Agenda of Planning Committee

Terms of Reference

Responsibilities

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

· Relevant regional strategy and policy

· Infrastructure strategy and policy

· Unitary Plan

· Spatial plans

· Plan changes to operative plans

· Housing policy and projects

· Special Housing Areas

· City centre development

· Tamaki regeneration

· Built heritage

· Urban design

· Environmental matters relating to the committee’s responsibilities

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

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

o Panuku Development Auckland

o Auckland Transport

o Watercare Services Limited

o Regional Facilities Auckland (stadia)

Powers

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

(a) approval of a submission to an external body

(b) establishment of working parties or steering groups.

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

(iii) The committee does not have:

(a) the power to establish subcommittees

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

Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

Members of the public

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

Those who are not members of the public

General principles

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

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

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

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

Members of the meeting

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

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

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

Independent Māori Statutory Board

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

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

Staff

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

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

Local Board members

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

Council Controlled Organisations

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

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

Lodgement of iwi management plan for Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

File No.: CP2018/13266

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To formally receive Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere, the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei iwi management plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The development of Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere has been a collaborative effort between Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and Auckland Council. This is a Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei document that expresses their tikanga and who they are. Council provided technical expertise to ensure the provisions of the iwi management plan can be applied to council processes and practice.

3. Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere replaces the Ngāti Whātua Iwi Management Plan 2012 received by Auckland Council in 2013 as a part of correspondence with staff on the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) formally receive Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere, the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Māori Trust Board iwi management plan in accordance section 35A of the Resource Management Act.

Horopaki / Context

What are iwi management plans and how does the council consider them

4. Iwi Management Plans are iwi planning documents under section 35A of the Resource Management Act (the act) when they are:

· recognised by an iwi authority, and

· lodged with council.

5. Under section 74 of the act, council must take iwi management plans into account when preparing or changing a regional policy statement, regional plan or district plan (e.g. the Auckland Unitary Plan) to the extent that their content has a bearing on the resource management issues of the area. Council may also have regard to iwi management plans when considering resource consent applications under section 104 of the Act.

6. Iwi management plans were used in the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan. They enabled the council to understand iwi/hapū concerns about relationships with legacy councils and their aspirations and expectations for the future. The plans assisted with the preparation of Auckland Unitary Plan and influenced the direction and language in the plan.

7. Under section 35A Resource Management Act 1991, council is required to keep and maintain a record of iwi planning documents lodged with council. Seven plans have been lodged to date either with Auckland Council or the legacy councils. Some are recent, others are older. Some plans include iwi/hapū cultural, social and economic aspirations and policy directions. As such, the plans are a valuable initial resource to assist staff to identify issues, values, views and preferences for iwi with respect to council decision making more generally. They have assisted staff across the council by supporting informed engagement and enabling better engagement outcomes.

Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere was a collaborative effort

8. The development of Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere has been a collaborative effort between Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and Auckland Council Resource Consents and Plans and Places departments. A series of workshops were held in 2017 where resource management practitioners of both organisations worked together to draft the plan.

9. The purpose of the plan is to provide a statement of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei interests and values as they apply to resource management matters and to embed kaitiakitanga into policy. The plan is intended as a manual for resource management practitioners including developers, decision-makers, and Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei itself.

10. Through the plan Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei seek outcomes at the policy (plan making, review, and changes) and the implementation (resource consent) levels. The plan clearly articulates Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei aspirations and expectations in environmental management, why, how and when to engage with them. The plan also provides guidance on when resource consents applicants should engage with them and will help to improve the advice provided by planning staff to applicants.

11. Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere is a significant milestone. It marks the first collaborative effort between an iwi authority and council to develop an iwi management plan. Council staff involved in the project found the process and relationships formed rewarding. Because of this collaboration, staff have an improved understanding of resource management issues from a Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei perspective and how their cultural values can be recognised through council processes.

Provisions of Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere

12. In summary the plan contains:

· a brief history of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei today

· desired outcomes

· contacts

· tribal boundaries

· tikanga (including engagement protocols)

· kaitiakitanga framework.

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

13. Te Pou o Kāhu Pōkere will be a useful resource for the local boards within the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei rohe to understand Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei history, aspirations and expectations in relation to local environmental management.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

14. Lodgement of Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere supports recognition and acknowledgment of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei cultural values in council processes, practices, and decision-making. It is anticipated that Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere will have positive outcomes for Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and Auckland.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

15. There are no financial implications associated with receiving this plan.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

16. There are no identifiable risks to this decision being made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

17. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei will be invited to co-facilitate a workshop and provide an overview of Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere to council officers and explain how it is relevant and will support them in their work.

18. Staff will ensure the following local boards within the Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei rohe receive Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere– Rodney, Hibiscus and Bays, Upper Harbour, Devonport-Takapuna, Kaipātiki, Waitākere Ranges, Henderson-Massey, Whau, Puketāpapa, Albert-Eden, Waitematā, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, and Ōrākei.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei iwi management plan - Te Pou o te Kāhu Pōkere	13

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Phoebe Monk - Principal Advisor Maori Responsiveness (Regulatory Services)

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Penny Pirrit - Director Regulatory Services

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Proposed Open Space Plan Change

File No.: CP2018/11510

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To obtain the Planning Committee’s approval to publicly notify the Proposed Open Space Plan Change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative In part).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. It is important that land intended as open space is appropriately zoned to provide for its intended use and development or protection. Conversely, land that is no longer required as open space requires an alternative zoning.

3. This plan change has four components:

i. Rezoning of land recently vested and/or acquired open space so that the land reflects its purpose, function and intended use

ii. Correcting open space zoning errors

iii. Rezoning associated with Tāmaki Regeneration Project proposed land exchanges

iv. Rezoning of 10 land parcels as part of Panuku Auckland’s land disposal and rationalisation process.

4. Approximately 100 new land parcels are either vested or acquired as reserve/open space annually and are required to be rezoned within the Auckland Unitary Plan. In addition, a small number of zoning errors associated with open space have been identified by the community and council officers. Panuku Auckland’s land disposal and rationalisation process also requires the rezoning of land (typically open space), as does the Tāmaki Regeneration Company’s urban regeneration project. From time to time requests from other council departments such as Parks, Sport and Recreation are also made to the Plans and Places department for changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan open space zones to facilitate particular recreational land uses or development.

5. To address the above matters efficiently and in a cost-effective manner, these proposed changes have been bundled together into one Open Space Plan Change.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) approve notification of the proposed Open Space Plan Change (agenda report Attachment A – Proposed Open Space Plan Change Maps and agenda report Attachment B – Proposed Open Space Plan Change Section 32 evaluation report) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

b) delegate to the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Planning Committee, the authority to approve any minor amendments to the proposed Open Space Plan Change prior to notification.

Horopaki / Context

Rezoning of recently vested or acquired open space

6. The rezoning of recently vested or acquired open space applies an appropriate open space zoning to land acquired as open space, either because of subdivision or purchase during the past year. The proposed zoning reflects the land open space qualities and intended use and development. This is the second update since the Auckland Unitary Plan was publicly notified, with Plan Change 4 updating the zoning of approximately 400 new open spaces.

Open space zoning errors

7. The Plan Change also includes a small number of zoning errors involving open space zones. These include land that has been zoned open space in error or conversely open space that requires an appropriate zoning. These errors have either been identified by the general public or by Auckland Council staff.

Tāmaki Regeneration project

8. The Tāmaki Regeneration Company (the company) is a joint venture between the Government and Auckland Council and aims to deliver 7500 homes together with new community facilities over the next 10-15 years. It is the first urban regeneration company of its kind in New Zealand.

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

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

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

i. Taniwha Reserve

ii. Maybury Reserve – West

iii. Boundary Reserve.

Panuku Auckland’s Land Disposal and Rationalisation Process

11. This is the second proposed plan change involving the rezoning of open space zoned land considered surplus to requirements. Plan Change 1 involved the rezoning of eleven land parcels. Panuku in conjunction with Auckland Council’s Stakeholder and Land Advisory team in the Community Facilities department have identified a further ten council owned land parcels currently zoned open space which are surplus to requirements and have been cleared for disposal.

12. The process for determining that land is surplus to requirements involves consultation with other council departments, mana whenua and local boards. Any proposed disposal recommendations must be approved by the Panuku Board before it makes final recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee. The Finance and Performance Committee has approved the disposal of these land parcels.

13. Where an open space zone or the identification of land as a road, as roads are not zoned, is no longer appropriate an alternative zone is required. The same zoning as the adjoining property has therefore been proposed for the surplus land parcels. The land parcels that are the subject of this proposed plan change are identified in Attachment A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Rezoning of Recently Vested or Acquired Open Space

14. The process for capturing newly vested land is as follows.

i. Potential open space land parcels are identified using the Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) NZ parcel statutory actions list.

ii. LINZ produces a table with the current statutory actions (actions authorised by a specific part or section of the Resource Management Act), recorded against those land parcels. The information contained within this table includes the action taken against the parcel including its purpose (e.g. local purpose reserve) and a gazette reference.

iii. The statutory actions are filtered to show those land parcels with a purpose of either reserve or local purpose reserve not currently zoned open space in the Auckland Unitary Plan.

15. Council departments involved in open space acquisition and disposal (e.g. Community and Social Policy, Healthy Waters, Panuku) and the Tāmaki Regeneration Company have identified either land purchased for open space that hasn’t gone through a vesting or gazetting process or land to be disposed of or swapped that requires an alternative zoning.

16. To determine the zoning of newly vested or acquired land, the open space zone descriptions, objectives and policies and the criteria/guidelines used during the Auckland Unitary Plan hearings and developed by the Parks and Recreation Policy and Unitary Plan team were used (Attachment D). All proposed changes were reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Policy team.

Open Space Errors

17. Errors have been identified by the public or council staff. Errors typically involve privately owned land with an incorrect open space zoning. For each potential error, the ownership was checked along with the legacy District Plan zoning. Errors also relate to Council-owned land which should be but are not zoned open space. Where privately owned land is incorrectly zoned as open space, the zoning of the land in the surrounding area is typically used to determine the correct zoning.

Tāmaki Regeneration Project

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

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

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

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

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

Taniwha Reserve (page 44)

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

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

Maybury Reserve – West (page 43)

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

Boundary Reserve (page 59)

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

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

Taniwha Reserve

21. The proposed change involving the removal of the narrow pedestrian linkage to Harlow Place (Land exchange 1).

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

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

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

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

22. The proposed change involving the rezoning of three lots fronting Epping Place to Open Space – Informal Recreation (Land exchanges C and D).

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

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

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

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

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

23. The proposed change involving the rezoning some of the existing park to Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings (Land exchange B).

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

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

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

Maybury Reserve – West

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

· Proposed land exchange to remove one block of housing on the south side of Taniwha Street.

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

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

Boundary Road Reserve

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

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

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

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

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

26. The proposed changes are closely aligned to the actions identified in the draft Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan. Although this plan is still in a draft state and public consultation is yet to be undertaken, the proposed changes are focused in specific areas (as opposed to the wider Tāmaki regeneration area) and will achieve the outcome of better connected, safer and more attractive open spaces. The proposed changes have been endorsed by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and members of the public will have the opportunity to make submissions once the changes are notified.

Panuku Auckland’s Land Disposal and Rationalisation Process

27. Panuku has requested that 10 lots be rezoned from open space zone or road to either residential or business zones. The land disposal and rationalisation process involves consultation with council departments, mana whenua, local boards and the Finance and Performance Committee. A flow chart of the process is outlined in Attachment C.

28. Rezoning the land is the final step in the process before it is sold. The Planning Committee’s approval is required to commence the plan change process.

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

29. A memo was sent to all local boards providing a summary of the plan change on 18 July 2017. Feedback was received from one local board, the Rodney Local Board, who supported the plan change.

30. The Tāmaki regeneration project land that is proposed to be rezoned sits within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Plan contains high level objectives and key initiatives around improving the quality of parks and open spaces in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki. Workshops and meetings were held between the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and staff. The board endorsed the proposed re-zonings on 24 July 2018.

31. In relation to land disposal and acquisition, local board feedback was considered as part of the disposal process and covered in the disposal recommendation reports to the Finance and Performance Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

32. A draft copy of the plan change was forwarded to all Auckland’s 19 mana whenua entities as required under the Resource Management Act on 20 June 2018. Results of any feedback received will be tabled and discussed at the Planning Committee meeting.

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

34. Panuku’s property rationalisation process involves consultation with mana whenua. Responses from mana whenua are considered as part of the disposal process and covered the disposal recommendation reports to the Finance and Performance Committee.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

35. The costs of the plan change process are within the Plans and Places department’s operating budget. Any delays in the rezoning of land in the Tāmaki Regeneration Area could have financial implications with delays in the redevelopment of land for housing. Delays in the rezoning of land associated with Panuku Auckland’s land disposal and rationalisation process will delay the sale of the land parcels.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

36. There is the risk that the Tāmaki Open Space Network Plan is amended because of public feedback and one or more of the proposed changes is not in accordance with that plan. This could be addressed by providing updated information (i.e. the revised Open Space Network Plan) at the hearing if consultation has occurred by then.

37. There are also risks associated with any delay in not notifying the plan change. This may hold up not only the regeneration project but the Panuku land rationalisation process. Any delays in notifying the plan change could involve reputational risks for Auckland Council.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

38. If approval is obtained to notify the plan change, notification will likely occur towards the end of August/early September 2018.

Note: Due to the size and complexity of agenda attachments A and B, have been published under separate cover and are available on the Auckland Council website at the following link: http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

Select Planning Committee 7 Aug 2018 > Attachments

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Proposed Open Space Plan Change Maps (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Proposed Open Space Plan Change section 32 evaluation report (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇩	Panuku Land Disposal and Rationalisation Process	61
d ⇩	Open Space Zoning Guidelines	63

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Tony Reidy - Team Leader Planning

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Update on appeals and making additional parts of the plan operative

File No.: CP2018/11794

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To update the committee on the remaining appeals against the council’s decisions on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

2. To request staff publicly notify the additional parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan (operative in part) that are no longer subject to appeal.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3. In September 2016, Auckland Council was served with: 67 Environment Court appeals; 41 High Court appeals; and 8 judicial review proceedings in relation to Auckland Council’s decision on the recommendations of the Independent Hearings Panel on the Auckland Unitary Plan.

4. Since the last update to this committee in June 2018, the Environment Court has issued two decisions on significant matters. The first related to the location of the Rural Urban Boundary at Ōkura. The Environment Court decision found in favour of the council’s position. The Environment Court decision has been appealed to the High Court by Ōkura Holdings Limited. The second decision related to the Rural Subdivision provisions in the Auckland Unitary Plan. The Environment Court decision was in favour of the appellant’s position. The Environment Court decision has been appealed to the High Court by the council.

5. The Planning Committee has considered reports on the status of appeals on three previous occasions – 10 October 2017, 13 February 2018 and 5 June 2018. Since the 5 June update, council officers have undertaken a full review of all appeals and the decisions and consent orders issued by the Courts (including since 5 June 2018), and identified further parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan that can be made operative. The additional resolved Auckland Unitary Plan appeals are set out in Attachment A.

6. Section 152 of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 provides for those parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan that are no longer subject to appeal, either as a result of being withdrawn or determined, to have been approved by the council. Section 160 of this act requires the council to publicly notify the date on which these parts of the plan become operative.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Planning Committee:

a) note that 13 appeals remain.

b) note that section 152 of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (LGATPA) deems those parts of the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan no longer under appeal to have been approved by the council under clause 17(1) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act. Section 160 of the LGATPA requires the council to publicly notify the date on which those parts become operative.

c) request staff publicly notify the following parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan as operative in accordance with clause 20(1) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act:

i) zoning of the sites at 55, 55A, 55B Takanini School Road to remain residential – mixed housing suburban.

ii) mapping of outstanding natural landscapes ONL78 and ONL87.

iii) chapters B10-Environmental Risk, E37-Genetically Modified Organisms and J1 – Definitions relating to genetically modified organisms.

Horopaki / Context

7. In September 2016, the council was served with 67 Environment Court appeals; 41 High Court appeals; and 8 judicial review proceedings, in relation to the council’s decision on the recommendations of the Independent Hearings Panel on the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Environment Court Appeals

8. The council was originally served with 67 Environment Court appeals on the council’s decision on the Unitary Plan. As a result of decisions of the High Court, creating an Environment Court appeal right for certain original submitters, the council was served with an additional five Environment Court appeals. The total number of Environment Court appeals to date is 72. Of these 72 appeals, 6 appeals remain.

High Court Appeals

9. The council was originally served with 41 High Court appeals on the council’s decision on the Unitary Plan. As a result of Environment Court decisions being appealed, the council was served with an additional 6 High Court appeals. The total number of High Court appeals to date is 47. Of these 47 appeals, 5 remain.

Judicial Reviews

10. The Council was served with eight Judicial Review proceedings. Of the eight judicial reviews, three have been discontinued, and five have been the subject of High Court decisions. Two of the High Court decisions have been appealed to the Court of Appeal. Each of these High Court decisions related to a judicial review proceeding and a related High Court appeal. The council was successful in each of the High Court decisions.

Status of Remaining Appeals

11. Table 1 provides a status of the remaining appeals.

Table 1: Status of remaining appeals

Appeal	Topic	Status
Environment Court
ENV-2017-AKL-000155 – National Trading Company of NZ ENV-2017-AKL-000156 - C N Barbour Family Trust ENV-2017-AKL-000232 - Bunnings Limited	Redhills Precinct (alignment of arterial roads)	Discussions are ongoing between the parties
ENV-2017-AKL-000167 - Strategic Property Advocacy Network	Subdivision provisions in the Waitākere Ranges	Discussions are ongoing between the parties
ENV-2017-AKL-000213 – North Eastern Investments Limited	Zoning of land and precinct in Albany	This appeal is currently on hold pending the determination of the related High Court proceedings
ENV-2016-AKL-000238 – Housing New Zealand Corporation	Special Character / Historic Heritage	This appeal was the subject of an Environment Court decision: (Housing New Zealand Corporation v Auckland Council (2017)NZEnvC120). The Environment Court decision was appealed to the High Court. The High Court decision, dated 1 March 2018, referred the matter back to the Environment Court: (2018)NZHC288). Legal submissions were filed with the Environment Court on 6 June 2018. We are currently awaiting the Court’s decision.
High Court
CIV-2016-404-2343 – Royal Forest and Bird	Significant Ecological areas overlaying a Quarry Zone	High Court order has created a right of appeal to the Environment Court for affected persons.
CIV-2018-404-000866 – J & F Gock CIV-2018-404-000923 – Self Family Trust	Rural Urban Boundary and zoning of Crater Hill and Pūkaki Peninsular	High Court appeals (x2) against Environment Court decision: Self Family Trust v Auckland Council (2018)NZEnvC49)
CIV-2018-404-001236 – Okura Holdings Limited	Ōkura Rural Urban Boundary & zoning	High Court appeal against Environment Court decision: Zhi Li, Jing Niu and Weili Yang and Okura Holdings Limited v Auckland Council (2018)NZEnvC87
CIV-2018-404-001294 – Auckland Council	Rural Subdivision	High Court appeal against the Environment Court decision: Cabra Rural Development & Ors v Auckland Council (2018)NZEnvC90
Court of Appeal
CA645/2017 (appeal) Ca184/2018 (leave request) – Franco Belgiorno - Nettis	Zoning of land in Takapuna	Appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court decision: Franco Belgiorno – Nettis v Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel (2017)NZHC916
CA287/2018 – North Eastern Investments Limited	Zoning of land in Albany	Appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court decision: North Eastern Investments Limited v Auckland Council (2018)NZHC916

12. The following table provides details on the parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan to be made operative, where this is relevant (i.e. where a subsequent appeal has not been lodged).

Table 2: Unitary Plan parts no longer subject to appeal

Environment Court Appeals
Appellant	Section(s) of the Unitary Plan	Date	Status
ENV-2017-AKL-000185 – Viaduct Harbour Holdings	Not applicable	10 August 2017	Appeal Withdrawn
ENV-2016-000241 – Wallace Group	Change the zoning of the 3 sites at 55, 55A and 55B Takanini School Road to Residential – Mixed Housing Suburban	12 June 2018	Environment Court decision issued
ENV-2016-000241 – Vernon	No additional changes	26 June 2018	Consent orders and withdrawal of appeal points
High Court Appeals
CIV-2018-404-002299 – Federated Farmers of NZ Inc.	Amendments to the mapping of ONL78 and ONL87 (Refer annexures to the decision)	20 December 2017	High Court decision (Judgement [2017] NZHC 3217)
CIV-2018-404-002299 – Federated Farmers of NZ Inc.	GMO’s	1 May 2018	Federated Farmers filed a notice of abandonment (partial), advising that Federated Farmers abandons the part described in its Notice of Appeal in paragraphs 14-25, Topic 024 (Genetically Modified Organisms). The appeal relief has been withdrawn.

13. A summary of the appeals resolved since 5 June 2017 is provided in the table below. Each appeal can be accessed via the Auckland Unitary Plan website.

Table 3: Summary of appeals resolved since 5 june 2017

Appellant	Date	Status
Environment Court
ENV-2017-AKL-000185 – Viaduct Harbour Holdings (activity status of offices in Viaduct Harbour precinct)	10 August 2017	Appeal withdrawn
ENV-2017-AKL-00241 – Wallace Group (zoning of land in Takanini)	12 June 2018	Environment Court decision supported appellants position
ENV-2017-AKL-00233 – Vernon (various matters throughout the plan)	Various dates. Final confirmation received that all parts of Vernon’s appeal resolved – 26 June 2018.	Consent orders & withdrawal of appeals
High Court
CIV-2018-404-002299 – Federated Farmers of NZ Inc (General coastal marine zone & other coastal zones)	20 December 2017	High Court decision
CIV-2018-404-002343 – Royal Forest and Bird Society of New Zealand Inc Identifies significant ecological areas on certain sites, includes a new activity for any vegetation, alteration or removal within an SEA overlaying a Quarry Zone, along with matters of discretion and assessment criteria related to this new activity.	8 June 2018	High Court decision Decision has created a right of appeal to the Environment Court

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

14. This report deals with a procedural matter – notifying the parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan identified in Attachment A of this report as operative. No analysis or additional advice is therefore required.

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

15. Local Boards have been involved in the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan since mid-2012. Their views were not sought for this report as it addresses factual and procedural matters.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

16. The final steps in making additional parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan operative is a procedural step and therefore does not have any impact on Māori. Impacts on Māori have been considered throughout the process of developing the Auckland Unitary Plan and the resolution of appeals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

17. The cost of making the Auckland Unitary Plan operative is covered by the Plans and Places department’s operational budget.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

18. The risk associated with this report is that failing to notify the date on which those additional parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan that are no longer subject to appeal, become operative, would be contrary to Section 160 of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

19. Following the Planning Committee’s consideration, staff will publish a public notice advising of the date on which further parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan will be made operative.

20. A further report will be presented to the Planning Committee when additional appeals are resolved. It is expected that all appeals will be resolved in early 2019.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	List of Additional Unitary Plan Appeals Resolved	73

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Tony Reidy - Team leader - Planning

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

Draft National Planning Standards - Auckland Council Submission

File No.: CP2018/13398

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the council's submission to the Ministry for the Environment on the first set of draft National Planning Standards.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The first set of draft National Planning Standards (the standards), prepared under the Resource Management Act, seek to standardise the structure and form, chapter layout, spatial planning tools, zone framework, metrics for noise and vibration, and digital and mapping requirements for plans and policy statements throughout New Zealand. The standards were released on 6 June 2018 and submissions are due 17 August 2018.

3. A submission has been prepared in consultation with Auckland Transport, Watercare and the Independent Māori Statutory Board. The main points are:

· support for the general intent of the standards to achieve consistency and improve accessibility in resource management plans

· oppose the standards that will have a significant impact on the Auckland Unitary Plan’s regional policy statement, regional coastal plan, zone framework and definitions

· oppose the seven-year timeframe for implementing the standards

· request that Auckland Council be given ten years rather than seven to implement the standards.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) approve the submission on the draft National Planning Standards included as Attachment C to the agenda report.

b) authorise the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Planning Committee to approve any minor amendments and corrections to the submission prior to lodgement on 17 August 2018.

Horopaki / Context

4. The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (the Amendment Act) introduced a new type of national direction in the form of national planning standards. The standards seek to achieve national consistency in plans and policy statements prepared under the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act). The content of the first set of standards by the Ministry for the Environment (the Ministry) has been developed over a two-year period as set out in Attachment A.

5. Council staff have attended numerous meetings and workshops over the past two years to provide insight on the functioning of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Staff submitted formal feedback to the Ministry on the discussion papers in August 2017. This was reported to Planning Committee on 1 August 2017 (resolution number PLA/2017/97). The focus of the feedback was to ensure that the standards are aligned with the Auckland Unitary Plan to ensure that the standards do not cause a full review of the Auckland Unitary Plan.

6. Drafts of the first set of standards were released for public submissions on 6 June 2018. Of the 18 standards, 14 are applicable for a combined plan such as the Auckland Unitary Plan. These standards are in Attachment B.

7. The Ministry identifies multiple outcomes that will improve the resource management planning system from implementing these standards. These outcomes are:

a) less time and fewer resources will be required to prepare and use plans

b) plan content will be easier to access, and relevant content easier to find

c) national direction will be consistently incorporated in plans, resulting in better implementation on the ground

d) councils will be able to focus their resources more on plan content that influences local resource management outcomes and what is important to the community

e) good planning practice will be shared by councils or applied quickly across councils.

8. The Amendment Act mandates the content of the first set of standards to include:

· a structure including how plans should reference national policy statements, national environmental standards, and regulations made under the Act

· definitions

· requirements for the electronic functionality and accessibility of plans.

9. The draft standards released on 6 June 2018 also include:

· spatial planning tools for both regional and district plans

· a zone framework

· mapping

· noise and vibration metrics.

10. The Amendment Act provides for two types of standards, mandatory and discretionary. The first set of standards are mostly mandatory standards. Incorporating these mandatory standards into the Unitary Plan cannot use a formal consultation process under the Act (Schedule 1).

11. The only discretionary standard in this first set is the Zone Chapter Structure. This Standard provides a set of zones that the council must select from. The council, then, must use a formal consultation process set out in Schedule 1 of the Act to consult on the zones selected.

12. The Amendment Act enables different timeframes to be specified to implement the standards. All the standards, with one exception, propose giving Auckland Council seven years to implement the standards from gazettal. The exception is the baseline electronic functionality and accessibility Standard which must be met within one year. Councils that have not recently concluded a major plan review have five years to implement the standards.

13. Staff have prepared a draft submission in consultation with Auckland Transport, Watercare and the Independent Māori Statutory Board. This draft submission is in Attachment C.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

14. Staff support the overall intent of the standards, which is to improve consistency in resource management plans making it easier for users to understand and access plans. However, the standards, in their current form, will significantly impact on the Auckland Unitary Plan. It is considered that the benefits of implementing the standards, within a seven-year period, would not outweigh the implementation costs.

15. The standards mandate a new structure for the Auckland Unitary Plan as well as a chapter and rule format, spatial planning tools, mapping requirements and some mandatory definitions. This would require a restructure and a reformat of the majority of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Some provisions would also need to be re-written to ensure they are integrated back into the plan after they have been relocated.

16. The standards cause significant impacts on the Auckland Unitary Plan structure and content of the plan to the extent that they would:

· challenge its policy direction;

· reverse agreements or decisions made in partnership with iwi or other stakeholders;

· not reflect the outcomes currently anticipated by the Auckland community; and

· be extremely difficult to incorporate without a significant amount of additional changes that fall outside the scope of consequential amendments.

17. The significant impacts on the Auckland Unitary Plan are described in the main section of the proposed submission in Attachment C. The regional policy statement; regional coastal plans, zone framework and definitions of the Auckland Unitary Plan are at risk of being undermined by these standards.

Consequential Amendments

18. Section 58I of the Act enables consequential amendments to be made to the Auckland Unitary Plan that are necessary to avoid duplication or conflict when giving effect to any mandatory or discretionary direction. These consequential amendments must be made without using a Schedule 1 process (i.e. a plan change process involving rights of submission and hearings).

19. Consequential amendments that go beyond the scope of duplication or conflict must use a Schedule 1 process.

20. There are some standards that will not be able to be incorporated into the Unitary Plan without substantial rework of content. Staff do not believe that the required rework will fit within the scope of consequential amendments. This rework will, therefore, need to be undertaken by a plan change. This could result in an extensive public submission and appeal process. Re-opening the debate on provisions such as the zone framework is an example of this rework triggered by the current standards.

Implementation

21. Most standards require the council to incorporate the standards into the Auckland Unitary Plan within seven years from gazettal. This is likely to be April 2026. This timeframe broadly aligns with when the council must, under the Act, start a ten-year review of the Auckland Unitary Plan.

22. The Auckland Unitary Plan was developed over a very intensive six-year period. The first three years involved building the structure, style and content. The next three years involved finalising that content through the extensive involvement of many Aucklanders. This is a plan that was built with a lot of thought and testing. It is a comprehensive and highly integrated plan that speaks to the Auckland region.

23. Since the Auckland Unitary Plan was made partly operative there have already been numerous plan modifications to fix errors, update zoning matters, to enable development and for administrative matters. More plan changes are likely to be required to correct errors and fix provisions that are creating unintended outcomes. Large plan changes planned in the next five to six years include the Hauraki Gulf Islands Plan Change and the plan change(s) required by the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management.

24. To try and incorporate the mandatory standards and notify a plan change for the choice of zones and any changes to content that are beyond a consequential amendment, could significantly expose the plan to a lengthy appeal period or a judicial review on the scope of consequential amendments. This makes incorporating these standards as part of a rolling review of the Plan extremely difficult to do, particularly if multiple parts of the plan are in a non-operative state.

25. In addition, incorporating these mandatory standards will require a significant rework of the structure and placement of content. This will use resources (time and money) that would have been used on responding to business as usual work requirements.

Options

26. Staff believe that, unless the standards are amended, a full plan review will be the most efficient and effective way to incorporate these standards.

27. The Act requires the council to start its review of the provisions in the Auckland Unitary Plan 10 years from these provisions becoming operative. Therefore, a review of the majority of the Auckland Unitary Plan should start by November 2026. However, a full plan review, incorporating the standards, will need to be notified by April 2026. This will require starting the plan review as early as 2022 or 2023.

28. Table 1 below sets out the options for the council to consider in its submission to the Ministry for the Environment. Table 2 assesses and ranks these options using three criteria.

Table 1: Options for responding to the National Planning Standards

Options

Benefits / Advantages

Disadvantages

Option 1

Amend the standards to align them with the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Able to incorporate the standards early without a plan change.

Removes most components of the plan from public submissions.

Ongoing plan changes able to adopt the standards from the beginning.

Enables a rolling review of the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Issues could still arise that were not anticipated requiring a Schedule 1 process.

There are aspects of the structure or terms the council may want to change.

Requires additional resources/cost.

GIS/eplan software upgrades required.

Potential for judicial review.

Standards have not been 'tested' so potential for ongoing corrections to standards.

Option 2

Exempt Auckland from the standards.

Enables the council to focus on improving the plan based on monitoring and implementation results.

Enables the council to continue to progress big plan changes (e.g. incorporating the Hauraki Gulf Islands)

Additional resources not required.

Enables a rolling review.

There are aspects of our structure or definitions we may want to change.

Council is not consistent with the rest of the country potentially damaging the council's reputation.

Council put in a position to continually maintain our exemption status.

Option 3

Give Auckland Council more time to incorporate the standards and better align the standards to the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Gives Auckland community a larger 'breathing space' before a full plan review.

Enables testing of the standards by other councils.

Enables any legislation changes to be accommodated by both the Plan and the standards.

Enables the council to continue to progress big plan changes (e.g. incorporating the Hauraki Gulf Islands).

Enables the council to improve the plan based on monitoring and implementation results.

Larger plan changes will be notified and then need to be changed again to incorporate the standards when they are possibly under appeal.

Will still require a full plan review.

Potential for judicial review.

GIS/eplan software upgrades required

Option 4

standards remain mostly the same and are required to be incorporated into the Auckland Unitary Plan within 7 years.

May enable early incorporation of monitoring results.

Will require a full plan review

Will need to start full plan review earlier than 7 years i.e. 3 or 4 years earlier.

Delays notifying larger plan changes.

Potential for judicial review.

GIS/eplan software upgrades required

29. The criteria used for assessing these options are:

a) Ease of implementation;

b) Minimal burden on the community; and

c) Achieving good planning outcomes.

Ease of Implementation

· Progressing larger plan changes (Hauraki Gulf Islands) within the timeframe required and without the need for an additional plan change to incorporate the standards.

· The extent of the plan and amount of time that is subject to plan changes before it can be made operative.

· Minimal amount of the Auckland Unitary Plan is ‘unpicked’ resulting in lack of integration.

· Minimal amount of ‘content’ requiring a Schedule 1 process and opening the plan up for challenge.

Minimal burden on the community

· The amount of time between the recent extensive plan review and the next plan review.

· The number of plan changes requiring public submissions.

· The burden on the public through Schedule 1 processes.

Achieving good planning outcomes

· Consistency with the rest of the country.

· Avoid duplication in effort on aspects of a plan that do not need local variation.

Table 2: Assessing the Options

Criteria
Options	Criterion 1 Ease of Implementation	Criterion 2 Minimal burden on the community	Criterion 3 Achieving good planning outcomes	TOTAL
Option 1 Align standards to Auckland Unitary Plan	2	2	2	6
Option 2 Exempt Auckland	1	1	3	5
Option 3 More Time	1	1	1	3
Option 4 Implement standards as currently drafted	3	3	2	8

Table 3: Explaining the rating

Rating scale	Rating definitions
1	Low impact
2	Medium impact
3	High impact

Recommendation

30. Staff recommend that the council’s submission to the Ministry for the Environment, request a 10 year implementation period for Auckland. Staff have also proposed, in the submission, a number of changes to the standards to minimise the impact the standards currently have on the Auckland Unitary Plan.

31. The Auckland Unitary Plan is the largest and most comprehensive in the country and is a fundamental tool for the council in addressing the development pressures in both the urban and rural areas. Auckland, therefore, cannot afford to commence a substantial review of its rule book in four or five years’ time.

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

32. Due to the tight timeframe for making a submission, the views of local boards have not been sought. However, as described in the draft Submission, the Standard that prescribes a new zoning framework for the Auckland region is likely to have significant impacts on local communities if it is finalised in a form that does not reflect the Unitary Plan zones.

33. The draft submission, therefore, opposes the proposed zoning framework for Auckland.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

34. The standards impact on Māori in a number of ways. The standards prescribe a Part 2, after the Introduction, which will contain all existing Resource Management Act requirements relating to tangata whenua values, aspirations and provisions. This Part 2 contains three chapters: Recognition of iwi and hapū, Tangata Whenua - local authority relationships, Iwi and hapū planning documents and Consultation. The council is required to move any Unitary Plan content, which addresses these matters, into these chapters.

35. Although the standards prescribe the mandatory order and headings for Tangata Whenua in Part 2, there are very little chapters or sections provided specifically for the mana whenua content that is in the Auckland Unitary Plan. The guidance provided with the standards clarify that it is intended for tangata whenua specific resource-related provisions to be integrated in the relevant theme based chapters of the regional policy statement and regional and district plan rather than as separate chapters.

36. The standards enable special topics to be created within the structure. However the Act requires a regional council to identify in their regional policy statement, as well as address, the issues of significance to tangata whenua (section 62(b) of the Act).

37. Staff support the integration of tangata whenua specific resource–related provisions throughout the regional policy statement and the plan. This is how it is done in the Unitary Plan. However, when the Auckland Unitary Plan was developed in consultation with mana whenua, it was very clear that mana whenua of Auckland should also have a specific chapter in the regional policy statement to provide the strategic policy framework for its issues of significance.

38. This would be the equivalent of B6 mana whenua in the regional policy statement section of the Unitary Plan. This section provides the overarching objectives and policies for mana whenua in the Auckland region. It also establishes the strategic policy direction for the inclusion of specific mana whenua provisions in other relevant sections of the regional policy statement, regional and district plan.

39. The draft submission requests that the standards are amended to enable the council to meet its statutory obligations and reflect the outcome reached when the Unitary Plan was developed with mana whenua.

40. The draft Definitions Standard proposes to define 'iwi authority', 'kaitiakitanga', 'mana whenua' and 'tangata whenua' as having the same meaning as these terms in the Act. The Unitary Plan does not include definitions that are the same as the Act. However, the Unitary Plan does include a definition for 'mana whenua'.

41. Staff have not consulted with mana whenua on the impact of these standards due to the tight timeframe for the submission period. However, staff have taken the position that generally the Unitary Plan represents the position reached with mana whenua after extensive engagement during the development of the plan and therefore these provisions should remain in content and location.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

42. The council has invested a significant amount of time and resources developing Auckland's first combined plan. The cost to the Auckland community and to submitters has probably been considerably more. While this cost is not necessarily going to be the same for the next full plan review, it is likely to be similar. Incorporating the standards in isolation of a plan review, or undertaking a full plan review three to four years earlier than anticipated, will compound costs given other existing planning commitments.

43. In addition, the draft Electronic Accessibility and Functionality Standard raises the risk of the council’s existing eplan software (ICON) being unable to meet the requirements of this Standard. In particular, the linking of GIS to text requirements. The procurement of a new eplan software will have implications for Plans and Places operational budget.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

44. The risks that these standards impose (in their current form and timeframe for implementation) have been identified above.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

45. The council’s submission must be lodged by 17 August 2018. Once lodged, staff will contact Ministry for the Environment officials to request a meeting to further discuss the concerns raised in this submission.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Process for developing National Planning Standards	83
b ⇩	Planning Standards relevant for the Unitary Plan	85
c ⇩	Auckland Council Submission on Draft National Planning Standards	87

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Phill Reid - Manager Planning- Aucklandwide

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

Development of core targets with central government for Auckland Plan 2050

File No.: CP2018/13251

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To establish a political working group to provide guidance during the development of core targets, in collaboration with central government, for the Auckland Plan 2050.

2. To confirm target areas and agree general criteria for the setting of targets.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3. Through the course of developing the Auckland Plan 2050, housing, transport, the natural environment and social wellbeing were identified as areas on which Auckland Council could collaborate with central government on developing core targets.

4. As part of the 5 June Planning Committee resolution (PLA/2018/62) to adopt the Auckland Plan 2050, it was agreed that staff commence a process to develop an implementation approach with core targets that relate to existing measures and priorities in the Auckland Plan, in collaboration with central government.

5. Since the adoption of the Auckland Plan 2050, discussions between council staff and central government officials have been held regarding an approach for developing targets.

6. Staff are seeking from the Planning Committee:

i. approval to establish a political working group to provide guidance on the development of core targets in anticipation of the need for timely input due to the dynamic nature of discussions at times during the process

ii. confirmation of the proposed target areas

iii. agreement on the general criteria for setting targets as the basis for engagement with central government officials.

7. It is proposed that a progress update on the development of targets be brought to the Planning Committee on 6 November.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) establish a political working group consisting of the chair and deputy chair of the Planning Committee, the chairs of the Environment and Community Committee and the Finance and Performance Committee, the Deputy Mayor, local board representation and a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board to provide direction on the development of joint targets with central government.

b) confirm target areas as housing, transport, natural environment and social wellbeing

c) agree the general criteria to guide the setting of targets:

i) attribution - contribution of the targets to addressing the three big challenges identified in Auckland Plan 2050, and

ii) spatial context - the ability to achieve the targets through a spatial response.

Horopaki / Context

8. In response to feedback received through the formal consultation process, the Planning Committee resolved that “the commencement of a process to develop an implementation approach with core targets that relate to existing measures and priorities in the Auckland Plan, in collaboration with central government, be undertaken” (resolution number PLA/2018/62).

9. At the start of the Auckland Plan refresh, central government officials identified housing and transport and how they related to the Development Strategy, as areas of particular focus. As the refresh of the Auckland Plan evolved, the Development Strategy remained the focal point for collaboration with central government although conversations included consideration of how the strategy contributed to the broader outcomes.

10. As such, staff recommended the following four areas are best suited for developing targets with central government: housing, transport, the natural environment and social wellbeing.

11. These four target areas have provided the basis for discussions with central government officials since the adoption of the Auckland Plan 2050.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

12. It is proposed that a political working group be established to provide direction throughout the development of the targets. Considering the subject matter and potential funding implications of setting targets, it is proposed that all the committees of the whole be represented on the working group.

13. Staff have identified the following criteria as a starting point to develop targets across the four areas.

I. The target must demonstrate improvement against the three key challenges defined in Auckland Plan 2050:

- Population growth and its implications

- Sharing prosperity with all Aucklanders

- Reducing environmental degradation

II. Achievement in reaching the target must fundamentally be driven through a spatial response based on how and where we grow.

14. Through Planning Committee approval of the general criteria, staff will be able to commence development of targets from a confirmed council position.

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

15. Although the targets are to be set at the regional level, it is anticipated that they will be analysed at a local board level once set.

16. Local boards representatives were invited to all of the Auckland Plan workshops and some provided feedback on the need for high level targets through formal resolutions to the Planning Committee.

17. It is proposed that local board members be included in the political working group.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. The principle of developing targets has no specific impact on Māori. The nature of the targets may however have specific impacts. An assessment of any such impacts must therefore be carried out through the development of targets.

19. Targets will relate to existing measures and priorities in Auckland Plan 2050. Engagement with Māori informed these measures and priorities during the development phases of the Plan.

20. In addition, the IMSB paid specific attention to the measures as part of its input to the Plan. The next step is for the IMSB to carry this through in its representation on the political working group.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21. The finalisation of targets and the funding commitment required to achieve them should be considered as part of their development.

22. Any new funding commitments will be addressed through the Annual Plan 2018/19 process, and/or subsequent planning processes.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. Through the Planning Committee workshops, members highlighted the risk that targets are not set in the long-term interests of the Auckland Plan. The political working group will help mitigate that risk. There is no legislative requirement to set targets in the Auckland Plan 2050 so either party can withdraw from the process if they wish to.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

24. Establishment of political working group.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Richard Hughes – Principal Specialist Auckland Plan Implementation

Authorisers

Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

Impacts of the Unitary Plan on residential development

File No.: CP2018/13912

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide evidence on the impacts of the Unitary Plan and its effects on the building types and locations of new dwelling consents.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Unitary Plan became operative in part on 15 November 2016. It took approximately nine months to begin to see the Plan affecting what and where new dwellings were consented.

3. In the 10 months since new dwelling consents began to surge in August 2017, total dwellings consented are up 27 per cent compared to a year earlier. Almost all of the growth in consents have been in brownfield (existing urban) areas, reversing the trend toward more greenfield development over the previous seven years.

4. More intensive typologies, specifically apartments and terraced/townhouses, have grown to account for 54 per cent of all new dwellings consented, compared to 37 per cent two years ago. A disproportionate share of this denser development is around the rapid transit network.

5. This analysis provides an antidote to the view that relaxing development restrictions on the fringes of the urban area is necessarily the best way to reduce the housing shortage. People by and large prefer to live closer to jobs, infrastructure that works, public transport, schools, shops and other amenities. As a result, developers are showing a preference for delivering development in brownfield areas.

6. Land on the fringes is significantly cheaper. But once the lack and/or value of infrastructure and proximity to amenities is accounted for, the market is displaying a strong preference for brownfield development.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a) receive the report.

Horopaki / Context

7. The Unitary Plan (the Plan) became operative in part on 15 November 2016, more than 20 months ago. It up-zoned thousands of brownfield (existing urban) properties across the city, allowing for intensification as well as growth in greenfield areas. Altogether, the Plan provided capacity for up to one million new dwellings although at the time, only an estimated 422,000 were deemed to be commercially feasible for development. This feasible growth was anticipated to be spread across brown and greenfield areas in a roughly 2:1 ratio.

8. As the Plan became operative just before Christmas 2016, and given the time required to get resource and building consents, the Chief Economist Unit had estimated an upturn in new residential building consents would begin around April or May 2017. However, growth in new dwellings consented did not occur until August 2017 but since then growth has been strong.

9. There appears to be little information in the public realm about the effects of the Plan on development patterns. This report provides information to support future discussions and decisions about important issues such as whether to remove or relax the Rural Urban Boundary.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. Building consents for new dwellings grew remarkably steadily from 2012 through to April 2016 (see Figure 1). This pattern broke and growth plateaued six months before the Plan became operative in part. Anecdote suggested that many investors had bought brownfield land in advance of the Plan becoming operative and were waiting to lodge consents for more intensive development once the Plan was operative.

Figure 1 Annual new dwellings consented, 2012 to 2018

11. During the period from November 2016 to July 2017, the first few months of the Plan being operative, consent growth was even weaker, against the backdrop of a housing shortage approaching 40,000 in Auckland at the time. The data indicates that this was because developers were still making plans for more intensive development.

12. Residential construction began to surge in August 2017. The number of new dwellings consented in the 10 months to May 2018 is up 27 per cent over the same 10 months the year before, and annual consents were only 5 per cent below the all-time peak in June 2004. This annual total is despite a much tighter 2005 Building Code regulatory regime and building consent authorities’ response to the leaky buildings crisis.

13. There is significant evidence to suggest the sudden resurgence in consenting activity is the result of the Plan beginning to work.

i) Brownfield areas dominate consents growth: 90 per cent of all growth in new dwellings consented in the 10 months to May 2018 (since the upturn began in August 2017) is in brownfield areas where the Plan delivered the bulk of potential for greater development (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 Growth in brown and greenfield dwellings consented since growth began to surge

ii) The trend toward green and away from brownfield growth has been reversed: The share of total new dwellings consented in brownfield areas in the 10 months since August 2017 has grown from 62 to 69 per cent. This has reversed a trend of declining brownfield development as a share of building consents over the previous seven years (see Figure 2 above).

iii) More intensive building typologies enabled by the Plan are being adopted: Terraced houses and apartments were 54 per cent of new dwellings consented in the 10 months to May 2018. In the 10 months to May 2016 (i.e. the comparator 10-month period before the Plan was passed), it was just 37 per cent.

iv) In the urban areas, the desired compact city is emerging: In the urban area (UA, 2016 definition) around 66 per cent of new dwellings are multi-units, precisely what the Plan aimed to deliver.

14. Further, a disproportionately large number of dwellings are being consented in rapid transit network catchment areas– defined as living within 1500 metres of a train station or northern busway bus stop. This highlights that people value rapid transit access, and that development enabled by the Plan is responding:

i) The share of multi-unit dwellings consented in rapid transit network areas is 16 times higher than the catchment’s share of Auckland’s land area. The rapid transit network catchment covers only 2.6 per cent of Auckland’s land area, but accounts for 42 per cent of all multi-unit dwellings consented in the last 10 months (see Figure 3 and Figure 4).

Figure 3 Where consents are being issued, relative to share of Auckland’s land area

ii) 11 per cent of stand-alone homes were consented in rapid transit network catchments. This is 4.3 times more than the catchment’s share of land area.

iii) 81 per cent of all dwellings consented in rapid transit network catchments in the last year were multi-unit, helping to deliver the intensification that characterises transit-oriented development.

iv) Overall, 40 per cent of all dwellings consented in the urban area were in the rapid transit network catchments, even though the catchments account for only a quarter of Auckland’s urban area.

15. This analysis highlights that people by and large prefer to live closer to jobs, infrastructure that works, public transport, schools, shops and other amenities. As a result, developers have revealed a preference for delivering development in brownfield areas.

16. These findings provide evidence that counter the view that relaxing development restrictions on the fringes of the region, where few amenities exist, is the best way to reduce the housing shortfall. Land on the fringes is cheaper. But once the lack and/or value of infrastructure and geographic proximity to amenities is accounted for, the market is displaying a strong preference for brownfield development.

Figure 4 New dwellings consented in RTN catchments, the urban area, and beyond

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

17. Analysis of new dwelling consents identifies, as one would expect, that stand-alone dwellings are most popular further from the central city and other amenities, where land is cheaper. But as Figure 5 highlights, lower-density multi-unit developments (terrace or townhouse style housing) are becoming increasingly common across the region. Apartments are still primarily in the central city (Waitematā) and its fringes. e.g. Albert-Eden or just across the harbour bridge. e.g. Takapuna-Devonport. The exception is Upper Harbour, where all three types of development is occurring.

Figure 5 Dwellings consented, by type and location

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. There are relatively large numbers of multi-unit dwellings being consented in the southern isthmus and southern Local Board areas. This suggests increased delivery of typologies in areas with larger Māori populations. Multi-unit developments are often cheaper on a per-unit basis than stand-alone housing, which may provide greater access to warm, dry modern housing for Māori in those areas.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

19. Staff will continue to monitor changes in development and could report back if desired by elected members in six or 12 months.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	David Norman - Chief Economist
Authoriser	Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee

07 August 2018

PLANNING COMMITTEE FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME 2018

Priorities for the second 12 months are:

· Auckland Plan refresh

· Strategic infrastructure planning

· City Centre and Waterfront development

Lead	Area of work	Reason for work		Planning Committee role (decision or direction)	Expected timeframes Highlight financial year quarter and state month if known

					FY19
					Jul-Sep 3 Jul 7 Aug 4 Sep	Oct-Dec 2 Oct 6 Nov 27 Nov	Jan-Mar 5 Feb 5 Mar			Apr-Jun 2 Apr 7 May 4 Jun
HOUSING
Auckland Council	Auckland Housing Accord monitoring and National Policy Statement requirements		All decisions on Special Housing Areas have been completed in the last council term. This relates to ongoing monitoring of the outcomes of the Housing Accord and the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.	Direction Completion of Housing Accord obligations and assessment of effectiveness of interventions. Progress to date Review and update of Housing Accord Aug 2017 PLA/2017/92 Update on affordable housing in Special Housing Areas Oct 2017 PLA/2017/132 National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity initial assessment results PLA/2017/156 and high-level findings of housing capacity assessment reported Nov 2017 PLA/2017/157 Quarterly reporting on NPS-UDC in Feb and Jun 2018	Q1	Q2	Q3			Q4
Auckland Council	Implementation of Housing Taskforce		The Housing Taskforce is led by His Worship the Mayor. The taskforce is likely to recommend actions to council and some of these actions may fall under the Planning Committee remit. Actions may include strategic overview and spatial outcomes of council’s role in housing.	Direction Provide strategic direction and oversight of council’s role in housing to ensure the remedying of any impediments to effective housing supply	Q1	Q2	Q3			Q4
Auckland Council	Auckland Housing Programme		Housing New Zealand Limited, HLC and Auckland Council are working together to speed up the delivery of housing in Auckland. Some initiatives will also include the delivery of affordable housing. Auckland Council’s role focuses on the delivery of infrastructure which enables delivery of housing. Staff are currently working with Housing New Zealand Limited and HLC to determine what actions and decisions are required from Council. There may be direction and decisions required from the Planning Committee as well as Finance and Performance Committee and Governing Body.	Direction and Decision Provide strategic direction and decisions as required Progress to date Workshop with Housing NZ and HLC March 2018	Q1	Q2	Q3			Q4
REGIONAL LAND USE AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Auckland Council	Auckland Plan Implementation		The Auckland Plan, Auckland 2050, will be adopted in June 2018. Focus is now on implementation of the plan. A decision will be sought on the overall framework and priority initiatives for implementation. Update reports will be provided at 6-monthly intervals, highlighting both progress on initiatives as well as emerging issues and trends impacting on Auckland 2050 including central government policy and legislation.	Direction and Decision Adoption of the Auckland Plan 2050. Approval and oversight of implementation of Auckland 2050. Baseline monitoring report to be presented in Q3 followed by six-monthly update reports. Progress to date Adoption of Auckland Plan 2050 Jun 2018 PLA/2018/62 Workshop on implementation workshop scheduled Aug 2018	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Transport	Auckland Transport Alignment Project implementation (including the Congestion Question)		The second version of the Auckland Transport Alignment Project strategic approach was adopted by Government and Council in April 2018. Any consideration of transport should be for the purpose of informing future Long-term Plans.	Direction Regional strategy and policy relating to infrastructure, land use and housing. Auckland Transport and Central Government have decision-making responsibilities. Financial recommendations made to Finance and Performance Committee Progress to date AT Board/Governing Body workshop April 2017 Auckland Smarter Transport Pricing Project delegation agreed Jul 2017 PLA/2017/74 Phase One Congestion Question project report received Feb 2018 PLA/2018/7 Updated Auckland Transport Alignment Project given support and implementation actions agreed by Governing Body GB/2018/76 Workshop on Congestion Question Phase Two scheduled Aug 2018 Congestion Question Phase Two project report scheduled Sep 2018	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Council	Auckland Unitary Plan appeals		The Auckland Unitary Plan is Operative in Part until all current appeals are resolved.	Decision Decisions on council’s position on the current Auckland Unitary Plan appeals as required. Once the current appeals are resolved, the Regulatory Committee will be responsible for future appeals.	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Council	Auckland Unitary Plan Monitoring of Performance		The development of an internal strategy to identify key performance measures of the Auckland Unitary Plan together with establishing Plan effectiveness monitoring and reporting is being progressed.	Direction Reporting on project progress	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Council	Auckland Unitary Plan plan changes		The Auckland Unitary Plan is Operative in Part until all appeals are resolved. The council may decide to promulgate public plan changes at any time. Council can decide not accept or reject private plan changes within the first 2 years	Decision Decisions on Auckland Unitary Plan plan changes Progress to date 8 council plan changes and 3 private plan changes have been notified since the Auckland Unitary Plan became operative in part in November 2016. Two of those plan changes are now operative. Further plan changes are currently being developed in accordance with the plan change programme endorsed by the Planning Committee in July 2017 PLA/2017/76 The Auckland Unitary Plan enhancements plan change and corrections to the Schedule of Notable Trees plan change will be presented to the Planning Committee in Q1/Q2 of the 2019 financial year.	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Transport	Mass transit - airport		Agree strategic direction with Auckland Transport through its consideration of options for mass transit to the Auckland International Airport.	Direction Strategic direction relating to infrastructure and land use. Auckland Transport has responsibility for the provision of public transport in Auckland. Progress to date Workshops held Apr, Jun and Oct 2017 and Feb 2018 Elected member site visits of key locations along proposed route Mar and Apr 2018	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Transport	Mass transit – light rail		Agree strategic direction with Auckland Transport through its consideration of options for light rail on the isthmus.	Direction Strategic direction relating to infrastructure and land use. Auckland Transport has responsibility for the provision of public transport in Auckland. Progress to date Workshop Apr 2017	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Transport and City Rail Link Limited	City Rail Link (public realm)		Provide direction to Auckland Transport on the public realm works associated with the City Rail Link.	Direction Strategic direction relating to infrastructure and land use. CRL Company has responsibility for the delivery of the City Rail Link. Auckland Transport has responsibility for the road corridor Progress to date Workshops held Mar and Jun 2017	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Transport Auckland Council	Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing		Provide strategic direction to Auckland Transport as it considers the Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing project. Provide strategic direction to the New Zealand Transport Agency as it develops the Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing project.	Direction To Auckland Transport relating to public transport options Decision Approve Auckland Council’s submission on the consent applications made by New Zealand Transport Agency	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Transport	Active Transport (Walking and Cycling)		Delivery of active transport initiatives	Direction Feedback to Auckland Transport on the plans and programmes	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Council Auckland Transport	Supporting growth Delivering transport networks		Delivery and route protection phase of the former Transport for Future Urban Growth process jointly undertaken by Auckland Council/Auckland Transport and New Zealand Transport Agency	Direction Reporting on project progress	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
Auckland Council	Technical Guidance Programme		To deliver a programme of technical guidance documents to facilitate development to comply with the Unitary Plan and Auckland Council’s infrastructure standards	Decision Approval of some documents	Q1	Q2	Q3		Q4
PLACE-BASED LAND USE AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Auckland Council	Spatial Planning Work Programme		Spatial Planning is an important placemaking tool that enables the integration of land use aspirations with the identification of the necessary supporting infrastructure.	Decision Approve the proposed spatial planning work programme Progress to date Approval of additional place-based planning projects and preparation of structure plans Formation of Political Reference group Aug 2017 PLA/2017/95	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Drury-Opaheke and Paerata structure plans		The Drury-Opaheke and Paerata structure plans will provide specific spatial planning for this area and assist with infrastructure investment decisions	Decision Approve the Drury-Opaheke and Paerata Structure Plans	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Silverdale and Warkworth structure plans		The Silverdale and Warkworth structure plans will provide specific spatial planning for these areas and assist with infrastructure investment decisions	Decision Approve the Silverdale and Warkworth structure plans	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Port Future Study		The Port Future Study was recommended to this council by the previous council. In conjunction with the Governing Body this committee will need to decide the next steps with this study.	Direction Likely to recommend actions to the Governing Body for decision Progress to date Decision to undertake further scoping work on an alternative port location and identifying related triggers/constraints PLA/2017/126 Technical review of Ports of Auckland Draft 30-year Plan. Ongoing collaboration with council, POAL and central government on the Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy requested as well as oversight of the capital expenditure programme as approved by the Finance and Performance Committee May 2018 PLA/2018/53 - PLA/2018/56	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Panuku	Tamaki redevelopment		Panuku leads council’s involvement in the Tamaki redevelopment programme. There are some decisions of council required from time to time. This is part of the Spatial Priority Area programme.	Decision Regional strategy and policy relating to infrastructure, land use and housing.	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Panuku	Transform Manukau		The previous council approved the High Level Project Plan for Transform Manukau, covering 600 hectares around the Manukau metropolitan centre.	Direction Feedback on the Framework Plan and priorities for Manukau. Panuku has responsibility for the delivery of Transform Manukau.	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
LEGISLATION/CENTRAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMMES
Auckland Council	National Planning Standards		The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 introduced national planning standards to improve the consistency of resource management plans and policy statements under the Act. Council will have the opportunity to make a formal submission in July – August 2018.	Decision Approve Auckland Council Submission. Progress to date Endorsement of feedback on National Planning Standards discussion papers Aug 2017 PLA/2017/97	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Urban Development Authorities		Urban Development Authorities legislation is planned to be introduced by the end of 2018.	Decision/Direction Approve Auckland Council submission.	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Tax Working Group		The Tax Working Group has been directed by government to advise on a number of specific challenges including taxation as it relates to housing affordability. The Tax Working Group will produce an interim report and draft recommendations to government in September 2018. There will be an opportunity for submissions. This work may sit under the Finance and Performance Committee. However, its scope is very broad.	Decision/Direction Approve Auckland Council submission.	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Resource Management Act reforms		The Government has indicated that Resource Management Act reform will be a focus from November 2018. Opportunities may arise to provide feedback to early discussion papers.	Decision/Direction Approve Auckland Council submission.	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill		The Local Government and Environment Select Committee reported back on this bill in Jun 2017. The bill provides greater flexibility for councils to collaborate on service delivery, new processes for council-led reorganisations, and a more proactive role for the Local Government Commission. There is no formal timeframe for the bill’s progression.	Decision/Direction Approve Auckland Council submission	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	National Environmental Standards			Decision/Direction As required	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Auckland Council	National Policy Statements			Decision/Direction As required	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
RESOLUTIONS OF OTHER COMMITTEES WHICH IMPACT PLANNING COMMITTEE
Panuku	Transform and Unlock programmes		Panuku produces High Level Project Plans which outline redevelopment projects and the delivery of initiatives in areas assessed against specific criteria i.e. scale of development based on council-owned land area, proximity to transport, potential for partnerships, infrastructure readiness and commercial opportunities.	Finance and Performance Committee decision for Panuku to consider additional areas for inclusion in the Transform and Unlock Programmes, including Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura and workshop these with the Planning Committee. Mar 2018 FIN/2018/40	Q1 Jul	Q2	Q3	Q4
RESOLUTIONS OF PLANNING COMMITTEE WHICH IMPACT OTHER COMMITTEES
Auckland Council	Urban Forest Strategy		The Environment and Community Committee approved the Urban Forest Strategy, a strategic approach to delivering on the wider social, economic and environmental benefits of a growing urban forest in the context of rapid population growth and intensification.	The Environment and Community Committee requested a report on the results of the LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) survey, an implementation plan for the Urban Forest Strategy including costs and benefits and funding sources, by Aug 2018 ENV/2018/12 Planning Committee decision to include resource consents data in the report to the Environment and Community Committee Apr 2018 PLA/2018/41	Q1 (Aug E&C)	Q2	Q3	Q4

COMPLETED
Auckland Council	Future Urban Land Supply Strategy refresh	Regional strategy and policy relating to greenfield infrastructure, land use and housing. Financial and Infrastructure Strategy recommendations made to Finance and Performance Committee	Decision to adopt the refreshed Future Urban Land Supply Strategy Jul 2017 PLA/2017/75
Auckland Council	Manurewa/Takanini/Papakura Integrated Area Plan	The Manurewa/Takanini/Papakura Integrated Area Plan is part of the Spatial Priority Area programme. It provides specific spatial planning of the area and assists with infrastructure investment decisions.	Decision to endorse the Manurewa/Takanini/Papakura Integrated Area Plan Nov 2017 PLA/2017/153
Panuku	Transform Onehunga	Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Transform Onehunga in 2017 (slightly delayed because of the East West Link proposal).	Decision to adopt the High Level Project Plan for Transform Onehunga Mar 2017 PLA/2017/34
Panuku	Unlock Henderson	Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Henderson which outlines the delivery of initiatives for the Henderson metropolitan centre.	Decision to adopt the Unlock Henderson High Level Project Plan May 2017 PLA/2017/53
Panuku	Unlock Papatoetoe	Panuku completed the High Level project for Papatoetoe which outlines redevelopment projects and the delivery of initiatives in Papatoetoe.	Decision to adopt the Unlock Papatoetoe High Level Project Plan Jul 2017 PLA/2017/78
Panuku	Unlock Panmure	Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Panmure which outlines the delivery of initiatives for the Panmure metropolitan centre.	Decision to endorse the Unlock Panmure High Level Project Plan Mar 2018 PLA/2018/21 Decision of the Finance and Performance Committee to dispose of properties specified in the Unlock Panmure High Level Project Plan Apr 2018 FIN/2018/59
Panuku	Unlock Avondale	Panuku completed the High Level Project Plan for Avondale which outlines the delivery of initiatives for the Avondale town centre. This is part of the Spatial Priority Area programme.	Decision to endorse the Unlock Avondale High Level Project Plan Nov 2017 PLA/2017/142
Auckland Council	Seachange – Tai Timu Tai Pari	The marine spatial plan for the Hauraki Gulf – Seachange Tai Timu Tai Pari – was completed by the independent stakeholder working group in November 2016. Staff reported on implications of the plan and options for Auckland Council implementation.	Decision to establish a political reference group to provide direction to council on how to implement the plan, propose a work programme of activities and collaborate with other agencies. Further reporting referred to the Environment and Community Committee. May 2017 PLA/2017/50
Auckland Council	Resource Management Act reforms	The previous council made submissions on the Regulatory Systems (Building and Housing) Amendment Bill. Parliament is expected to pass this legislation in March 2017. Staff will advise of any implications for Auckland Council.	Update Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 passed - memo circulated to committee outlining implications for council Apr 2017.
Auckland Council	Productivity Commission – Better Urban Planning	The previous council made submissions on the Better Urban Planning discussion document. The Productivity Commission is due to report back to Government with their final report in March/April 2017. Staff will report on any implications for Auckland Council.	Update Government released the Productivity Commission report in March 2017. Memo circulated to committee outlining implications for council Apr 2017.
Auckland Council	Unit Titles Act review	The Government released the Unit Titles Act discussion document in December 2016. Auckland Council submission March 2017 on regional strategy and policy relating to infrastructure, land use and housing.	Decision to approve Auckland Council submission Mar 2017 PLA/2017/18

Auckland Council	Urban Development Authorities discussion document	The Government released the Urban Development Authorities discussion document on 14 February 2017. Auckland Council submission May 2017.	Decision to approve Auckland Council submission May 2017 PLA/2017/51
Auckland Council	National Environmental Standards	The Government released the proposed national environmental standard for marine aquaculture on 14 June 2017. Auckland Council submission Aug 2017.	Decision to approve Auckland Council submission Aug 2017 PLA/2017/98
Auckland Council	Whenuapai structure plan	The Whenuapai Structure Plan provides specific spatial planning for these areas and assists with infrastructure investment decisions.	Decision to adopt the Whenuapai structure plan adopted by Auckland Development Committee Sep 2016 AUC/2016/117
Auckland Council Panuku	City Centre and Waterfront development	A refresh of the 2012 City Centre Master Plan will ensure that it remains current and will inform Long-term Plan prioritisation and budget decisions. Panuku is leading the refresh of the spatial planning for the Wynyard Point area in Wynyard Quarter, and a refresh of the Central Wharves strategy which was deferred while the Port Future Study was undertaken.	Decision to update the City Centre Master Plan Mar 2017 PLA/2017/31 In principle approval of Queens Wharf inner dolphin Mar 2017 PLA/2017/32 Decision to approve updated implementation of City Centre Master Plan and Waterfront Plan Sep 2017 PLA/2017/111
Auckland Council Auckland Transport	Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018	The Government released the draft document for consultation in February 2018. This document informs the Regional Land Transport Plan and the Council’s Long-term Plan.	Decision to approve Auckland Council submission May 2018 PLA/2018/57
Auckland Council	Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill	The Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill seeks to reinstate the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities and restore the power to collect development contributions for a wider group of infrastructure projects.	Decision/Direction to establish a political working group to provide direction and approve Auckland Council submission May 2018 PLA/2018/58

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

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Planning Committee forward work programme 7 August 2018	199
b ⇨	Schedule of August Planning Committee workshops (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity Quarterly Monitoring Report June 2018 (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	Memo on Environment Court Decision – Rural Subdivision appeals (Auckland Unitary Plan) (Under Separate Cover)
e ⇨	Auckland Plan refresh workshop 26 documents (Under Separate Cover)
f ⇨	Transpower's Emerging Strategy for Auckland workshop minutes (Under Separate Cover)

Author	Kalinda Gopal - Senior Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy