents. The application is to carry out additions and alterations to a heritage listed former church building at 218-220 Beach Road, Campbells Bay, and convert it to a childcare centre catering for up to 150 children. The centre will be available for use as a community facility after hours. The conversion will involve internal alterations to the existing church building and constructing a large addition to the rear. The site is on a main road through the East Coast Bays, Beach Road, and the former church building is listed in the operative district plan as a category B heritage item, but not listed in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

3. The centre will operate 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday, and provide 32 on-site parking spaces within a new basement parking area to be constructed.

4. The application was publicly notified and attracted 226 submissions plus 2 late submissions, 227 in opposition and 1 support, of which 163 submitters wish to be heard. The application is regarded by staff as contentious due to the large number of submissions, the prominence of the site and heritage status of the church building, and media interest.

5. The application is regarded by staff as contentious and as defined by the Hearings Committee Policy, the Hearings Committee is responsible to determine the decision makers for such matters. The Hearings Committee is therefore invited to appoint commissioners to hear and determine the application under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”).

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a) appoint three independent commissioners to hear submissions and determine the application by Adrian Rowan to carry out additions and alterations to a heritage listed former church building at 218-220 Beach Road, Campbells Bay, and convert it to a childcare centre catering for up to 150 children, and use it as a community facility after hours, under section 104 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

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

Comments

Background

6. In July 2015, the council received a resource consent application from Adrian Rowan (the applicant) for resource consents to operate a childcare centre catering for up to 150 children, and after hours community facilities, at 218-220 Beach Road, Campbell’s Bay.

7. The application site is located on the northwest corner of Beach Road, a main thoroughfare through the East Coast Bays, and Park Rise, close to Campbells Bay Beach. The site comprises two separate rectangular allotments that together form a square. A site location plan and aerial photo are attached to this report as Attachment A.

8. The southern allotment contains a large brick church building at its eastern end, constructed in the 1950s by the Methodist Church, and a modern residential dwelling to the west. The Church sold the site in 2015 due to costs associated with necessary earthquake strengthening work that they could not afford. The northern allotment is generally covered in vegetation. The surrounding area is suburban residential and the land rises steadily up to the west.

9. The proposal is to convert the existing church building into a childcare centre. Physical works involve demolishing the existing rear extension of the church building and the existing residential dwelling to the rear of the site. The site would then be excavated out to create a basement parking area for 32 vehicles with a new rear extension. The centre will operate 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday. The existing house would be demolished and a new residential lot created along the western half of the overall site. Plans of the proposal are attached to this report as Attachment B.

10. Resource consents are required due to the nature and scale of the activity, earthworks, groundwater dewatering, stormwater, changes to a listed building and the subdivision.

11. The application was publicly notified at the applicant’s request in April 2016. Submissions closed on 4 May 2016. The council received 226 submissions and 2 late submissions, of which 227 opposed the application 1 supported. 163 submitters have indicated they wish to be heard in support of their submission. The main issues that are raised by the application relate to traffic and car parking, noise, heritage, trees, stormwater and earthworks.

Consideration

General

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

13. The application falls within the policy’s definition of contentious due to the large number of submissions, the prominence of the site and heritage status of the church building, and media interest. Therefore, it is recommended that the Hearings Committee in accordance with its policy appoint the commissioners as decision-makers. While the policy seeks to include a local board member, this will not be possible as the hearing is to be held during the election interregnum before the new local board members are sworn in. It is recommended that the appointed commissioners include those with planning, heritage and engineering expertise.

Local board views and implications

14. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board provided comment on 24 August 2015 that they considered the application should be processed on a non-notified basis.

15. The board provided further comment, after it had been publicly notified, on 12 May 2016, highlighting its concern relating to traffic impacts from the level of traffic likely to be generated due to the proposed number of children at the centre and also the potential loss of native bush on the site. It requested that the commissioners hearing the application look at these aspects closely and, if consent is granted, ensure appropriate conditions are included to minimise effects on the surrounding neighbourhood and street networks. Copies of these comments are attached to this report as Attachment C.

Māori impact statement

16. The application does not specifically identify any iwi-specific issues, require consents in relation a site of significance to mana whenua, or trigger the need for a Cultural Impact Assessment. No iwi groups made a submission.

17. The application will be assessed in accordance with Part 2 of the RMA which requires the council to recognise and provide for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other Taonga; to have particular regard to kaitiakitanga and the ethic of stewardship; and to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi when making its decision.

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Site location plan and aerial photo	29
b View	Floor plan and elevations	31
c View	Hibiscus and Bays Local Board comments	33

Signatories

Authors

Gerard McCarten - Principal Planner Hearings and Resolutions

Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

Appointment of Hearing Commissioners: Applications for resource consent by Brookby Quarries Ltd to expand quarry operation at 146 Kimptons Road, Brookby

File No.: CP2016/17695

Purpose

1. To appoint independent commissioners for resource consent applications for the expansion of quarry operations located at 146 Kimptons Road, Brookby.

Executive summary

2. Brookby Quarries Ltd are proposing to expand their existing quarry operation at 146 Kimptons Road, Brookby.

3. Given the long and contentious planning history of the site and previous involvement of local residents, the application has again attracted interest from residents in the area. At Brookby Quarries Ltd request, Auckland Council publicly notified the consent applications and 4 submitters wish to be heard on their submissions.

4. The application is regarded by staff as contentious and as defined by the Hearings Committee Policy, the Hearings Committee is responsible for deciding who is the most appropriate decision-maker for such matters.

Recommendation/s

That the Hearings Committee:

a) appoint three independent commissioners to hear submissions and determine the application by Brookby Quarry Limited pursuant to section 104 of the Resource Management Act;

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

Comments

5. Since 1996, Brookby Quarries Ltd have applied for and obtained a range of both regional and territorial authority consents to enable them to operate the quarry. These consents have been subject to decisions by the Environment Court and the High Court.

6. These most recent applications for resource consent by Brookby Quarries Ltd were determined by the Environment Court in 2015 through a direct referral process. For this current set of applications, Brookby Quarries Ltd do not wish have the applications directly referred and wish to proceed to a Council hearing.

7. The proposal involves an application for a new landuse consent to expand the footprint of the existing quarry including landuse consent for earthworks, groundwater diversion, take and discharge, works in a water course; discharge to air and a s127 application to modify their existing landuse consent. The proposed quarry footprint will extend approximately 500 meters to the north of the currently consented footprint, covering a further 19.92h and giving a new quarry footprint area of 58.02ha - refer to attached plans at Attachment A.

8. The new consents do not seek to increase the current rock processing rates or truck movements and these will continue to be controlled by the existing land use consents. Likewise the current noise and vibration condition will apply to the new quarry areas.

9. Most change will relate to the landscape and visual expansion of the quarry area that will continue to rely on currently consented landscaping and bunds.The loss of approximately 12.57ha of mature native vegetation will be mitigated by a 2:1 staged re-vegetation programme. Approximately 410 meters of permenant watercourse will be lost by the removal of two stream tributaries that will be mitigated by the rehabilitation of a watercourse on an adjoining property. Sedimentation and erosion control for the expanded area will discharge to the quarry pit pond and will be covered by the current discharge controls to the Papakura stream.

10. The proposal was publicly notified in June 2016, with submissions closing on 22 July 2016. Five submissions have been received (4 in opposition and 1 neutral). Four of the submitters wish to be heard.

Consideration

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

12. This application is considered contentious largely due to the quarry’s previous consenting history and record of public involvement, including several appeals to the Environment Court and High Court.

13. In accordance with the Hearings Committee policy, it is considered that the Hearings Committee should determine the independent decision makers for these applications. It is recommended that three independent commissioners with expertise in regional consenting, stream and terrestrial ecology, visual assessment and engineering. The hearing will likely be held in the election interregnum and prior to new local board members having been sworn in.

Local board views and implications

14. The Franklin Local Board has not provided formal comments on the application.

Māori impact statement

15. No iwi have submitted on the proposal. The application will be assessed in accordance with Part 2 of the RMA which requires the council to recognise and provide for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga; to have particular regard to kaitiakitanga and the ethic of stewardship; and to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi when making its decision.

Implementation

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Site and Staging Plans	39

Signatories

Authors	Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager
Authorisers	Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

Noting the urgent decision of 8 August 2016 to appoint independent commissioners

File No.: CP2016/17180

Purpose

1. To note a decision made under urgency to appoint commissioners to make decisions on an application by Auckland Transport for the demolition of the Neilson Street road bridge (Onehunga) and replace it with an at-grade road corridor.

Executive Summary

2. Leigh McGregor was appointed to determine the notification of resource consent and determine the application if it proceeds without the need for notification. Leigh McGregor (chair), Ian Munro, and Barry Kaye were appointed to hear and determine the application if it proceeds with notice and/or a hearing is required.

3. The decision was made under urgency under Section 2 and 5.1.1 of the Hearings Committee policy and terms of reference. The matter needed to be considered prior to next Hearings Committee meeting on 23 August 2016 to meet statutory timeframes.

4. The decision was made by Chairperson Linda Cooper, Deputy Chairperson Webster, and member Glenn Wilcox on 8 August 2016.

Recommendations

That the Hearings Committee:

a) note the decision of 8 August 2016 in relation to the application for an outline plan of works and resource consents to undertake the demolition of the Neilson Street road bridge and replace it with an at-grade road corridor.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Appointment of independent commissioners: application for resource consent and outline plan of works Neilson Street road bridge removal Onehunga	45

Signatories

Authors	Louis Dalzell - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Hearings Committee

23 August 2016

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

That the Hearings Committee:

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

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

C1 New resource consent appeal: Kendall v Auckland Council - 4 Greenhithe Rd, Greenhithe

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