Agenda of Planning Committee

Planning Committee

02 May 2017

Initial assessment of the Seachange – Tai Timu Tai Pari marine spatial plan for the Hauraki Gulf

File No.: CP2017/00075

Purpose

1. To provide key observations of an initial council-wide assessment of the SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari marine spatial plan for the Hauraki Gulf.

2. To approve an approach where council departments and council controlled organisations investigate the relative value and impact of incorporating initiatives identified in the SeaChange –Tai Timu Tai Pari marine spatial plan, that fall within Auckland Council’s statutory responsibilities, into their work programmes and report to the Environment and Community Committee on these evaluations within six months.

Executive summary

3. The Seachange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan (the plan) (www.seachange.org.nz) was publicly released by the Stakeholder Working Group on 6 December 2016, following its development by this group over the preceding three years. As the plan is several hundred pages in length, a summary document has recently been produced. This should be available on the project’s website prior to the Planning committee meeting of 2 May 2017.

4. The plan is a non-statutory document. The Seachange Project Steering Group, which received the plan from the Stakeholder Working Group, has referred the plan to key agencies for their consideration. The Stakeholder Working Group has an expectation that agencies should implement all recommendations in accordance with their respective responsibilities.

5. The plan’s broad vision is to ensure that the Hauraki Gulf is vibrant with life, its mauri strong, productive, and supporting healthy and prosperous communities. This aligns with Auckland Council’s own goals. In total the plan proposes five broad initiatives: biodiversity, fish stocks and aquaculture, sediment and water quality, Ahu Moana, and Kaitiakitanga. These initiatives are supported by 67 objectives and 189 management actions. 67 research topics are also proposed. Four of the five initiatives are directly relevant to council’s statutory responsibilities.

6. An Auckland Council Evaluation Group was established in February 2017, consisting of senior staff from council departments and key council controlled organisations. The group’s objective was to undertake a high-level evaluation of the plan’s vision, objectives and management actions in light of the role and responsibilities of the Auckland Council group.

7. The Council Evaluation Group found that the broad initiatives and objectives in the plan fall into three categories:

a) those which are within the Auckland Council group’s responsibilities;

b) those where responsibilities of the Auckland Council group and other agencies (e.g. Waikato Regional Council) serve to complement particular outcomes;

c) those which are not within Auckland Council group’s responsibilities (but Auckland Council may advocate for, or have an interest in).

8. Following consideration of this initial council-wide assessment at the Planning Committee, recommendations are made to acknowledge Auckland Council group’s shared goals for the Hauraki Gulf and to direct the council group to undertake further analysis and develop or enhance further work programmes to improve the health of the Hauraki Gulf. These subsequent implementation steps are most likely best reported through the Environment and Community Committee, particularly as many initiatives will be operational in nature.

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) acknowledge the shared vision and intent of the SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan and Auckland Council’s goals, which both seek to improve the health of the Hauraki Gulf.

b) direct the council group to report to the Environment and Community Committee within six months on:

i) how to implement the SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan, including additional analysis of the implications for the council group, including the extent to which existing work programmes implement the plan

ii) a proposed work programme of activities consistent with the outcomes envisaged by the SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan, and within Auckland Council’s statutory responsibilities, including prioritisation, timing and funding

iii) options for where actions could be delivered in collaboration with other agencies that share similar goals and responsibilities

iv) consideration of these updated and proposed work programmes for incorporation into the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2018-28 and other relevant processes and opportunities.

Comments

Background

9. The SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari marine spatial plan for the Hauraki Gulf was developed by an independent Stakeholder Working Group over the past three years, and was publically released on 6 December 2016.

10. The plan is a non-statutory document and is non-binding on agencies. The plan includes a number of principles about its implementation, the first of which is that the plan must be considered as an integrated package. The Stakeholder Working Group expects that agencies should implement all recommendations relevant to them, within their statutory mandate.

11. The use of a spatial planning tool was prompted by a report on marine spatial planning published by the Hauraki Gulf Forum in April 2011, and simultaneously picked up by Auckland and Waikato Regional Council staff at that time. The concept was further discussed at the Environmental Defence Society’s conference in June 2011.

12. Through predominantly the Auckland Plan Committee (from February 2012), and also the Strategy and Finance Committee (August 2012), Auckland Council received various reports and advice, debating the proposed governance, structural and financial options for the proposed project, as it related to its involvement. By resolution of the Auckland Plan Committee, the Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan initiative was authorised by Auckland Council in February 2013.

13. The development of plan content was undertaken by the Stakeholder Working Group. Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Department of Conservation and Ministry for Primary Industries provided operational support and technical input when requested by the Stakeholder Working Group. The plan development process was therefore neither owned nor led by Auckland Council or other local government or Crown agencies.

14. The Stakeholder Working Group consisted of ten people, representing agricultural interests, recreational and commercial fishers, aquaculture, ports, communities and environmentalists. Also included were four representatives from Mana Whenua associated with the Hauraki Gulf. The ten representatives covering different interest groups were self-selected following a facilitated process. The four Mana Whenua representatives were selected following their own processes. The plan is therefore the product of an ‘outside in’ stakeholder-driven model, with engagement between business, Mana Whenua, environmental and community representatives.

15. From mid-2014 to February 2015, a round table process was used to inform the Stakeholder Working Group on specific topics. Each of the seven round tables^{^[1]}, chaired by one or two Stakeholder Working Group members, focused on a specific issue and comprised stakeholders with specific interest in the issue. Once all round tables had completed their work in February 2015, the Mātauranga Māori round table evolved into the Mātauranga Māori reference group and continued to provide input through to the latter stages of the project. The Stakeholder Working Group recommended the completed plan to the Project Steering Group on 9 November 2016.

16. The Project Steering Group provided periodic oversight during the process, and referred the final plan to the agencies for consideration at the end of November 2016. Half of the Project Steering Group was comprised of Mana Whenua representatives (8), with the balance of the group being from Auckland Council (2), Waikato Regional Council (2), Thames Coromandel District Council, Ministry for Primary Industries, Department of Conservation and the Hauraki Gulf Forum / Hauraki District Council. The number of Auckland Council representatives on the Project Steering Group reduced from two to one following the local body elections of 8 October 2016.

17. An Independent Review Panel was established as part of the project’s design and comprised international experts in marine spatial planning and other disciplines (science, Mātauranga Māori, strategy, environmental law). The Panel was tasked to assess progress during plan development, and to provide recommendations to help produce a high quality plan. The review was intended to provide assurance to the Project Steering Group, agencies and stakeholders that the plan reflected good practice in marine spatial planning, is informed by best available science and Mātauranga Māori, and that the plan’s outputs are robust. The Independent Review Panel produced three reports in August 2014, March 2015 and lastly September 2016.

18. The Independent Review Panel’s Final Review Report dated 12 September 2016 commented on an earlier 22 August 2016 draft of the Stakeholder Working Group plan, and preceding work they had undertook since March 2015. The Panel stated that the draft plan was not consistent with UNESCO guidelines for marine spatial planning. It described the draft plan (of 22 August 2016) as a ‘State of the Environment Report’ with proposed management options, rather than a spatially oriented plan that integrates themes and sectors sufficiently. The Independent Review Panel commented that the draft plan provided a basis on which to build future actions. The Panel’s findings were provided to the Stakeholder Working Group for consideration in the final plan version.

Summary of plan contents

19. The overall vision of the plan is to elevate the status of the Hauraki Gulf to be the key planning goal for all the agencies active in the Hauraki Gulf. To achieve this vision, the plan identifies 67 objectives, 189 management actions and 67 research recommendations.

20. The plan identified the following five broad initiatives as being key to achieving desired outcomes (more detail is provided in Table 1):

a) Mahinga Kai – a fish stock and aquaculture;

b) Biodiversity and habitat restoration;

c) Sediment and water quality;

d) Ahu Moana;

e) Kaitiakitanga / Guardianship.

An initial Auckland Council group assessment of the plan

Process

21. A Council Evaluation Group was established within the Auckland Council group to oversee and take ownership of the initial staff evaluation of the plan. The group consists of senior staff from council departments and council controlled organisations.

22. The Council Evaluation Group, assisted by staff from the Natural Environment Strategy Unit, completed a high level assessment of:

a) the plan’s vision, breadth of considerations and any gaps;

b) the plan’s initiatives and broad objectives, against the Auckland Council group’s responsibilities and;

c) the objectives and management actions contained in the plan.^{^[2]}

23. Following requests, meetings were also held with Franklin, Great Barrier and Waiheke Island local boards to provide a briefing on the plan and how the Auckland Council group would be looking to evaluate its content.

Council Evaluation Group – assessment of the vision, breadth of consideration and gaps

24. High level vision: There is alignment between the plan’s high level vision (to improve the status of the Hauraki Gulf), and Auckland Council group’s goals.

25. Consideration of broader range of Auckland Council’s responsibilities: The plan does not consider in depth the strong population growth and supporting economy that is forecast to occur in the Auckland region, and the consequential infrastructure, housing and business needs. How these needs can be integrated into a vision with a strong environmental outlook is the challenge and opportunity.

26. Statutory obligations: The plan links some statutory obligations to the Auckland Council group. However, the plan does not generally identify agencies responsible for delivering desired outcomes or identified actions in light of their statutory obligations. Current statutory plans (Auckland Plan, Auckland Unitary Plan and their equivalents in the Waikato region) are the primary vehicles for delivering Resource Management Act and Local Government Act outcomes. Others, such as fisheries management and its relationship to the aquatic environment (Fisheries Act 1996) fall to the Ministry for Primary Industries. Through further evaluation, agency staff can identify outcomes sought in the plan that cannot be attributed to a single lead agency, and work to deliver on them.

27. Governance: The plan identifies the need for a governance entity to be the champion for the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park and long term implementation of the plan. The plan recognises that the Crown is committed to Treaty of Waitangi settlements that will be important to the make-up of future governance, and records that ‘the plan must not dilute or otherwise affect Treaty settlements’. The plan also notes the Hauraki Gulf Forum could play a future role in implementation of the plan, while also recognising that much of the implementation will occur through existing agencies. Generally the plan provides a basis for future consideration of governance matters, including with Mana Whenua groups, the Crown, local government and communities.

28. Blue sky thinking: The Stakeholder Working Group took a ‘blue sky thinking’ approach to develop the plan. The plan did not consider in detail the current initiatives or work programmes of different agencies as part of plan development (apart from incorporating several case studies). Similarly, existing and proposed legislative frameworks, national policy statements and directions^{^[3]}, and regional policies, strategies and plans^{^[4]} are not canvassed in the plan. As a result of this approach the plan:

a) identifies many actions that are already underway or anticipated to be delivered through future committed council work programmes (for example, research topics, water quality outcomes);

b) does not fully reflect that Auckland Council has developed the Auckland Unitary Plan, which included significant public consultation and discussion to develop policy, objectives, rules and planning direction for marine receiving environments;

c) proposes outcomes and/or actions that could require legislative changes before they can be implemented (e.g. proposed Marine Protected Area network).

29. Timeframes: The objectives and management actions proposed all have expected timeframes for delivery, with the first objectives and management actions proposed to be delivered by the end of 2017. Generally, many objectives and management actions have ambitious timeframes. The timeframes do not acknowledge the time required for statutory planning processes, or the nature and extent of existing work programmes and funding cycles (for example, Long Term Plan, Asset Management Plans), or the linkages between these.

30. Funding: The plan does not evaluate the direct, indirect or opportunity costs of proposals. Implementing actions not already funded will have budgetary implications. This will require decision making as to resourcing priorities. Hence the recommendation for proposed work programmes to achieve the plan’s outcomes as applicable to council responsibilities.

31. Research: The plan outlines a significant program of further research, investigation and analysis to be undertaken before many of the recommendations can be implemented. Some of the proposed research topics are being undertaken through existing programmes. Other suggested activities have merit, but are presented with sometimes ambitious timeframes, when technical, financial or logistical issues are taken into account.

Council Evaluation Group – assessment against council responsibilities

32. The Council Evaluation Group assessed the plan’s broad initiatives and objectives, against Auckland Council group responsibilities. The broad initiatives and objectives of the plan fall into three categories (Table 1):

a) those which are within the Auckland Council group’s responsibilities;

b) those which are a combined responsibility of Auckland Council group and other agencies;

c) those which are not within the Auckland Council group’s responsibility (but Auckland Council may advocate for, or have an interest in).

Table 1. The plan’s initiatives and broad objectives and council group responsibility

Seachange Initiative	Broad objectives	Local government responsibility	Agency responsibility
Mahinga Kai – a fish stock and aquaculture initiative	Transitioning commercial fishing methods that impact benthic habitat out of the Hauraki Gulf.	Not local government responsibility	Ministry for Primary Industries
	Reviewing the management settings for priority fish stocks.	Not local government responsibility	Ministry for Primary Industries
	Thirteen new areas prioritised for future aquaculture development, including mussels, oysters and finfish stocks management	Complementary responsibility, local government as planning and consenting authorities for aquaculture zones and farms, and biosecurity management.	Department of Conservation, Ministry for Primary Industries, Local Government
Biodiversity and habitat restoration initiative	Fifteen new marine protected areas, including no take areas nested within larger, special management areas with fisheries management objectives.	Partly local government responsibility	Department of Conservation, Ministry for Primary Industries
Biodiversity and habitat restoration initiative	Restoring historic habitats such as green lipped and horse mussel beds. bds.	Within local government responsibilities	Auckland Council, Department of Conservation, Ministry for Primary Industries
A Gulf sediment and water quality initiative	Setting and achieving catchment sediment and nutrient load limits for all major catchments to minimise adverse impacts on water quality.	Within local government responsibilities	Auckland Council, Ministry for the Environment
	Restoration and creation of major wetland systems to trap sediment before it reaches coastal waters.	Within local government responsibilities	Local government
	Land-based measures to ensure that sediment stays on the land where possible to significantly reduce sediment reaching the coast.	Within local government responsibilities	Local government
	Stabilising sediment already in the marine environment.	Within local government responsibilities	Local government
Ahu Moana initiative	Novel co-management areas covering the coastline of Tikapa Moana / Te Moananui ā Toi to provide for joint mana whenua and community co-management of local marine areas.	Combined responsibility	Local government, Local Boards, Mana Whenua, Communities,
Kaitiakitanga / Guardianship	Connecting everyone including the next generation and different ethnicities to the marine environment to strengthen kaitiakitanga and guardianship.	Combined responsibility with community. Some access and infrastructure outcomes are council responsibility	Local government, Local Boards, Mana Whenua, Communities, non-profit groups

Council Evaluation Group – assessment of objectives and management actions

33. The Council Evaluation Group also undertook an initial assessment of the objectives and management actions in the plan, using a traffic light system (Attachment A), such that objectives and management actions were coded as:

a) Green – Within the council group’s responsibilities;

b) Orange – Partly within the council group’s responsibilities, or needs refinement;

c) Red – Not within council responsibilities, or is another agency responsibility.

34. The Council Evaluation Group also recommends that Auckland Council should:

a) explore where actions could be delivered in collaboration with other agencies that share similar goals and responsibilities;

b) assess budget implications and carry out cost-benefit analyses before making a decision to implement particular management actions;

c) assess cases where outcomes may be delivered by future work programmes, and consider the most appropriate timing for implementing these initiatives.

Initial assessment of the plan by other agencies

35. The Department of Conservation, Ministry for Primary Industries, and Ministry for the Environment are analysing the broad suite of recommendations in the plan that are relevant to central government and have recently provided advice to Ministers on its consideration and implementation. This work has also identified aspects of the plan which are aligned with existing programmes. The involvement of other central government agencies is not understood to be significant at this time (e.g., New Zealand Transport Agency, Maritime New Zealand), despite some likely implications for them.

36. Waikato Regional Council view SeaChange as a useful strategic planning document to inform future planning, in particular its review of the Waikato Regional Coastal Plan^{^[5]}. Waikato Regional Council has started working on analysis and evaluation to respond to those actions in the plan relevant to their statutory functions. The implementation of the plan by Waikato Regional Council will be achieved through a mix of business as usual, expanding business as usual and new work across the organisation.

37. Thames Coromandel District Council considers the plan as an information only tool to inform the strategic actions and directions in the Hauraki Gulf^{^[6]}.

38. Pending completion of initial assessments by agencies, Auckland Council group staff will investigate opportunities to work further with other agencies, through existing relationships, particularly where shared responsibility has been identified. Staff from these agencies^{^[7]} have indicated desire to work alongside each other in furthering the management actions that are immediately achievable and aligned. Further work will be done to adapt and align management objectives and actions as appropriate.

Local Board views and implications

39. Fifteen local boards have a boundary on the Hauraki Gulf, with two, Waiheke and Great Barrier surrounded by the Hauraki Gulf. Both these boards and Franklin have been briefed about the approach to evaluation of the plan to date. All local board chairs have been informed of the evaluation phase to date, noting that further opportunities for input from boards will be provided. This will largely occur as council departments and council controlled organisations seek decisions from council and local boards that have a bearing on Hauraki Gulf outcomes.

40. Local boards have specific interests in many of the outcomes and management actions proposed by the plan, such as coastal infrastructure and access, water quality improvements and marine protected areas.

Māori impact statement

41. Tikapa Moana / Te Moananui ā Toi is recognised as a taonga. Outcomes and initiatives that protect and recognise this status are woven through the plan.

42. The Project Steering Group had eight mana whenua members (half of the membership). Mana whenua were involved throughout the process, through the Stakeholder Working Group, and at specific hui held to consider the input of Mātauranga Māori. Mana whenua also had the opportunity to participate in the ‘Listening Post’ public consultation events at early stages of plan development.

43. The Mātauranga Māori round table/reference group used during plan production provided Māori perspective to the plan, and ran a program of engagement with Māori, through a series of hui and an online survey. Mana whenua also participated in other round tables.

44. The plan has been written as regional and individual Treaty claims negotiations are taking place for iwi and hapū with interests in the Hauraki Gulf. These settlements are likely to change the cultural, economic and political landscape in Hauraki and Tāmaki Makaurau. The Crown has also committed to collective negotiations to provide redress over harbours and waterways, with the expectation that this will lead to the establishment of co-governance arrangements. This will be important for future governance arrangements and decision-making processes, and therefore for implementation of the objectives and management actions derived from the plan. The Stakeholder Working Group has agreed that the plan must not dilute or otherwise affect Treaty settlements or related interests of any kind.

45. Further opportunities for mana whenua input will be available in work programme development by council and council controlled organisation processes in response to the plan.

Implementation

46. The structure and nature of the plan means that its implementation and delivery is complex. The plan comprises a mixture of objectives, some delivered through existing work programmes, some partly delivered, and some requiring new work programmes to deliver. Some objectives and management actions proposed may be difficult to implement due to timeframes, funding or other limitations. Other objectives may be straightforward. Focusing on achievable objectives and management actions in the first instance, with a view to building on that foundation over the medium term could be a useful consideration for the Environment and Community Committee over the next time period.

47. In order to achieve an integrated approach, in which council departments and council controlled organisations embed the actions suggested in SeaChange (within council’s statutory mandate, and in coordination with other agencies), further analysis of options and budgetary implications is required.

48. On this basis, the Auckland Council Group should:

a) develop a proposed work programme, intended to deliver the vision and intent of the plan for council areas of responsibility (including what is already being done to deliver the work program);

b) incorporate costing and staffing requirements so proposed work programmes can be considered for inclusion in the Long Term Plan process and other opportunities;

c) include in the proposed work programmes an assessment of funding requirements, prioritisation of objectives and management actions, impact on existing activities, effort required and external collaboration requirements.

49. The plan suggests a range of changes to governance, including new committees, Panels, and co-governance arrangements. These proposals will need to be considered across Auckland Council. Consideration should also be given to how the plan’s proposed arrangements could be delivered. Likewise, council will need to consider how it wishes to engage with the Crown and Mana Whenua in future Treaty settlement negotiations, to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes for the governance of the Hauraki Gulf.

50. With other reviews of council plans underway (e.g. Auckland Plan, local board area plans) there is opportunity to incorporate appropriate actions in these reviews.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	SeaChange - initial assessment of the objectives and management actions	19

Signatories

Authors

Sietse Bouma, Team Leader, Natural Environment Strategy Unit

Nick Reid, Senior Analyst – Strategy, Natural Environment Strategy Unit

Dave Allen, Principal Analyst – Strategy, Natural Environment Strategy Unit

Authorisers

Jacques Victor, General Manager Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn, Chief of Strategy, Chief Planning Office

Planning Committee

02 May 2017

Auckland Council draft submission on Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document

File No.: CP2017/05748

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement of Auckland Council’s submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment in response to its Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document.

Executive summary

Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document

2. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s (MBIE) Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document, released in February 2017, proposes new legislation for urban development authorities. Submissions are due on 19 May 2017.

3. The proposed legislation is the government’s direct response to recommendations made by The Productivity Commission during the Using Land for Housing inquiry (2015). It is also one of a number of initiatives to improve the urban development system overall, others being the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 and the Productivity Commission inquiry into Better Urban Planning.

4. The legislation is intended to complement the government’s recent introduction of a National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity and the Housing Infrastructure Fund.

5. The proposed legislation would enable local and central government to:

· empower nationally or locally significant urban development projects to access more enabling development powers and land use rules; and

· establish new urban development authorities to support those projects, where required, and powers which may include the ability to:

o acquire parcels of land

o plan and fund infrastructure

o buy, sell or lease land and buildings and fund infrastructure, and

o override existing and proposed district plans through the preparation of a development plan or act as the regulatory authority by granting planning consents.

6. Developments could include housing, commercial premises, associated infrastructure, and amenities including parks, community spaces or shopping centres. Projects could also be greenfield and part of city expansion. Projects would not be limited to solely housing related projects. Development powers will not be available for stand-alone infrastructure projects.

7. The council’s draft submission represents the views of the Auckland Council Group, which includes Auckland Council, Auckland Transport, Panuku Development Auckland, and Watercare Services Limited. The council has worked with the Independent Māori Statutory Board to prepare this submission.

8. The draft submission consists of high level comments followed by comments on the issues and proposals it considers most substantive.

9. Overall, the council supports in principle the establishment of urban development authorities. While many of the 169 specific proposals in the discussion document are supported, the council has raised concerns with some aspects, including:

· the composition and powers of urban development authorities (UDA)

· the processes outlined for the development of a UDA

· the nature of new urban development that could arise if these are not sufficiently cognisant of, and responsive to, the legislative, planning, environmental and infrastructure context in which they would sit.

10. Central government has signalled that the earliest a Bill could be introduced would be May 2018, and six months after that before a Bill would be reported back from select committee (i.e. November 2018). This timetable depends on Cabinet deciding in mid-2017 to proceed with drafting a Bill.

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) approve Auckland Council’s draft submission to the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment’s Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document (February 2017), in Attachment A of the agenda report, inclusive of amendments agreed to by the committee.

b) delegate authority to the Planning Committee Chair and Deputy Chair to finalise and approve the council’s submission on the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document.

Comments

Proposed key messages in the council’s draft submission

11. The council supports, in principle, the establishment of urban development authorities as a means of effecting urban development at speed and scale in Auckland^{^[8]}.

12. The council supports urban development that provides for local aspirations and aligns with current and future plans, and takes a collaborative approach to urban regeneration.

13. The council has significant concerns regarding aspects of the overall proposals in the discussion document, including: the composition and powers of UDAs: the processes outlined for the development of UDA; and about the nature of new urban development that could arise if these are not sufficiently cognisant of, and responsive to, the legislative, planning, environmental and infrastructure context in which they would sit.

General comments

14. The problem which the discussion document seeks to solve is insufficiently defined. A more specific problem definition would be helpful in providing useful feedback and suggested improvements. In addition, the discussion document does not address the considerable resources that would be required to establish and operationalise a UDA.

15. The council does not believe that, as proposed, the tools, processes, and interventions in the discussion document will address the underlying constraints that presently hold urban development back. In addition, many of the suggested tools intended for UDAs’ use are already available to local authorities.

16. The council is unconvinced that, as stated in the diagram of proposed processes (page 15), the benefits of the proposals will lead to better integration between land use planning and transport systems, as well as increased planning certainty for developers. Collectively, the proposals are likely to reduce planning integration and will reduce certainty for local government and other actors such as key infrastructure providers.

Strategic issues

17. As set out, the proposals create greater potential for out of sequence/ad hoc greenfields proposals to be brought forward. This may conflict with and undermine long term planning for growth and infrastructure investment.

18. This scale of Auckland’s growth makes it important that the council takes a strategic approach in ensuring that the right residential, business and commercial land is released in the right places at the right times. Land release for development must align with the provision of appropriate infrastructure and amenities that is able to meet current and future needs.

19. The council has a number of initiatives underway that will enable Auckland to respond to growth pressures. These include, amongst others, implementing the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) and the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity, undertaking its own urban development activities through Panuku, updating its Future Urban Land Supply Strategy, and refreshing the Auckland Plan. There are also ongoing discussions with central government through the Auckland Transport Alignment Project to address broader transport issues and to begin implementing project recommendations.

20. The council does not support proposals that would allow the strategic objectives of a UDA in a project area to override a territorial authority’s strategic decision making at the city and regional level. This includes proposals that would conflict with the urban growth strategy contained in the Auckland Unitary Plan and the Auckland Plan.

Infrastructure

21. Proposals regarding trunk infrastructure are not clearly resolved. As proposed, it is unlikely to be cost-effective or efficient for the specific requirements for a UDA project area to be prioritised over the regional growth requirements of the infrastructure network. Trunk infrastructure provision requires a substantial body of long term planning and a prioritisation of resources by the council.

22. The council recommends that infrastructure providers must be included in the initiation stage, as well as throughout the establishment phase of a UDA’s project development. Auckland Transport and Watercare in particular note the critical nature of their involvement in the process of identifying opportunities including the availability, or otherwise, of infrastructure.

Funding and finance

23. The funding and financing proposals, e.g. development contributions levied by a UDA, do not properly address the shortfall of funding necessary for urban development and regeneration at the initial stages.

24. The council recommends that any powers over reserves must have set parameters to ensure that reserves are replaced with equal or better quality open space. Territorial authorities should not be required to invest in additional costs such as infrastructure, reserves, and amenities as a result of a UDA.

Integration with current reforms

25. The council is concerned that the proposals are not integrated with the government’s wider package of reforms, particularly those which place a greater emphasis on speedier decision making. Changes through the Resource Legislation Amendment Act, for example, will potentially make some of the proposals redundant.

Māori involvement

26. The council recommends that robust, transparent, and early and meaningful engagement with Māori must be part of the overall process. The council supports utilising established frameworks and mechanisms for ongoing engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka Māori to ensure that Māori outcomes are identified.

Development of the council’s draft submission

27. At its 7 March 2017 meeting, the Planning Committee endorsed the council group making a submission to the government’s Urban Development Authorities Discussion Document.

28. The Committee established a Political Reference Group to provide staff direction in developing the council’s submission, comprising:

· Cr C Darby

· Cr D Lee

· Cr P Hulse

· Cr A Filipaina

· Phelan Pirrie, Rodney Local Board.

29. The direction of this proposed submission has been agreed to by the Political Steering Group members.

Engagement with Central Government

30. Staff from the council group met with MBIE staff as part of their stakeholder engagement. A second meeting is scheduled to discuss the complexities and requirements of infrastructure provision.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

31. Local board chairpersons were invited to make an Expression of Interest for the Political Reference Group providing direction to staff on the submission.

32. Local boards were given the opportunity to provide specific comments for consideration for in the council’s submission by 28 April. Any feedback received before 15 May 2017 will be attached to the final submission.

Māori impact statement

33. The proposals in MBIE’s discussion document could have an impact on Māori. Māori landowners may have the opportunity to be part of a UDA. Te Waka Angamua and other relevant staff and the Independent Māori Statutory Board secretariat were consulted throughout the development of the submission to provide meaningful feedback on the discussion document.

34. In the draft submission the council recommends that robust, transparent, and early and meaningful engagement with Māori must be part of the overall process. The council supports utilising established frameworks and mechanisms for ongoing engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka Māori to ensure that Māori outcomes are identified.

Implementation

35. No implementation issues have been identified at this stage.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Council draft submission on Urban Development Authorities discussion document	27
b ⇩	Puketāpapa feedback on Urban Development Authorities discussion document	39

Signatories

Author

Christina Kaiser - Principal Strategic Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

02 May 2017

Panuku Unlock Henderson - High Level Project Plan

File No.: CP2017/01034

Purpose

1. This paper outlines the content and seeks Planning Committee adoption of the High Level Project Plan (HLPP) for Henderson Metropolitan Centre and its surrounds known as Unlock Henderson.

Executive summary

2. The Unlock Henderson HLPP will catalyse and reinvigorate wider private development potential in central Henderson through three broad stages of proposed development on specific council landholdings within the Unlock Boundary. The HLPP takes a cross-council, centre wide view of property opportunities to potentially facilitate and enable high quality, residential led development.

3. Unlock Henderson as a project was brought forward in the priority locations programme when Auckland Transport confirmed its exit from council’s Waitakere Central office buildings as an anchor tenant approximately by October 2017. It currently utilises approximately 6300sqm of the site’s 14000sqm of available floor space across three buildings and will reduce its presence to 500sqm.

4. In working with the Henderson-Massey Local Board, Ward councillors and Mana Whenua, Unlock Henderson now has a widely supported vision to become:

1. an “Urban Eco Centre, enhancing the mauri of the twin streams of Wai o Panuku and Wai Horotiu” (The Vision).

2. This combined vision and cultural narrative builds on the strong foundations of Waitakere City’s earlier Eco-City vision.

5. The HLPP proposes a three stage development strategy which will grow the market appetite for greater density over time by starting in the short term with a first stage proposing a minimum of two-three level terraced housing and three level walk up apartment typologies on two sites on Henderson Valley Road.

6. The second stage then looks to the medium term by adding value and greater density with potentially four to six level apartments in two key centrally located car park sites.

7. After this the project seeks to explore potential long term development opportunities on the film studios site and its surrounds over time once film activities cease there. Enabling this future opportunity is an imminent transfer of the film studios site’s land and buildings from Auckland Council Investments Limited (ACIL) to Auckland Council, which will then be managed by Panuku. Further out, the final site in the Unlock Henderson project seeks to achieve a single high rise development opportunity adjoining the existing train station on council’s southern car park in the long term. This part of the site would require additional reporting and approvals if it were to be developed in this manner.

8. The HLPP report attached and summarised in this committee report proposes five development principles and four project goals that will guide development planning going forward. The report also proposes a range of projects and initiatives that encompass nine properties grouped into five development projects over three development stages. The scope also proposes planning and investigation of four unfunded public good initiatives to maximise development associated outcomes on or adjacent to development sites.

9. The five development projects are all residential led; the first two projects are the Wilsher Village site and the north car park of the council service centre site. The third project is the release and realisation of five surface car parks, these require more planning assessments and reporting in the short term in order to clear them for potential medium term development. The fourth project seeks to investigate the long term potential of the Film Studios site, at a later date, once film activity ceases and transitions to other more suitable sites, for urban development in the context of envisioning a potential transformation to Henderson Valley Road. The fifth project is to support the future proofing of the council’s two remaining service centre buildings and its southern car park for a potential high rise development adjoining the train station given that a new City Rail Link platform and two new lines are currently being planned for part of this car park.

10. To deliver positive change and high quality attractive intensification, development cannot take place in isolation of creating a neighbourhood environment with quality amenities and connections. This assumption supports the Panuku vision which is not just to develop council land for housing but to shape spaces and places for Aucklanders to love. This approach requires support funding by reinvesting some of the development site proceeds of sale.

11. To address this integrated approach to development the project proposes to maximise, enhance and connect the projects and properties with four development associated public good initiatives. These include development site place making initiatives, planning for an upgrade of Opanuku Reserve opposite the council’s north car park site and an initiative to plan two “missing link” walking and cycling connections along and over the Twin Streams pathway which could pass through and connect to development sites and amenities. These three initiatives along with the fourth, a strategic investigation of Corban Estate, which is in the Community Facilities Action Plan, is to assess if this property can be made a fit for purpose facility and more attractive to the community which can better re-connect with its centre.

12. These five projects and four initiatives above cover a total of nine council properties and form a ten year residential led development programme. The identified sites have the potential to deliver up to 400-500 housing units and for seven of them, to potentially return approximately $26m of sale proceeds to council, based on current 2013 rateable values. Development of these properties, over time, will eventually facilitate more people living and working within the centre which will in turn enliven the main street and reduce negative perceptions of crime and safety.

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) adopt the Unlock Henderson High Level Project Plan appended as Attachment A

b) endorse the Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) role to actively collaborate with the wider council group and its controlled organisations integrating planned activities in order to align projects and implementation to achieve the outcomes in the High Level Project Plan.

c) endorse Panuku Development Auckland to dispose of the Auckland Council owned properties as listed below, with the objective of contributing to the outcomes of the High Level Project Plan, urban renewal and housing:

1. Central One building, associated parking and casual staff car park:

i. 2-4 Henderson Valley Road - (CFR) 284767

2. The Alderman car park:

ii. 4 Edmonton Road - NA625/22

iii. 6 Edmonton Road - NA625/23 (part-cancelled)

iv. 8 Edmonton Road - NA1040/14

v. 10 Edmonton Road - NA1106/257

vi. 22 Alderman Drive - NA91/77 (part-cancelled)

3. The Falls car park:

vii. 14 Edmonton Road- NA693/359

viii. 16 Edmonton Road- NA810/244

ix. 18 Edmonton Road- NA1656/50

x. 20 Edmonton Road- NA1656/51

4. 5 Trading Place car park leading to the footbridge:

xi. NA11A/1335

5. 1 Ratanui Street car park adjacent to the Library:

xii. ID 95624

6. Corban’s Hill car park – road reserve:

xiii. 430 Great North Road- N/A (vested as Legal Road)

7. Auckland Film Studios site:

xiv. 2 Hickory Avenue – CFR 493255

xv. 10-14 Hickory Avenue – CFR 493254

Subject to:

- Satisfactory conclusion of required statutory processes, and

- Auckland Transport satisfaction regarding transport requirements for the Corban’s Hill, Falls and Alderman car parks.

- cessation of film activity on the Auckland Film Studios site at some future point or once it transitions elsewhere

d) note that the Finance and Performance Committee will need to approve the disposal of the properties above and as reference in the High Level Project Plan.

e) note Comprehensive Parking Management Plan with a view to rationalising parking supply in Henderson and utilising property assets efficiently.

f) note that Panuku will consider service properties and community facilities within the Unlock boundary as part of the project, engaging with the council departments, the Local Board and will seek further approval from Council if it recommends development or optimisation of these properties.

g) note that Panuku, through the Unlock Housing for Older People project and previous council resolutions has approval to develop and dispose of 21-33 Henderson Valley Road (the Wilsher Village site) as outlined in those separate reports, and intends to proceed with development shortly.

h) note the future transfer of 2 and 10-14 Hickory Ave, the 3.8ha film studios site, from Auckland Council Investments Limited to Panuku Development Auckland on the basis that it will be run by Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development into the medium term, which is under negotiation.

Comments

Why Henderson?

13. Henderson was chosen as an Unlock location as it has number of key attributes:

· There is a high level of Local Board planning, political and community support for change in this area

· The Unitary Plan has provided substantial upzoning of the key sites into Metropolitan Centre zone from previous zoning

· It is a strategic town centre location, with good accessibility to public transport and is generally infrastructure-enabled with constraints being limited to localised traffic access and flood mitigation requirements

· It has strategic Council landholdings that can be used to catalyse private sector investment and redevelopment

· There are a range of Council facilities that can be optimised to create further value for the area

· Panuku-led development for residential activity will create new market demand for different housing types (terraces and apartments)

· The centre has a wealth of existing leisure facilities, quality open spaces and retail offerings as well as a good provision of social and community infrastructure, including primary, secondary and tertiary education sites

Opportunities

14. Henderson has several features and elements that can be leveraged, celebrated and further nurtured and promoted:

· The twin streams and their social and environmental values, most notably the dedicated cycleway, art, community involvement and ecological attributes

· The unrealised potential of Corban Estate Arts Centre as a potential amenity and community hub that is made fit for purpose utilised more intensely

· The wealth of public art and the creative arts expertise in the area that has given Henderson its distinct point of difference

· The unique strength of the screen and film industry based in the area that could be further promoted

· The opportunity to leverage the City Rail Link’s (CRL) new station developments which will create a new platform and two new terminating services directly to Onehunga and Otahuhu, along with a reduced 35 minute travel time to the city centre.

Challenges and Issues

15. Once considered “the hub and historic heart of the West”, Henderson has fallen by the wayside since the emergence of Westgate, North West and Hobsonville and the maturing of New Lynn as attractive places to live and invest. This loss of attractiveness has also eroded as a consequence of the Waitakere City council’s amalgamation in 2010 into Auckland Council.

16. The centre is fractured and fragmented by the two streams and the rail corridor, severing connectivity from east to west and from the surrounding suburbs into the central area. A combination of reduced public reinvestment and maintenance, along with a poor market perception, exacerbated by local crime rates, the area’s lower socio-economic profile and a main street dominated by shopfront vacancies has acted as a deterrent for private investors and businesses to take risks in delivering new projects to the market.

17. While there is a broad and general demand for residential growth, the current housing stock lacks diversity, with apartments and terraced housing difficult to justify or get off the ground in a market that has a limited market appetite and price point ceiling. This, combined with an eroded strategic mandate, Henderson has been rendered a financially challenging development location.

Vision, principles and goals

18. The vision for Henderson outlined in the HLPP, connects the centre to its environmental roots and its verdant natural landscape. The vision is further strengthened by the areas strong sense of a west Auckland identity and community action in environmental protection and activism. The vision themes provide the overarching direction for the Unlock Henderson development programme and reflect the key themes drawn from Mana Whenua and stakeholder engagement to inform the development principles and goals.

Centre vision

19. The vision for Henderson is to become “an urban eco centre, enhancing the mauri of the twin streams of Wai o Panuku and Wai Horotiu”

Unlock Henderson proposes to support this vision with five principles and four goals to guide and achieve development planning:

Five project principles are:

1. To place an emphasis on attracting and retaining families when planning developments

2. To reinforce the west Auckland and eco-city identity to enhance perceptions

3. To integrate green building features in each development, building a point of difference

4. To include partnership with the community, Mana Whenua, mataawaka and council organisations in development planning

5. To ensure a place-led approach, embed Te Aranga design principles and reflect the cultural narrative in developments

Four project goals are to:

1. Achieve high quality, medium density residential and commercial development

2. Plan two walking and cycling links to better connect development sites to amenities and services, supporting the Twin Streams pathway

3. Incorporate public and creatives arts as a point of difference, to enhance the quality of development outcomes

4. Transform Henderson Valley Road into a high quality, urban mixed use residential corridor over time, within the Unlock boundary

Approach to catalysing high quality living (a Local Board key move):

20. The above principles and goals combined and applied together will strongly guide development to accomplish the Local Board’s key move of catalysing high quality living. This is proposed to be achieved by ensuring the developments are:

· compact, dense and urban in their form and nature

· family friendly

· designed as walkable and cycle friendly

· built with green building features included, reinforcing the west Auckland identity

· respectful of the cultural landscape, narrative and Te Aranga design principles

· further enhanced through the inclusion of public and creative arts feature

Henderson Snapshot

Landholdings in HLPP Boundary

21. The project area as illustrated in the attached map (appendix B) covers approximately 145ha. 47ha is controlled by council and 14ha controlled by the Crown, made up mostly of schools sites and some Housing New Zealand stock. The council land holdings are made up of mostly open space properties with some community facilities and services land. 20ha of land is taken up by road reserve. Within the wide range of properties in council control there are a number of surface car parks and “in service” properties that total approximately 7ha of land with high or moderate level potential for development opportunities which form the subject of the HLPP.

22. The boundary of the project area aligns closely with the Metropolitan Centre zoning and reflects an 800m development catchment around the train station. The project area includes key sites such as Corban Estate Art Centre, The Auckland Film Studios, Westfield West City, the Mega Centre, West Wave Pools and Henderson High School.

Community Profile

23. As of the 2013 Census, Henderson has a population of 13,000, 11% of Henderson-Massey Local Board’s population. The age composition of Henderson and Henderson-Massey population is generally similar to that of the wider Auckland region. However, it is worth noting Henderson has an older population than found in the wider region, with 13% of its population over the age of 65 as opposed to 11% for the region. This is due, in part, to a growing supply of retirement villages in the area.

24. The ethnic composition of Henderson is similar to that of the wider Auckland region, with a marginally higher Maori population (12.5%) than the Auckland average of 10%.The dominant ethnicity in the area remains European (despite a substantial departure within 2001-2006). The Asian population has grown significantly, representing 24% of the residents in 2013 (12% in 2001). The demographic change also led to a shift towards higher household incomes.

25. Henderson-Massey incomes are comparable to the wider Auckland region despite significant differences in industry structure. The only exception is a lower proportion of high to very high income earners and a relatively higher share in the $5,000 to $20,000 annual income. This is largely made of part time employees, unemployed or not in the labour force on benefit.

26. The Unlock Henderson area, more specifically, has social challenges to overcome. Both Henderson North and South, where most of the target area is located, have very high deprivation scores, 8 and 9 respectively, 10 being the highest. Education options in the area are offered at Henderson School a decile 3 primary school and Henderson High School a decile 3 secondary school. There are a range of community and commercially based early childhood centres and there is a small Unitec campus opposite the library.

Market Activity

27. Henderson’s residential market is dominated by three and four bedroom stand-alone houses, the result of significant subdivision and greenfield housing development over the past fifty years. There have been 132 sales of 3 bedroom dwellings/units in the size range of 80 – 100m2 in the past 12 months at a median price of $651k. There have been 24 sales of 2 bedroom dwellings/units in the size range of 60 -80m2 in the past 12 months at a median price of $538k. There are very few sales of apartments due to there being a shortage of completed stock. Retirement villages comprise a large part of the apartment market, which has a pipeline of around 50% to the current stock.

28. We are aware of a 2 bedroom apartment conversion with carpark in Waider Place, which is a building off Great North Road, opposite Corban Estate and near the Waitakere Garden’s retirement village, being offered to market at $380k for the past 9months with very little interest. This low point ceiling in the area makes multi-level development feasibility challenging despite the enabling Metropolitan Centre zoning

29. Apartment developments have entered the market over the last 10 years but have not been widely accepted. Within 750m from West City shopping centre there are three projects currently on the market with Resource Consents in place for a total 160 apartments. Projects which the developers are electing to abandon due to the inability to secure the required buyer commitment with funding to commence construction are:

· 57 Henderson Valley Road - 36 two bedroom apartments,

· 1 Buscomb Ave - 40 apartments over nine levels

· 29-31 Catherine St 84 apartments with 70 carparks over 13 floors.

30. Residential rentals in West Auckland have increased considerably over the past two years our advice is 3bedroom homes cost in the in order of $550/week and 2 bed $450/week.

31. Recent sales of the Westfield West City Shopping Centre and the Waitakere Mega Centre are transactions worth noting at $160m and $40m respectively.

32. Notable new development in the form of the $15-20m Whoa!Studios development has recently launched as a family friendly restaurant, interactive theatre and playground, has been a welcome addition to the Henderson development and entertainment scene.

Transport and Access

33. Henderson has excellent public transport links with the train station providing convenient access to the rail network and the Auckland CBD. Travel time to Auckland CBD by train at peak hour is approximately 45 minutes. The City Rail Link project will reduce travel time to around 35 minutes and will see the delivery of an additional platform at the Henderson Train Station. This will facilitate higher frequency services (up to every 5 minutes at peak) and a direct service to Otahuhu Interchange via Newmarket.

34. Henderson is also well serviced by the bus network. There is a prospect that a rapid bus service from Henderson to Constellation Drive could be planned in the long term future to service West to North trips. There are initial discussions that relate to the future arrangements of the Railside Avenue Super Stop being complimented by an enhanced bus stop and service on Henderson Valley Road.

35. The centre also has reasonable access to State Highway 16 and approximately 25-30 minutes from the city centre off peak.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

36. The Unlock project’s guiding development principles and goals reflect and build on previous planning in the Henderson-Massey Local Board Plan 2014 and the Henderson Implementation Plan 2014.

37. At its 21 March 2017 business meeting, the Henderson-Massey Local Board resolved to endorse and support the Unlock Henderson project with a wording adjustment in the resolution to include engagement and consultation with mataawaka.

38. The resolution also included a formal request to the Governing Body to reinvest the proceeds from any sales within the Henderson metropolitan area back into the development of Henderson in line with the Unlock Henderson High Level Project Plan. This matter was discussed at the 5 April 2017 Planning Committee workshop, at which the Henderson-Massey local Board chair, Shane Henderson, attended and spoke to the matter.

39. On-going advocacy, engagement and consultation with the Henderson-Massey Local Board will continue throughout the development planning process to ensure alignment and collaboration. Panuku is working with the Local Board to explore where potential local funding for transport and parks projects could align with Unlock Henderson.

Māori impact statement

40. Mana whenua seek to play an integrated cultural, social and economic part in the “unlocking” of Henderson. Engagement with mana whenua through the Panuku Mana Whenua forum and The Unlock Henderson mana whenua project working group has contributed to defining the overall approach and has resulted in a supported narrative of the project by mana whenua. This was informed by the preparation and development of a project charter between Panuku and mana whenua which has helped to set expectations and streamline engagement. The mana whenua forum endorsed the project and its vision and cultural narrative on 20 February as part of the HLPP process.

41. Through the HLPP approvals process with the Henderson-Massey Local Board, on 21 March 2017, it was resolved, that as part of the project’s principle number four, that mataawaka be included in the development planning process. Panuku will additionally engage with urban Māori as part of the project’s Engagement and Place Plan.

42. The key themes emerging through this engagement relate to recognising and upholding the cultural values of the place and place naming, valuing the environment and designing for the people. These themes are set in the context of an ongoing collaborative partnership approach to any development that is inclusive and regenerative with a strong sustainability ethos.

43. Mana whenua has a strong historical footprint in the Henderson Valley and seek to build on this association through involvement in development which recognises their cultural values, draws on Te Aranga design principles and reflects the cultural narrative.

44. Opportunities for mana whenua may extend to joint ventures, land purchase and development.

45. Tamaki Makaurau mana whenua listed below have interests in the broader Henderson area. Panuku will work in partnership with mana whenua towards high quality outcomes throughout planning and implementation of Unlock Henderson which intends to see the enhancement of the mauri (the life essence of place and people). The list of mana whenua that have been identified is:

a. Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

b. Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

c. Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei

d. Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

e. Te Kawerau a Maki

f. Te Akitai Waiohua

g. Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

h. Ngāti Paoa

i. Ngāti Maru

j. Ngāti Tamaterā.

Implementation

46. There is a strong desire for great outcomes in this valued place and for all parts of the organisation and the community to work towards and achieve one of the Local Board’s Key Moves which is to catalyse high quality living. The Unlock Henderson project is the Panuku contribution to advancing the six key moves outlined by the Board’s most recent spatial planning.

47. Henderson is an aspirational metropolitan centre where the generous planning and zoning envelope does not align well with market and demographic factors to enable the outcomes provide for in the Unitary Plan. The location is commercially challenging in context of nearby maturing and emerging centres such as New Lynn and Westgate, the crime and safety perceptions and given the limited market appetite for apartments in Henderson during the remainder this development cycle. These factors combined renders Henderson as not yet ready for high rise development outcomes as enabled through the centre’s zoning.

Development Strategy

48. The consequential development strategy is to therefore develop high quality, medium density residential and commercial development over three broad stages as follows:

49. Short term (0 to three years), develop two sites, the 21-33 Henderson Valley Road (Wilsher Village) and 2-4 Henderson Valley Road (Central One and car park) with medium density terraced housing and walk up apartment typologies. These two development sites need to be delivered within a tight price point ceiling to meet the market for new residential product in the area. Together, the two sites could potentially yield between 100-150 units.

50. Medium term (two to six years), the development of two key surface car parks sites will be assessed and agreed with Auckland Transport and become cleared and available for development. However the planning and analysis needs to begin in the short term for this to be achieved in year 3 onwards. By starting with terraced housing in the short term as outlined above, it is projected that four to six level apartments could become more viable and commercially attractive by this time. This can only happen once the first terraced housing product has been brought to market in Henderson. The two sites known as The Falls and Alderman car parks could potentially yield up to 130-150 units combined with associated ground floor commercial outcomes with surface or first floor parking solutions. The other two small sites known as 1 Ratanui St and Corban’s Hill car park may together yield another 20 units and or present a range of yet to be determined outcomes. 5 Trading Place is subject to legal investigation and the future of this site is yet to be explored.

51. Longer term (five to nine years plus), there is a key strategic opportunity to plan for a single site high rise opportunity, like that achieved at New Lynn for Henderson. This is envisioned on the south car park of the 6 Henderson Valley Road council building, directly adjoining the existing train station. This site presents the best opportunity to meet the aspirations of the Auckland and Unitary Plans enabled intent and zoning. This site is proposed to be future proofed for this opportunity.

52. In consideration of this approach to development and staging there are five proposed development projects and four proposed public good initiatives that make up the Unlock delivery programme. The identified five Development Projects are:

P1	*Project 1* (short term): Develop 21-33 Henderson Valley Road, known as Wilsher Village, into 50-60 terraced housing units and 40 Housing for Older People units
P2	*Project 2* (short term): Develop 2-4 Henderson Valley Road, known as the Central One and staff car park site, into 50-80 terraced houses and walk up apartments.
P3	*Project 3* (medium term): Release and realisation of 5 surface car parks into potentially 150-160 terraced houses and apartment buildings with associated ground floor commercial outcomes and necessary agreed parking solutions.
P4	*Project 4* (long term): explore the future form and function of Henderson Valley Road and investigate longer term development opportunities for the film studios site given its close proximity to the train station.
P5	*Project 5* (short, medium and long term): Support the consolidation and optimisation of council accommodation needs onto just 6 Henderson Valley Road and future proof the rear car park for a single high rise development opportunity over the train station as the City Rail Link platform project progresses through the planning stages.

53. The proposed four Public Good Initiatives are:

I1	*Initiative 1* (short term): Development associated place making and activations which will enhance the vibrancy of the properties and transition the sites from mostly car parking towards development outcomes. These may include a signature event, a gap filler intervention, an information kiosk utilising an available tenancy in Central One and making use of the onsite council kitchen to deliver an innovative incubator kitchen project to enliven the space and complement the existing food and beverage offering.
I2	*Initiative 2* (short term): Advocate and plan for an Upgrade of Opanuku Reserve, opposite Project 2, to improve development amenity, increase park utilisation, public safety, access and attractiveness. Reflect the cultural narrative and pay respect to the mauri of the Opanuku stream.
I3	*Initiative 3* (short, medium term): Plan two walking and cycling links to better connect development sites to amenities and services. One between Corban Estate and the train station over the Opanuku stream and the other along the Oratia stream to connect the Library to Westwave and Tui Glen.
I4	*Initiative 4* (medium term): Investigate options to make Corban Estate fit for purpose and explore options to optimise the uses on site, aligned with the Community Facilities Network Action Plan.

54. Projects 1 and 2 are underway with due diligence, design and planning. Project 3 will initiate later in the year with the necessary parking studies. Initiative 3 is progressing with advocacy to Auckland Transport Programme Business Case for walking and cycling. Advocacy for use of the Henderson-Massey Local Board Auckland Transport capital fund, which currently has some unallocated funding, is being sought as well.

Engagement

55. To ensure that Panuku establishes a high level of trust and understanding with the Henderson-Massey Local Board, council and its Council Controlled Organisations, and mana whenua, there are a number of baseline engagement initiatives that apply to the Henderson project.

56. Panuku is committed to ensuring a place-led approach to engagement in Henderson. We will partner with stakeholders including Mana Whenua, Henderson-Massey Local Board members, ward councillors and relevant council staff.

57. We will take a fresh and bold approach to stakeholder engagement and communications. We will be proactive, collaborative and authentic across a number of key relationships.

58. A key priority for Panuku is the ability to maintain positive momentum and to demonstrate quick wins. Engaging hearts and minds will be vital to achieving this. Establishing understanding, trust and credibility with people will help the organisation to proactively mitigate negative sentiments that can often lead to re-litigation of proposals and a delay in progress.

59. We are actively approaching advocacy, community and special interest groups to align and identify opportunities to collaborate. This includes but is not limited to; Corban Estate Arts Centre, Unitec, Police, Community Waitakere, Project Twin Streams.

60. A number of baseline engagement tools/activities are underway, including a Cross-council Engagement Working Group, monthly project meetings with Local Board members and Ward councillors. We are working to agree on a Terms of Reference Agreement that sets out, at a high-level, how we will work together.

Value Creation

Non - Commercial Value Creation

61. Total Value Analysis and an outcomes monitoring framework process will establish a number of key indicators and a baseline for these indicators that will enable the broader benefits of Unlock Henderson to be monitored and reported on at key milestones of the project. This will consider each of the four well-beings of environment, economic, social and cultural. It will give specific consideration of Mana Whenua values and aspirations and the recognition of Mana Whenua identity and footprint in Henderson.

Commercial Value Creation

62. As outlined in the development strategy and delivery approach the goal is to grow value in the centre over time by increasing density and market attractiveness with each site starting from terraced housing and moving into low rise apartments. Development associated place making and investment in specific development related public realm initiatives will assist in growing the value proposition in Henderson and ultimately to change the perceptions of the market to increase confidence.

63. The existing 2013 rateable values for properties seeking approval have been listed below in table 1. 21-33 Henderson Valley Road cannot be included as the proceeds of sale of this property are required to deliver the 40 Housing for Older People units on the same site.

3. Table 1: Existing value of council properties

Potential disposal via development property	2013 Rateable Value
2-4 Henderson Valley Road – 1.73ha car park and office building	$12.0m
Alderman car park – 7,215sqm	$1.81m
Falls car park - 5,290sqm	$885,000
5 Trading Place – 873sqm	$830,000
1 Ratanui St – 403sqm	$310,000
Corban’s Hill parking area – approximately 2,000sqm	Valuation required, road reserve
Auckland Film Studios Site - 2, 10 -14 Hickory Ave	$9.85m
Total	Approximately $26m

64. Note 1: 21-33 Henderson Valley Road, Wilsher Village proceeds of sale are to be directed to the Housing for Older People portfolio

65. Note 2: 6 Henderson Valley Road, Waitakere Central, is not sought for disposal and is not listed above for sale proceeds calculation. It has a $43.4m rateable value as at 2013

Funding and Budgets

66. In order for Unlock Henderson to progress the projects and initiatives, this will require operational funding utilising the Panuku Development Fund for the non-recoverable projects and initiatives, noting that some of the operational budget is directly attributable to a development site and is recoverable from sale proceeds.

The project will also seek access to a number of other funding sources:

· A Long Term Plan re-prioritisation funding bid through Panuku organisational reporting to the council for priority location funding

· Local Board discretionary funding, including from their Community, Parks and Transport work programmes

· Operational and capital funding as negotiated from other parts of the council organisation such as Corporate Property, Community Facilities, Healthy Waters and Auckland Transport etc.

Dependencies

67. A number of general external dependencies such as market conditions, stakeholder alignment and statutory clearance or land use controls continue to impact on all of the organisation’s projects to varying degrees. For Henderson in particular the Panuku programme dependencies can be summarised as:

· Council mandate to proceed

· seed funding

· business case approval for public good projects

· The timing the release of Auckland Council and Auckland Transport managed parking sites

· Timing to resolve and plan the future proofing of the council site at 6 Henderson Valley Road and

· Time for any film studio lease to complete and lapse before any development options could be considered

68. A number of coordinated actions are underway across the organisation to manage these dependencies.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Unlock Henderson High Level Project Plan	61
b ⇩	Unlock Henderson Potential Development Projects and Initiatives	101

Signatories

Author

Richard Davison - Senior Project Planning Leader

Authorisers

David Rankin - Director Strategy & Engagement

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

[1] Water Quality and Catchments, Hauraki Gulf fish stocks, Biodiversity and Biosecurity, Infrastructure for the economy and communities of the Gulf, Aquaculture, Accessible Gulf, Mātauranga Māori.

[2] Objectives and management actions were initially assessed using a ‘traffic light’ system. This system is explained in paragraph 32.

[3] E.g. National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, Science Road Map, Biosecurity 2025, Future of our Fisheries, consultation document for new Marine Protected Areas legislation, National Direction for Aquaculture, NPS Indigenous Biodiversity, NES Plantation Forestry.

[4] E.g. Snapper 1 Management Plan, Auckland Council’s Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy, Auckland Transport’s Ferry Strategy, Future Port Study, Auckland Visitor Plan.

[5] Hauraki Gulf Forum, 20 February 2017 (CP2017/01128)

[6] Hauraki Gulf Forum, 20 February 2017 (CP2017/01128)

[7] Waikato Regional Council, Department of Conservation, Ministry for Primary Industries.

[8] See also Auckland Council’s submission to the Productivity Commission’s Using land for housing draft report, June 2015. http://www.productivity.govt.nz/sites/default/files/sub-land-for-housing-135-auckland-council-6612Kb.pdf

Chairperson	Cr Chris Darby
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Denise Lee
Members	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Daniel Newman, JP
	Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore	IMSB Member Liane Ngamane
	Cr Ross Clow	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins	Cr Greg Sayers
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr Desley Simpson, JP
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Mayor Hon Phil Goff, JP	Cr Wayne Walker
	IMSB Member Hon Tau Henare	Cr John Watson
	Cr Richard Hills
	Cr Penny Hulse
	Cr Mike Lee

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	24/04/2017 - Information Report - Auckland Plan Refresh (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	29/03/2017 - Memo - Release of Productivity Commission's Better Urban Planning Final Report (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	30/03/2017 - Memo - Future Urban Land Supply Strategy Refresh Timeline (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	03/04/2017 - Auckland Plan Refresh Workshop 5 documents (Under Separate Cover)
e ⇨	05/04/2017 - Auckland Plan Refresh Workshop 6 documents (Under Separate Cover)
f ⇨	06/04/2017 - Auckland Plan Refresh Workshop 7 documents (Under Separate Cover)
g ⇨	10/04/2017 - Auckland Plan Refresh Workshop 8 documents (Under Separate Cover)
h ⇨	13/04/2017 - How decisions were made around light rail and heavy rail to the airport briefing documents and responses to subsequent questions (Under Separate Cover)

Author	Elaine Stephenson - Senior Governance Advisor
Authorisers	Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy