I hereby give notice that an ordinary
meeting of the Heritage Advisory Panel will be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Tuesday, 23
October 2018
5:30pm
Level 2
Reception Lounge
Town Hall
Auckland
|
|
Ngā Hui a te Rōpū
Kaitohutohu Taonga Tuku Iho /
Heritage Advisory Panel
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Cr Mike Lee
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Sally Hughes
|
|
|
Members
|
Elizabeth Aitken-Rose
|
|
|
|
Graeme Burgess
|
|
|
|
John Burns
|
|
|
|
Leyton Chan
|
|
|
|
Helen Geary
|
|
|
|
Rau Hoskins
|
|
|
|
Allan Matson
|
|
|
|
Claudia Page
|
|
|
|
Bill Rayner
|
|
|
|
Sherry Reynolds
|
|
|
|
David Veart
|
|
|
|
Lorraine Wilson
|
|
(Quorum 8 members)
|
|
|
Tam White
Senior Governance Advisor
18 October 2018
Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8156
Email: tam.white@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
|
Heritage
Advisory Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 Apologies 5
2 Declaration of
Interest 5
3 Confirmation
of Minutes 5
4 Extraordinary
Business 5
5 Resource
Consents in Special Character Area 7
6 Special
Character - Housing New Zealand Appeal 13
7 Heritage
Evaluations - Prioritisation process 91
8 Heritage
Manager's Report 93
9 Consideration
of Extraordinary Items
At the close of
the agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Declaration
of Interest
Members are
reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a
conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other
external interest they might have.
3 Confirmation
of Minutes
|
That the Heritage Advisory Panel:
a)
confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting,
held on Tuesday, 28 August 2018, as a true and
correct record.
|
4 Extraordinary
Business
Section 46A(7)
of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended)
states:
“An item
that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by
resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member
explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-
(i) The
reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the
discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A)
of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended)
states:
“Where an
item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed
at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor
matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains
at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that
the item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or
recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to
a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
|
Heritage
Advisory Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
Resource
Consents in Special Character Area
File No.: CP2018/17604
Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report
1. To
update the Panel on issues that have arisen following the
Environment Court’s Declaration in Auckland Council v Budden.
Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary
2. Following
on from the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) becoming operative in part in November
2016 applications within the Special Character Overlay were assessed against
the special character provisions and not the underlying residential zoning
provisions.
3. An
Environment Court declaration sought by Council found that this was not the
correct interpretation of the plan provisions. The Court did not agree with
Council’s interpretation in applying only the Special Character Areas
Overlay – Residential Chapter of the Plan, ruling that the underlying
zone controls were also applicable, even where inconsistent and regardless of
the intention behind the drafting of the provisions.
4. The
rules within the Single House Zone and Special Character Areas Overlay have
different standards e.g. yard, height in relation to boundary and building
coverage requirements, with the Special Character Areas providing more generous
building envelopes given the traditionally narrow sites, with houses being
built close to the boundaries.
5. It
should be noted that, all of the consented applications were assessed and
considered against the special character provisions in the Plan.
6. Since the Court’s decision, the Resource Consents Department
immediately changed its processing practice so that all consents from 20
December 2017 were to be determined in line with the Court’s declaration.
7. Further
all affected consent holders have been contacted by Council.
8. Officers are also preparing a Plan Change to clarify the matter and
address the conflicts between the Single House Zone and
Special Character Areas Overlay provisions.
9. Attached
is a FAQ sheet provided to affected consent holders and the media.
|
Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s
That the Heritage Advisory
Panel:
a) receive
the report.
|
Ngā
tāpirihanga / Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩ 
|
FAQ Sheet
|
9
|
Ngā kaihaina / Signatories
|
Author
|
Noel Reardon - Manager Heritage
|
|
Authoriser
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
|
|
Heritage
Advisory Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
|
Heritage Advisory
Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
Special Character - Housing New Zealand
Appeal
File No.: CP2018/18953
Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report
1. To
refer the recent Environment Court decision on Special Character to the Panel
for any advice.
Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary
2. The
Environment Court issued its second decision on the Special Character RPS
appeal.
3. The
Court has allowed the Housing New Zealand appeal in part, deleted the
Council’s new objective and suggested some other changes to the other RPS
text. The Court found that there is no disconnect in the cascade between
the RPS and the District Plan requiring the Council’s new objective.
4. The
Court found that the single remaining RPS objective and related policies and
rules are entirely consistent and provide a complete set of provisions in
relation to special character. It also found that lower order provisions
do not refer to historic heritage in a section 6(f) sense. The Court
considered that adding a “protection” objective as proposed, has
the potential to confuse the situation.
5. As
well as deleting the Council’s new objective, the Court proposed changes
to the B5.3(1) Issue, Policies B5.3(2)(a) and (4), and the Explanation and
Reasons.
6. The
Court has offered the parties the opportunity to comment on its changes
(Housing NZ within 10 working days, and the Council within a further 5 working
days) before it issues a final decision.
7. A
copy of the decision is attached.
|
Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s
That the Heritage Advisory
Panel:
a) receive
the report.
|
Ngā
tāpirihanga / Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Environment Court Decision
|
15
|
Ngā kaihaina / Signatories
|
Author
|
Noel Reardon - Manager Heritage
|
|
Authoriser
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
|
|
Heritage
Advisory Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
|
Heritage Advisory
Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
Heritage Evaluations - Prioritisation
process
File No.: CP2018/19713
Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report
1. To
seek the Panels advice on issues arising from the Hearings on Plan Change 7.
Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary
2. Plan
Change 7 added 48 sites to the schedule in the Unitary Plan. The hearings for
the plan change have finished and decisions are expected in approximately 2-3
months.
3. A
number of issues arose during the hearing. Once we have fully debriefed from
the hearings and after decisions have been made we will bring further issues to
the Panel for consideration.
4. An
immediate issue which was raised by the Panel members as a result of submitters
seeking to add additional sites through the submission process is how Council
decided on the 48 versus others.
5. While
the Council can provide greater clarity around our prioritization process it is
clear that there are more sites to evaluate than the Council has resources or
time to consider. There is therefore a need to prioritise.
6. There
is also a need to provide advice to potential submitters about the system. The
Advisory Panel through its contacts could facilitate this advice.
7. The
Heritage unit has a ‘places of interest’ list. This list works as a
central depository and includes public nominations, places identified by local
board area heritage surveys and places identified in the pre-1944 overlay
survey. This list currently includes over 2000 places.
8. Places
continue to be added to this list, particularly from local board area heritage
surveys. These are funded by local boards.
9. In
2016 advice was sought from the Panel as to a prioritisation approach to these
sites particularly those identified through the pre 1944 survey work.
10. From
that prioritisation process approximately 500 of the 2000 sites were identified
as candidates for evaluation.
11. Plan
Change 7 started with a list of 70 of the 500 sites, with 48 being included in
the notified plan change.
12. While it is anticipated that there will be further plan changes it
is unlikely that they will include as many potential sites. 10 -15 sites are
considered enough to evaluate given resources and time. It is also anticipated
that there will not be a plan change every year as time needs to be allocated
for the hearings process.
13. Officers will
present on this matter.
|
Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s
That the Heritage Advisory
Panel:
a) receive
the Heritage Evaluations – Prioritisation process report.
|
Ngā
tāpirihanga / Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina / Signatories
|
Author
|
Noel Reardon - Manager Heritage
|
|
Authoriser
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
|
|
Heritage
Advisory Panel
23 October
2018
|
|
Heritage Manager's Report
File No.: CP2018/19827
Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report
1. To
update the Panel on a range of issues.
Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary
2. Heritage
Counts is to be published soon. Copies may be available at the meeting.
3. Plan
Change 10 which corrects errors and anomalies to the existing Heritage schedule
begins the hearings process on 1 November 2018.
|
Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s
That the Heritage Advisory
Panel:
a) receive
the Heritage Manager’s report.
|
Ngā
tāpirihanga / Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina / Signatories
|
Author
|
Noel Reardon - Manager Heritage
|
|
Authoriser
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
|
