Agenda of Franklin Local Board

Franklin Local Board

05 May 2020

Attendance at local board meetings during the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period

File No.: CP2020/04693

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To recommend an amendment to the local board’s standing orders in order to provide for attendance of non-members at local board meetings via audio or audio-visual link.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report updates the local board on the temporary arrangements for local board meetings enabled by the COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020 and provides options for implementing similar arrangements for non-members.

3. The COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020 temporarily amends the existing legislative restrictions for local government on remote attendance for elected members and minimum quorum at local board meetings. This now enables meetings to proceed by audio-visual link, changes how meetings can be open to the public and how members of the public receive the agenda and minutes.

4. The current local board standing orders do not provide for non-members, specifically members of the public and Māori, to give input via audio or audio-visual link.

5. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires that a person other than a member of the local board may participate by means of audio link or audio-visual link if the standing orders of the local authority permit this and if the chair is satisfied that all conditions and requirements in the standing orders are met. (Clause 25A(2), Schedule 7, LGA). Local board standing orders do not currently allow for this.

6. Auckland Council will be using Skype for Business for local board meetings. Attendance by members and non-members (if approved) will be facilitated by phone (audio only) or Skype video (audio-visual) via the Skype for Business app.

7. An amendment to Standing Orders to enable electronic attendance can either be reversed at a future date or maintained to support that attendance in the future, where it is available.

8. The Standing Orders for the Franklin Local Board are included in this report as Attachment A and are available on the Auckland Council website at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/meetings-council-bodies/Documents/standing-orders-franklin-local-board.pdf.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) note the temporary amendments pursuant to the COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020 which allows members to attend meetings by audio-visual link, as of right and despite anything to the contrary in standing orders and to be counted for the purposes of quorum.

b) amend its standing orders by including a new Standing Order 3.3.10 that reads as follows:

Attendance of non-members by electronic link

A person other than a member of the local board may participate in a meeting of the local board by means of audio link or audio-visual link if the person is otherwise approved to participate in accordance with Standing Orders Sections 6 and 7.

c) amend its Standing Order 7.8.5 to provide discretion to the chair of the meeting to decline Public Forum requests via audio or audio-visual link.

Horopaki

Context

COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020

9. In late March 2020, central government enacted an omnibus bill that amended various acts of parliament including the LGA and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA).

10. The amendments to the LGA and LGOIMA enable local authorities to have meetings by audio-visual link (given the restrictions regarding physical distancing and Alert Level 4) and support the effective operation of those meetings by removing conditions associated with the right to attend meetings by audio or audio-visual link.

11. These amendments only apply while the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice 2020 is in force and will be repealed when that notice expires or is revoked.

Amendments to LGA

12. The amendments to the LGA modify Clause 25A, Schedule 7 so that a member of a local authority has the right to attend any meeting by audio or audio-visual link, regardless of what is provided for in the local authority’s standing orders. It also modifies clause 25A so that a member attending by audio link or audio-visual link is counted for the purposes of quorum.

Amendments to LGOIMA

13. The amendments to LGOIMA include modifying s 47 so that the requirement for meetings of local authorities to be ‘open to the public’ may be met during Alert Level 4 and other restrictions on physical distancing. The amendment redefines ‘open to the public’ to mean that the local authority:

a) if it is reasonably practicable, enables access to the meeting by broadcasting live the audio or video of the meeting (for example, by broadcasting it on an internet site); and

b) does one or both of the following as soon as practicable after the meeting ends:

i) makes an audio or a video recording of the meeting available on its internet site;

ii) makes a written summary of the business of the meeting available on its internet site.

14. This amendment does not anticipate public involvement as part of the meeting itself but ensures the public can access or view meeting proceedings online (either live or after the meeting) or through reviewing the summary.

15. Other amendments to LGOIMA include:

· modifying s 46A so that agendas and reports for the meetings may be made available on the local authority’s internet site instead of at offices and other physical locations

· modifying s 51 so that minutes of meetings may be made available on the local authority’s internet site instead of at offices and other physical locations

· the changes made by the COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020 now supersede some of the provisions in the local board standing orders and the restrictions on physical distancing and from Alert Level 4 now limit the opportunity for public input.

Local Board Standing Orders

16. The LGA requires local authorities to adopt a set of standing orders for the conduct of its meetings and those of its committees (Clause 27, Sch 7). Each local board has adopted its standing orders which have been developed from a template.

17. As a result of the statutory amendments listed in this report, the following standing orders have been temporarily superseded:

· 3.3.2 Member’s status – quorum and vote

· 3.3.3 Conditions for attending by electronic link

· 3.3.4 Request to attend by electronic link

· 7.3.1 Information to be available to public

· 7.3.2 Availability of agendas and reports

· 8.2.1 Inspection of minute books

18. There are additional provisions in standing orders that may require further consideration if the local board wishes to enable these to continue during the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period. These relate to input and participation by Māori and the public.

19. Clause 25A(2), Schedule 7 of the LGA requires that a person other than a member of the local authority may participate by audio link or audio-visual link if the standing orders of the local authority permit this and if the chair is satisfied that all conditions and requirements in the standing orders are met.

20. The current standing orders do not currently provide for non-members, if required and approved to do so, to give input by means of audio link or audio-visual link.

21. Other participants at local board meetings include Governing Body members and staff. The LGA and the recent amendment provide the right for any member of a local authority or committee to attend any meeting of a local authority by audio-visual link (unless lawfully excluded). This can be interpreted broadly to extend to meetings where the elected member may not be a decision-maker or be participating in the decision at all. As such, Governing Body members participation may be by audio or audio-visual link and the process for providing them with speaking rights remains under standing orders.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

22. In performing their role, local boards are required to act in accordance with the principles contained in s 14(1) of the LGA including the requirement for the council to conduct its business in an open, transparent and democratically accountable manner and make itself aware of and have regard to the views of all of its communities.

23. While the LGA does not specifically require public input to be provided for at local board meetings, the standing orders approved by the local board reflects the principles in s 14 LGA by providing for public attendance and enabling public input at meetings.

24. In order to continue to provide this opportunity as well as facilitate input by Māori and the public, the standing orders require amending.

Standing Orders Section 6 Māori Input

25. Speaking rights for Māori organisations or their nominees are granted under standing orders for the purpose of enabling Māori input, if any, to any item on the agenda of a meeting.

26. To ensure this right can be exercised during the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period, provision needs to be made enabling any input to be given by audio or audio-visual link.

Standing Orders 7.7 Deputations and 7.8 Public Forum

27. The provisions for public input in standing orders are one of the ways that local boards give effect to the requirements of the LGA (s 78 and s 79).

28. The LGA provides that in the course of its decision-making, a local authority must consider the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter. The LGA does not specify how those views are to be obtained or what form that consideration should take. It does not require a public forum at meetings.

29. However, the LGA gives local authorities discretion as to how to comply with s 78 and what to consider. Through their standing orders, local boards and the Governing Body have chosen to enable public input through deputations and public forum at their meetings as one way to obtain community views, among other things.

30. To ensure this opportunity can continue to be made available during the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period, provision must be made in standing orders to receive this by audio or audio-visual link.

Proposed amendment

31. This report recommends that input from non-members continue to be enabled during the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period. This requires an amendment to the standing orders.

32. An amendment to standing orders requires a 75 per cent majority vote.

33. A similar amendment has been made by the Governing Body to their standing orders. It is desirable to ensure consistency across the governance arms of Auckland Council. The Governing Body resolutions are as follows:

Resolution GB/2020/33 (n) That the Governing Body amend standing orders by inserting a new Standing Order 3.3.10 as follows:

Attendance of non-members by electronic link: A person other than a member of the Governing Body, or the relevant committee, may participate in a meeting of the Governing Body or committee by means of audio link or audio-visual link in emergencies if the person is otherwise approved to participate under these standing orders (such as under Standing Order 6.2 “Local board input” or 7.7 “Public input”.)

Resolution GB/2020/33 (p) That the Governing Body agree to change Auckland Council’s Standing Orders to provide full discretion to the chair of the Emergency Committee to decline public input requests

34. The local board’s standing orders currently give discretion to the chair to decline deputations but not public forum requests. Giving discretion to the chair to manage requests for public forum during this time can ensure the requirements of the LGA regarding the provision of the technology requirements, can be supported.

Technology options available

35. Where attendance by audio or audio-visual link is permitted, the LGA requires that the chair of the meeting ensures:

· the technology for the audio link or audio-visual link is available and of suitable quality and;

· that the procedure for use of the technology will ensure that participants can hear and be heard by each other.

36. The chair’s discretion will need to be exercised where the technology and quality cannot be guaranteed.

37. The audio and audio-visual link options available for non-member input are provided by Auckland Council through Skype for Business.

Table one: Technology options available and their abilities

Option	Ability
Audio link only Attend Skype for Business meeting via phone.	· no ability to see presentations being shared or to see and be seen by local board members attending the meeting · only technical equipment required is a landline or mobile telephone.
Audio-visual link Video and audio attend Skype for Business meeting	· allows non-member to see both presentations being shared and to see and be seen by the local board members attending · requires a mobile phone or a computer device with an internet connection.

Option

Ability

Audio link only

Attend Skype for Business meeting via phone.

· no ability to see presentations being shared or to see and be seen by local board members attending the meeting

· only technical equipment required is a landline or mobile telephone.

Audio-visual link

Video and audio attend Skype for Business meeting

· allows non-member to see both presentations being shared and to see and be seen by the local board members attending

· requires a mobile phone or a computer device with an internet connection.

38. If enabled under standing orders, non-members who wish to give input would need to contact the local board with a request to attend. If approved by the chair, information on how to join the meeting using audio and audio-visual link options above will be sent out to the attendee by staff.

Summary of meeting

39. Where it is not reasonably practicable for the public to attend the meeting through a broadcast and/or peruse a recording after it has happened, a summary of the meeting will need to be provided by staff.

40. A summary in this context would be different from the content of agendas, reports and minutes which are all separately required to be publicly available. It should contain the thrust or key points of the discussion or debate at the meeting keeping in mind that its purpose is to provide an alternative to an audio or video recording of the meeting, in a situation where the public is not able to attend and hear this discussion themselves.

41. The ordinary definition of a summary is a brief statement or account of the main points of something. While the appropriate level of detail is likely to vary depending on what is being discussed at meetings, a summary is not expected to include verbatim notes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

42. This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

43. Staff attendance at meetings, while not specifically provided for, is a necessary part of local board meetings and as such is expected to take place using an audio-visual link.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

44. This report seeks to amend the local boards standing orders to enable public input and Māori input at meetings.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

45. This report seeks a decision that will ensure Māori input can continue to be given during the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period.

46. This will ensure Māori are not prevented from giving input at a meeting on any matter that may be of interest to them.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

47. The decision to amend standing orders is of a procedural nature and is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

48. The scaling up of technology to ensure compliance with COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020 is being done at a cost to the council. The costs are not known at this stage and will be factored into operational budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

49. The objective of the recent legislative changes is to reduce public health risks and ensure compliance with social distancing measures and other restrictions in New Zealand’s COVID-19 alert levels response plan.

50. While this is not specifically required by legislation, permitting public input by audio or audio-visual link, if practicable, can ensure the local board can receive and consider views of its constituents on decisions that they are making.

51. There is a risk that the audio-visual option would only be taken up by a small number of constituents as this would only be available to those who have the technical devices and internet access. The software that will be used for meetings is Skype for Business which is free to download and use. However, the internet access costs or availability of technology/devices can be a limiting factor for some constituents. Constituents who do not have internet access can participate, if approved, by phone.

52. The report is seeking discretion for the local board chair to decline public forum requests. This delegation should be exercised with caution so as to not undermine the intention of standing orders (which currently provide some limited grounds to decline public input). There will be instances where it is reasonable to decline (noting these examples are not intended to be exhaustive), such as:

· where the technology cannot be provided or quality cannot be assured;

· a need to manage time allocations for the agenda;

· the matter is neither urgent nor the subject of a decision to be made at the meeting;

· the request is offensive, repetitious or vexatious.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

53. If approved, the amendments to standing orders can, if the local board chooses, continue beyond the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period. Enabling these changes gives maximum flexibility for attendance of non-members at future meetings, including those with underlying health issues or compromised immune systems that may need to take extra precaution even after the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice period has ended.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Local Board Standing Orders	15

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Polly Kenrick - Business Manager, Local Board Services

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager for Franklin and Howick Local Boards

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Waiuku Planning Scoping Study	79

1. Introduction

Waiuku’s capacity for growth was last considered as part of the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in Part (AUP).

Submissions on the proposed AUP were heard through the Independent Hearings Panel (IHP) process. Whilst clearly building on earlier planning for the area, inclusive of the Franklin District Plan 2000, the current zoning within Waiuku is an outcome of the recommendations of the IHP to the Council and from that the Council’s final determinations on the AUP. This was made operative in part, relatively recently - on 29 September 2016.

In Waiuku the urban area was generally not extended from that provided for in the Franklin District Plan with the exception of the Fernleigh industrial area which was expanded through an update to the Franklin District Plan, following the settlement of Plan Change 14.

In 2018, following direction from the Franklin Local Board, Plans and Places agreed to undertake a high level planning scoping study to give consideration to future growth in and around the Waiuku area. Consideration was to be given to the capacity for the growth of Waiuku including the future role of the town as a key service centre providing for the needs of the surrounding rural hinterland. The work would also assist with informing responses to future development proposals.

It was agreed that the planning scoping study would include a review of previous planning documents together with workshops with the local board and iwi, and initial discussions with key stakeholders and the local community.

A number of workshops have been held with the Local Board (late 2018, April 2019 and August 2019). Public engagement included drop in sessions held in Waiuku in April and August 2019. Iwi engagement (with representatives of Ngati Te Ata and Ngati Tamaoho) occurred in July 2019.

The limitations of this study should be noted. It is not intended to be a comprehensive planning exercise for the future of Waiuku but is a high level planning scoping study for further work to come, inclusive of a settlements capacity study for the rural and coastal settlements in the wider southern area from Beachlands across to Waiuku currently being prepared.

2. Study Area

The study area for this high level planning scoping study is shown in Figure 1 below and comprises the urban zoned area of Waiuku, focusing on the residential and industrial zones and the immediately abutting rurally zoned land. This report also gives consideration to the capacity for industrial growth near the steel mill at Mission Bush Road, Glenbrook, a few kilometres to the north of Waiuku.

Figure 1 Study Area – Waiuku Planning Scoping Study

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

Waiuku’s 2018 population was 8,319^{^[1]} Council records indicate that there are approximately 3457^{^[2]} dwelling units in Waiuku’s urban area, which represents a nett gain of 113 dwelling units since December 2016.

3. Population, Household and Employment Projections

Auckland Council’s RIMU unit have provided the population, household and employment forecasts shown in Table 1 below^{^[3]} for Waiuku. These have been developed from the I11 regional model, version 5.

It is noteworthy that given that Statistics NZ’s population results have only recently arrived, the regional forecasts from which the dataset for Waiuku below is extracted are likely to require adjustment. This is programmed to occur in late in 2020 or early 2021 as part of a wider update of the entire regional model. For Waiuku, the 2016 basis for the forecasts below, projected Waiuku’s population to be 9,520 in 2018. This is clearly higher than 2018 census population count result of 8,319. Given this, it may be that the I11^{^[4]} forecasts are adjusted for Waiuku. The advice from the Council’s RIMU unit is to use the following as the best available forecasts to work from.

Table 1 Waiuku population, household and employment forecasts

SCENARIO I MODIFIED

HOUSEHOLD FORECASTS

2016	2021	2026	2031	2036	2041	2046	2051
3,551	3,720	3,856	4,013	4,092	4,177	4,269	4,272

POPULATION FORECASTS

2016	2021	2026	2031	2036	2041	2046	2051
9,520	9,687	9,777	9,932	9,905	9,890	9,874	9,880

EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS

2016	2021	2026	2031	2036	2041	2046	2051
3,085	3,214	3,244	3,262	3,243	3,222	3,184	3,326

The forecasts above show that by 2051, Waiuku will have 721 more households, 360 more people and the ‘usually resident’ population will have 241 more jobs.

4. Planning for Waiuku: Auckland Council and earlier

4.1 Auckland Plan

The first Auckland Plan was adopted by Auckland Council in 2012 and set the council’s strategic direction on how growth would be accommodated for the next 30 years. The plan:

· outlined a high-level development strategy to give direction and enable coherent, co-ordinated decision making by Auckland Council and other parties,

· Identified the existing and future location of residential, business, rural production and industrial activities

· identified the existing and future location of critical infrastructure facilities (such as transport, water supply, wastewater and stormwater disposal), other network utilities, open space, and social infrastructure identifies nationally and regionally important recreational and open space areas, ecological areas that should be protected from development, environmental constraints on development, and landscapes and areas of historic heritage value

· identified the policies, priorities, land allocations, programmes and investments to implement the strategic direction.

· The Auckland Plan’s development strategy promulgated the concept of a Quality, Compact Urban Form as a key means of guiding the development of Auckland. The Auckland Plan was influential in the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan.

.4.2 Auckland Unitary Plan

The development of the Unitary Plan was the largest and most complex planning exercise undertaken in New Zealand.

The proposed AUP was developed and notified by the Council. It was then referred to a hearings panel independent from the Council, chaired by Judge David Kirkpatrick.

The Independent Hearings Panel, similar to a Board of Inquiry, was appointed by the Ministers for the Environment and Conservation. The IHP heard public submissions and evidence through a process which allowed for cross-examination and careful testing of evidence.

After considering the plan, the IHP delivered its findings by way of recommendations to the Council.

Where the Council accepted the panel’s decision, the provisions were immediately operative, subject only to appeals on points of law. In respect of any recommendations the Council did not accept, full appeal rights to the Environment Court were available.

It was through this process that the current urban zoning for Waiuku (and the Glenbrook industrial area) was achieved. The Auckland Unitary Plan was made operative in part in 2016.

The AUP replaced the seven district plans inherited from the former councils.

4.2 Earlier Franklin District Council Work

Prior to the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan, planning for Waiuku involved the development of several planning initiatives by the Franklin District Council including the development of the Franklin District Plan (2000), Project Waiuku – Waiuku Concept Plan (2003) and the Franklin District Growth Strategy (2007). Discussion in Appendix 1 provides an overview of the Franklin District Council’s work from approximately 2000 to 2007.

4.3 Current Urban Zoning

Waiuku

Under the provisions of the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP), Waiuku has approximately 291 ha of residentially zoned land featuring a range of residential zones. Refer to Table 2 below. Waiuku also has 12 ha of centre zoning, 116 ha of light industrial zoning, 12 ha of mixed use zone and 238 ha of large lot zoning surrounding the urban zoned area, as summarised in the table below. A zoning map of the town is provided below as Figure 2^{^[5]}.

Table 2 Waiuku AUP zoning (ha)

Mixed Housing
Urban Zone (ha)

Mixed Housing
Suburban Zone (ha)

Single House Zone (ha)

Mixed Use Zone (ha)

Total AUP Urban Residential
zoning

(ha)

Large Lot Zone (ha)

Light Industrial
Zone (ha)

Neighbourhood Centre /
Local Centre Zone (ha)

10.12

237.44

31.24

12.25

291.05

238.57

116.63

12.01

Figure 2 Waiuku AUP zoning map

Most of Waiuku’s residential area is zoned Mixed Housing Suburban, the predominant residential zone across Auckland. Single House zoned land is located to the south around Hull and Towers roads.

There is a large area of large lot zoning - around two distinct areas located to the north east and north west, in the south eastern area (around Colombo Road) and to the south west (west of the southern end of Queen Street).

Mixed Housing Urban zoned land is located around Kent, Domain, Kirk and Martyn Streets and Victoria Ave.

Mixed use zoning can be seen around in the fringe area around the town centre – in an area south of Kitchener Road as far as Bright Road and in a band running from Queen Street north of Kirk Street across to Constable Road.

There are two distinct areas of light industry zoned land - around Belgium and Pacific Streets to the south of the town and in Fernleigh to the north east of the town, centred on Colombo Road north of Kitchener and Waiuku Roads. The Fernleigh area is subject to specific AUP Waiuku precinct provisions. An overview of the AUP zones applied in Waiuku is provided in Appendix 2.

Glenbrook Industrial Area

The Glenbrook industrial area to the north of Waiuku comprises 361 hectares of Heavy Industry zoning which covers the NZ Steel site in Mission Bush Road, Glenbrook. Refer to the purple coloured land in the map at Figure 3 below. The site is the subject of AUP precinct provisions I415 Glenbrook Steel Mill Precinct.

As the precinct describes: the purpose of the Glenbrook Steel Mill Precinct is to support and enable the continued operation of the existing steel mill and associated facilities. The Glenbrook Steel Mill is located on Mission Bush Road, Glenbrook and is a significant industrial resource within the Auckland region. This precinct seeks to provide for the mill’s growth and operation in a way that continues to support the local, regional and national economy.

Figure 3 Glenbrook / Mission Bush AUP zoning map

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

5. Utilisation of Residential and Industrial Land

5.1 Waiuku Residential

2019 data provided by Auckland Council’s Research and Investigation Unit (RIMU)^{^[6]} provides an indication of the amount of occupied and vacant land in Waiuku’s residential zones. Refer to Table 3 below. The ‘vacant’ figure comes from the Council’s rates assessment. Vacant refers to properties without any buildings but does not include properties with a house at the front and the potential to build another dwelling at the rear, i.e: existing residential properties with potential for ‘infill’.

Table 3 Vacant and occupied land: Waiuku residential zones

Waiuku Residentially zoned land	Occupied land	Vacant land	Total
Residential - Large Lot Zone	226.68	11.89	238.57
Residential - Mixed Housing Suburban Zone	227.02	10.41	237.44
Residential - Mixed Housing Urban Zone	9.46	0.67	10.12
Residential - Single House Zone	28.92	2.32	31.24
Total	492.08	25.29	517.36

The figures above indicate that currently there is approximately 10ha of ‘vacant’ land zoned for Mixed Housing Suburban and a smaller 2.3ha Single House zoned area. Approximately 12 ha of ‘vacant’ land is also available on large lot zoned land.

It is noted that the capacity for development on this vacant land may be restricted by environmental constraints including topography or flood plains.

Redevelopment of existing residential sites to achieve greater land use intensity would be able to occur for at least some of the ‘occupied’ residential land.

5.2 Waiuku Industrial

In an informal survey carried out in 2019, Fernleigh, as shown in Figure 4 on the next page, had approximately 36 ha of vacant land and 59 ha of underutilised land (referenced as ‘vacant potential’ in the next figure). At the time, this would allow an area of approximately 95 ha with capacity for development.

As discussed later in this report, there is a current resource consent application to develop 77.5 ha of this industrial land into an industrial business park with associated roading and servicing infrastructure as well as recreational amenities. The application proposes 74 lots ranging from 677 m² to 7.4ha with 4x rural residential lots.

Figure 4 - Vacant land in the Fernleigh industrial area as of 2019

The other industrial area at Belgium/Queen/Pacific Streets is much smaller, being approximately 5.6 ha in total with approximately 0.9 ha of vacant land and 1.8 ha of underutilised (‘vacant potential’) land. At the time of the survey, this would enable approximately 2.7 ha for total re/development. Refer Figure 5 below.

Figure 5 - Vacant land in the Belgium and Pacific Street industrial area as of 2019

5.3 Heavy Industry – Glenbrook

Figure 6 below^{^[7]} shows the area of Heavy Industry Zoned land at the New Zealand steel site at Glenbrook. There is approximately 156ha of ‘unused’ land, shown in red with the balance being land with buildings or storage (shown in blue).

Figure 6 – ‘Used’ and ‘Unused’ Areas of Heavy Industry Zoned land at the New Zealand Steel site at Glenbrook

A picture containing text, map

Description automatically generated

6. Recent Urban Subdivision and Building Consent Activity

6.1 Subdivision

There appears to be an active site development/subdivision market in Waiuku involving land with existing AUP urban residential zoning. The table provided in Appendix 3 describes residential or industrial subdivisions of 2 or more lots, either recently granted or under assessment.^{^[8]} The location of the granted subdivision consents is shown on the map at Figure 7 below.

Between the years 2016–2019, 55 subdivision consents were granted in the Waiuku area. Of these, 23 subdivision have been implemented,^{^[9]} 5 have had survey plans approved by Council,^{^[10]} and 27 are undergoing/awaiting monitoring and the deposit of a survey plan. In addition to these consents, there were five subdivision consents on hold or currently being processed by Council, at time of writing.

Subdivision activity involves a mix of new development and infill on residential zoned sites. Some of the larger subdivisions either completed or being currently assessed are described in Table 4 below.

Figure 7 – Location of recent Waiuku subdivision activity (granted subdivision consents, 2016–2019)

Table 4 Larger recent subdivisions in Waiuku

Site	Zoning	Number of lots created / proposed	Stage in subdivision process
25 and 30 Fernleigh Avenue, and 9 Ron Wyatt Lane (71 Kitchener Road)	Mixed Housing Suburban	92	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.
141 Collingwood Road	Light Industry, Rural Production, Mixed Housing Suburban	74 industrial	Received 24/05/2019. Subdivision consent application on hold.
45 Constable Road	Mixed Housing Suburban and Mixed Rural	38	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.
44 Collingwood Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	37	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.
41 Matai Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	13	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.
9A Karioitahi Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	12	s224c certificates issued 20/02/2017 and 11/06/2018 (Stage 1–2).
1 Trosk Place	Mixed Housing Suburban	10	s224c certificate issued 03/11/2017
29 Owens Road	Single House	10	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.

6.2 Building Consent Activity

Data provided by the Council’s Research, Investigation and Monitoring Unit shows that there has been 78 new dwellings consented in the past 3 years in Waiuku. Refer Table 5 below.

Table 5 Consented dwellings in Waiuku

Consented Building development	Apartments	Houses	Townhouses, flats, units, and other dwellings	Grand Total
2017		33	3	36
2018		19	2	21
2019	1	18	2	21
Total	1	70	7	78

7. Capacity Analysis

The dataset for Auckland Council’s reporting for the 2017 National Policy Statement – Urban Development Capacity was used to develop the capacity analysis described below in Table 6.

Table 6 Existing residential opportunities in Waiuku (August 2107)

Dwellings	Dwelling infill capacity	Dwelling re-development capacity
3547	1550	8764

As can be seen, two types of assessments were modelled^{^[11]},

a. Residential infill assessment – this being in-situ development potential without demolishing or relocating existing dwellings (noting that the yield calculation does not include minor dwellings)

b. Residential redevelopment assessment – this being in-situ development potential by demolishing existing dwellings (the yield calculation does not include minor dwellings)

The summarised methodology is provided in Appendix 4.

Maps of Waiuku’s residential infill assessment and redevelopment assessment have been produced by RIMU. These can be found in Appendix 5.

It is noted that site specific environmental constraints such as flood plains have not been considered in the development of these capacity figures. Flood plains^{^[12]} (Figure 8 on the next page) or steep topography^{^[13]} as land slopes down to watercourses such as the Waiuku stream (refer to Figure 9a on the next page) are known development constraints in parts of Waiuku. The zoning is also shown for completeness in Figure 9b [See Appendix 2 for AUP zone key information].

Some sites may be able to be developed either through ‘infill’ e,g: a second or more dwellings on the same site) or through total redevelopment (‘starting from scratch’) by way of engineering solutions if potential building sites are located in a flood plain or on a steep slope for example. However, if development on such sites cannot be addressed or it is an overly expensive solution, the development feasibility of such new development on some sites will be constrained.

Figure 8 Waiuku Floodplains

Figure 9a Topography around the Waiuku Stream / Kitchener Reserve
A picture containing text, map

Description automatically generated

Figure 9b Zoning around the Waiuku Stream / Kitchener Reserve
A close up of a map

Description automatically generated A screenshot of a cell phone

Description automatically generated

8. Rural Production Land

The rural area around Waiuku and the Glenbrook steel mill features a mix of FARM LUC1, LUC2, LUC3 and LUC 4 arable land at the 1:50,000 scale. Land classified as Land Use Capability (LUC) class 1 is considered land containing elite soil and land classified as LUC classes 2 and 3 is considered land containing prime soils.

Refer to the following two maps^{^[14]}. Figure 10 covers the area around Waiuku and Figure 11 is the area around the steel mill at Mission Bush Road, Glenbrook.

Figure 10 Land Use Capability Map around Waiuku

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

Figure 11 Land Use Capability Map around Steel Mill at Glenbrook

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

9. Auckland Plan 2050 (2018)

· The Auckland Plan which was refreshed in 2018, sets Auckland Council’s (the council’s) strategic direction on how growth will be accommodated. The Plan looks ahead to 2050, As part of a quality compact approach to growth, The Auckland Plan anticipates that up to 70 percent of new dwellings will be built within the existing urban area, up to 32 per cent is anticipated to occur largely within future urban area with a small amount allocated to rural areas – including towns and villages (6 %). One of the benefits of the quality compact city approach is that it helps to maintain Auckland’s rural productivity by limiting urban sprawl. Encouraging growth within urban areas helps to protect rural environments from urban encroachment and maintains the productive capability of the and its rural character.

· In terms of rural growth, the Auckland Plan’s approach is to focus on residential growth mainly in towns which provide services for the wider rural area, particularly the rural nodes of Pukekohe and Warkworth. Less residential growth is anticipated in the smaller towns and villages.

· Rural lifestyle growth will be focused into those areas already zoned as 'Countryside Living', and only a small amount of growth is anticipated in the wider rural area. This growth is likely to relate to incentive-based subdivision for environmental enhancement and/or the amalgamation of existing vacant lots.

· To ensure that rural production can continue and develop, the Auckland Plan advises that land fragmentation and reverse sensitivity must be minimised to safeguard Auckland's land and soil resources, particularly elite soils and prime soils.

10. Future Urban Land Supply Strategy (FULSS) July 2017

Future urban zoned land forms an important component of the overall strategy for enabling Auckland’s growth. Approximately 15,000 hectares was zoned Future Urban within the AUP with approximately 1,400 hectares for new business land. Figure 12 below shows the areas in the region zoned Future Urban.

The Future Urban Land Supply Strategy identifies the sequencing and timing of future urban land for development readiness over 30 years. The strategy is a long-term and proactive approach to delivering land that is ‘ready to go’ in these future urban areas. As this land is predominantly rural and has not previously been identified for urbanisation, bulk infrastructure has to be provided. This programme helps to provide greater clarity and certainty to landowners, iwi, developers, infrastructure providers and council about when future urban land will have bulk infrastructure in place and be ready for urban development. The programme specifically helps to inform:

· council’s infrastructure asset planning and management and its infrastructure funding priorities and sequencing that inform the council’s future Long-term Plans and the Annual Plans

· central government, such as the Ministry of Education, with medium to long-term projections, location and investment decisions

· private sector infrastructure providers with forward planning and investment decisions.

Other council documents such as the Auckland Plan, the Auckland Unitary Plan, and the 30 year Infrastructure Strategy have close links with this strategy. The strategy informs the greenfield element of the Auckland Plan Development Strategy which makes up a portion of the overall growth anticipated over the next 30 years. There are also links with relevant transport documents such as the National Land Transport Programme, Integrated Transport Programme, Regional Land Transport Plan, Auckland Transport Alignment Project and Supporting Growth.

There are large areas of future urban zoned land around Drury and Pukekohe and small areas around Glenbrook, Clarks Beach and Patumahoe. Future Urban land was not zoned around Waiuku.

Figure 12 Future Urban zoned areas in the region in FULSS

A picture containing text, map

Description automatically generated

11. National Policy Statement – Urban Development Capacity

The NPS-UDC directs local authorities to provide sufficient development capacity in their resource management plans, supported by infrastructure, to meet demand for housing and business space.

Development capacity refers to the amount of development allowed by zoning and regulations in plans that is supported by infrastructure. This development can be ‘outwards’ (on greenfield sites) and/or ‘upwards’ (by intensifying existing urban environments). Sufficient development capacity is necessary for urban land and development markets to function efficiently to meet community needs. The NPS-UDC contains objectives and policies that local authorities must give effect to in their resource management decisions. It provides direction on:

· outcomes that urban planning decisions should achieve

· evidence underpinning those decisions

· responsive planning approaches

· coordination between local authorities and providers of infrastructure.

Key objectives and policies are listed in Appendix 6

Analysis

The Auckland Unitary Plan was developed in parallel with the development of the National Policy Statement – Urban Development Capacity. The Auckland Unitary Plan identifies approximately 15,000 hectares of rural land for future urbanisation with the potential to accommodate approximately 137,000 dwellings. As described in the preceding section of the report, the FULSS addresses the council’s obligations under the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity which requires the council to ensure there is greater focus on enabling urban development and that there is sufficient capacity for housing and businesses. Auckland Council provides quarterly^{^[15]} and monthly^{^[16]} updates on how it is tracking against NPC-UDC expectations. Reporting is done on an Auckland wide basis with reference to Local Board areas. Key results from the last available reports are provided as follows.

Auckland wide:

· 1120 dwellings were consented in November 2019. In the year ending November 2019, 14,866 dwellings were consented in the region.

· 54 per cent of new dwellings consented in November 2019 were houses, 12 per cent were apartments and 34 per cent were townhouses, flats, units, retirement village units, or other types of attached dwellings.

· 1067 dwellings consented in November 2019 were inside the RUB. Over the past 12 months, 94 per cent of new dwellings consented were inside the RUB.

· 1745 dwellings were ‘completed’ by having a Code Compliance Certificate (CCC) issued in November 2019. In the year ending November 2019, 12,700 dwellings had a CCC issued.

· 658 new residential parcels under 5000m2 were created in December 2019.

· In the past 12 months, 7916 new residential parcels under 5000m2 were created – an average of 660 each month. In December 2019, 631 new residential parcels of all sizes were created inside the RUB.

· Across Auckland, there is over 9,000 hectares of land area zoned for business purposes. The two largest business zones are Light Industry and Heavy Industry zones.

· A total of 92 business zoned parcels were created between January and March 2018 among which, 41 per cent of the new business parcels are located within the Light Industry zone and 29 per cent are located in the Mixed Use zone.

The Council is, on a region wide basis, providing sufficient development capacity in its resource management plans, supported by infrastructure, to meet demand for housing and business space. Earlier discussion within this report describes the active subdivision / development market within Waiuku on existing residential and business zoned land.

12. National Policy Statement – Highly Productive land

In 2019, the Government proposed a National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL) to prevent the further loss of NZ’s productive land and promote its sustainable management. The overall purpose of the proposed NPS-HPL is to improve the way highly-productive land is managed under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) to:

· recognise the full range of values and benefits associated with its use for primary production

· maintain its availability for primary production for future generations

· protect it from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development

The Ministry for Primary Industries and the Ministry for the Environment called for submissions on the proposed NPS-HPL. The Council prepared a submission on the proposed National Policy Statement. This incorporated input from the Franklin Local Board. The main points of the Auckland Council submission are summarised below:

· While the council generally supports the National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land, there are a number of matters where the council that seeks the National Policy Statement to be more directive to give more certainty for the Highly Productive Land areas.

The Auckland Council:

· Supports the introduction of national direction to protect Highly Productive Land through the proposed National Policy Statement (‘NPS’) on Highly Productive Land. This is in light of the threats to Highly Productive Land in Auckland, the alignment of the NPS Highly Productive Land with council plans and policies, the benefits of national direction, and the importance of local food production.

· Requests the strengthening of Policy 4 to essentially preclude rural lifestyle development or zoning on Highly Productive Land as it impacts negatively on primary production and is an inefficient form of development.

· Requests that the tests for urban expansion onto Highly Productive Land be significantly strengthened to recognise the value of this finite resource.

· Supports the first list of criteria to identify Highly Productive Land as these relate to the physical land resource itself.

· Requests that further national direction be provided on the types of primary production activities and effects that should be anticipated and tolerated in rural areas and also in relation to methods to avoid reverse sensitivity effects.

· Request that a ‘buffer area’ be included in the Highly Productive Land identification exercise to protect Highly Productive Land from reverse sensitivity issues around its edges.

The government is currently reviewing the proposed NPS based on submissions received. It will then go to the ministers and cabinet for approval. If approved the NPS is currently forecast to take effect in mid 2020.

Analysis

The area around Waiuku and the steel mill features Farm LUC1 and 2 land – both considered to be ‘elite’ and ‘prime’ soils. The future adoption of the NPS especially in its amended form, (as suggested in the Council’s submission) would help protect the finite resource of elite and prime quality soils from urban expansion.

13. Franklin Local Board Plan (2017)

The Franklin Local Board Plan is a strategic document reflecting community priorities and preferences. It guides the local board activity, funding and investment decisions and influences local board input into regional strategies and plans.

A common theme during feedback on the draft plan was support for the protection of productive soils. This is reflected in the final plan through ‘Outcome 4: Growth is dealt with effectively’. It states that “protecting our fertile soils used for local horticulture and agriculture is a key priority” and a key initiative in the plan is to “Plan for growth in the right places, centred on local and town centres, to protect productive soils used for local agriculture and horticulture.”

14. Infrastructure

14.1 Wastewater

Watercare has advised that the existing Waiuku wastewater treatment plant can handle short term growth and is considered effective at present. The advice is that the existing wastewater supply network in the area has enough current capacity for about 1000 additional people subject to additional demands from other users – e.g. trade waste. Population growth and / or growth in trade waste will eventually bring the plant to capacity. The current discharge consent was renewed in 2019 and will provide for growth for approximately the next five to eight years until Watercare’s South West scheme becomes operational in approx 2026. The South West scheme includes:-

(a) building a high tech facility at the Waiuku Wastewater Treatment Plant to serve these western communities

(b) laying pipelines to take the highly treated wastewater to the proposed outfall in the Waiuku river channel, near the Clarks Beach golf course

The discharge consent for the South West scheme allows for population growth of up to 30,000 people of which a 16,000 increase in population is allocated to Waiuku.

14.1 Water

Watercare considers that the existing water supply network in the area has sufficient capacity to accommodate proposed development in line with AUP zoning. Water treatment plant upgrades will be staged at the plant to stay ahead of growth. A new water bore has recently been drilled at Cornwall Rd. In terms of current water supply, there is capacity for about 3,100 people in Waiuku. Further growth would require an additional water source. Watercare is in the process of coordinating the potential proposals in order to assess the actual effects on their services.

General
With both wastewater and water supply, localised upgrades may be required but this is dependent on the scale and location of any developments. Watercare has advised that it would work with developers to align any required work and the associated infrastructure funding requirements

14.2 Stormwater

The Waiuku study area falls outside any approved urban stormwater catchment area. However, it is recognised that flood management is a constraint to development in some areas. Storm water modelling would be required by Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters department depending on the nature and location of any future growth.

A Network Discharge Consent (NDC) was granted in October 2019 for the wider Auckland area. This is a single region wide consent to discharge stormwater with clear processes and requirements. This makes it easier to prepare stormwater management plans and manage all public stormwater discharges.

Healthy Waters has advised that it would work with developers seeking to utilise the NDC and how best to provide stormwater management for any future development.

14.3 Transport

Analysis^{^[17]} provided by RIMU using the 2013 census data reveals that for those living in Waiuku and not working from home, 68% of employment commuter trips are to local jobs (Waiuku, Pukekohe, west Franklin) with 6% commuting to Drury/Papakura/Manurewa, 11% commuting to Manukau/Wiri and 15% working further north.

As with many other rural towns in the region, Waiuku’s location renders it somewhat dependant on the use of private vehicles for local transport needs. The nearest train stations are in Pukekohe or Papakura for north and south bound train services and there are relatively infrequent bus services to Pukekohe (every 1 to 2 hours) and Papakura (Mon to Fri – one bus service to Papakura in the morning and one returning in the evening).

There are safety improvements currently being implemented on SH22 from Drury to Paerata.
Safety improvements to local roads including both Glenbrook and Waiuku Roads are included in the Strategic Transport Network Plan announced in July 2019. However, they are yet to be prioritised for funding.

The Supporting Growth Alliance is currently looking at serving future land development needs in the Drury and Pukekohe areas. Eventual transport improvements in these areas will assist with travel to and from Waiuku.

14.4 Gas

First Gas, an owner and operator of gas networks, is currently expanding its gas pipelines into Waiuku, recognising that Waiuku is a growing area. A new 8.5km gas distribution pipeline project links Waiuku to the main gas transmission pipeline at Glenbrook. The work was completed in 2019 with the route going through Waiuku

The new gas pipeline network will mean gas supply infrastructure will now be in place for any current or future development in and around Waiuku to tap into. This type of gas provision could be considered for subdivisions of a certain size, otherwise pipes would be installed in trenches. Capacity is suggested to be around 1200-1500 homes (or equivalent) subject to user needs. As with waste water, industrial uses create greater need /take more gas.

15. AUP Regional Policy Statement

The issues discussed in Chapter B2.1 and Chapter B9.1 and the objectives and policies of Chapters B2.2, B2.5 and B2.6 and Chapters B9.2., B9.3 and B9.4 are the most relevant for the purposes of this report. Extracts of these provisions are provided within Appendix 8.

B2.2 provides ‘higher order’ region wide direction and B2.5 refers to commercial and industrial growth. B2.6 provides growth and form objectives and policies specifically for rural and coastal towns and villages along with B9 which addresses the rural environment. Analysis is provided as follows.

Chapter B2.2 - Urban Growth and Form

Objective B 2.2.1 (1) seeks an outcome of a quality compact urban form which wouldn’t preclude the growth of rural towns such as Waiuku, bringing with it greater productivity and economic growth, greater social and cultural vitality and potentially infrastructure benefits for the area.

There is however also an expectation that rural character and productivity would be maintained and adverse environmental effects would be reduced. It is noted that rural area around Waiuku and the steel mill at Glenbrook features a high proportion of Farm LUC1 and 2 land. LUC1 land is considered to be ‘elite’ whilst LUC2 land is considered to be ‘prime’.

Whilst urban growth is to be primarily accommodated within the urban area 2016, Policy B2.2.1 2 does not include preclude growth in areas outside of the urban area such as Waiuku, which is noted as having a relatively small population.

Policy B2.2.2 (4) directs that urbanisation outside of the region’s towns is avoided.

Chapter B2.5 - Commercial and industrial growth

Objective B2.5.1 (1) identifies that opportunities for industrial growth should meet current and future demands. B2.5.1 (3) provides for industrial growth and activities to be enabled in a manner that does all of the following:

(a) promotes economic development;

(b) promotes the efficient use of buildings, land and infrastructure in industrial zones;

(d) recognises the particular locational requirements of some industries; and

(e) enables the development and use of Mana Whenua’s resources for their economic well-being.

B2.5.2. Policies

(7) directs the enabling of the supply of land for industrial activities, in particular for land-extensive industrial activities and for heavy industry in areas where the character, scale and intensity of the effects from those activities can be appropriately managed.

(8) enabling the supply of industrial land which is relatively flat, has efficient access to freight routes, rail or freight hubs, ports and airports, and can be efficiently served by infrastructure.

(9) enabling the efficient use of industrial land for industrial activities and avoid incompatible activities by all of the following:

(a) limiting the scale and type of non-industrial activities on land zoned for light industry;

(b) preventing non-industrial activities (other than accessory activities) from establishing on land zoned for heavy industry; and

(10) Manage reverse sensitivity effects on the efficient operation, use and development of existing industrial activities, including by preventing inappropriate sensitive activities locating or intensifying in or adjacent to heavy industrial zones.

Chapter B2.6 - Rural and coastal towns and villages

Objective B 2.6.1 enables growth and development of rural and coastal towns and villages such as Waiuku but only in ways that amongst other matters, avoids elite soils and avoid where practicable prime soils which are significant for their ability to sustain food production.

Policy B 2.6.2 directs that any expansion of existing rural and coastal towns and villages such as Waiuku is undertaken in a manner that avoids elite soils and avoids where practicable prime soils which are significant for their ability to sustain food production.

As discussed earlier, the area around Waiuku and the steel mill features a reasonable proportion of Farm LUC1 and 2 land – aka ‘elite’ and ‘prime’ land.

A case could be potentially developed that the expansion of the urban area could be undertaken on land around Waiuku and NZ Steel which isn’t LUC1 or 2 and can achieve or isn’t constrained in a policy sense by the other matters listed. It could also be argued that the LUC1 or 2 areas aren’t significant in terms of their ability to sustain food production – either in size or productivity terms.

However, in contrast, the history of land development within the Auckland region’s productive rural areas is typically relatively small in scale and incremental and whilst any given development is not necessarily significant per se, the result over time is the cumulative loss of productive land.

Analysis of Chapter B9. - Rural environment

Rural and coastal towns and villages, and areas zoned for countryside living, play an important role in enabling people to live, work and play in rural areas. They also can accommodate a portion of Auckland's growth.

Auckland, especially areas in Franklin, inclusive of the area around Waiuku has land of high productive potential for farming classified as elite land (Land Use Capability Class 1) and prime land (Land Use Capability Classes 2 and 3). The priority in these areas is to maintain the potential for these high quality soils to be used for agricultural purposes, rather than activities that are not dependent on soil quality.

Chapter B9’s policies seek to protect highly productive land from urban expansion, fragmentation, reverse sensitivity and inappropriate uses. The policies seek to ensure that uses and subdivision do not undermine or significantly compromise the productive potential of Auckland’s rural areas, while maintaining those qualities which the community values.

16. Engagement

As part of the Waiuku Planning scoping project, Plans and Places held a range of engagement activities with mana whenua, key stakeholders and the community.

This included:
(a) a workshop at the Waiuku Community Hall on 4 April 2019 for invited members of the business/commercial sector, attended by about 13-15 people
(b) meeting with Ngati Te Ata and Ngati Tamaoho representatives on 10 July in Pukekohe
(c) a drop in session with the community at Waiuku on 9 August 2019, attended by approximately 80 people.

Waiuku Community Hall Workshop

At the workshop, Council representatives presented on preliminary work completed and discussed the constraints affecting the future development of the town. Those attending raised matters including:

· their aspirations for an expansion of the urban area

· infrastructure constraints and opportunities

· forwarding technical work completed to the Council for consideration as part of this project

· their desire to continue to be involved in future planning for Waiuku

Mana Whenua meeting

The mana whenua were briefed on the nature of the project, the programme and timeline. Issues raised included:

· stream (awa) protection

· stormwater management

· earlier planning work completed for the town, including the FDGS

· engagement that had occurred with them by local developers, in particular the Fernleigh industrial developer seeking to develop 74 industrial lots

· the opportunity for best practice environmental management to be put into practice should development occur.

Otherwise, there were no specific concerns raised by the two mana whenua representatives. They did wish to be kept informed of any future planning activity by Auckland Council for the area.

Drop In Session

There were over 110 comments received at the drop in session.

37 comments suggest that more development for a wide range of uses should be allowed in Waiuku. Three comments suggest that no more development should be allowed in Waiuku. Nine comments refer to infrastructure issues. Some comments are generic, but some also are very specific around location and uses. Three comments were received which relate to a specific question asked at the drop in session about "what makes Waiuku special".

There were over 50 comments which fell outside of the scoping project. 35 comments were received which related to transport/traffic issues and the remainder (approx. 56) covered lifestyle, recreational facilities, placemaking, provision of housing, tourism, natural landscape and ancillary matters.

THEMES		Number	Comments
More development should be allowed
	Utilise/rezone land on Constable Rd for more residential	12	Good location as walking distance to town centre/medical centre/schools/proposed sports park/supermarket/ college
		3	Area suitable for retirement village or secure units for retired
		3	Area suitable for new subdivision
		1	Can rezone in stages over 20-30 years
		1	Area could include sports land, pools, parking, event complex [including access to all the above]
		1	Area provides opportunity to do a green fields development
	Growth and housing are needed	7	in whole peninsula and especially near arterial routes
	More mixed housing suburban (MHS), more industrial land, business activity, more THAB around town centre	4	MHS needed to support businesses mixed business use (for small business users).
Changes to zoning/controls needed	Rural – residential lots are too big	1
	Rural areas are struggling	1	More lifestyle blocks
	Only two storey buildings	1	No high rise
	Relocate the golf course	1	Use of housing or open space
	Extend the boundary at Hyland Place	1	More housing
Waiuku does not need more development
	No shortage of land for housing	1
	No high rise in the main street, keep the character of the town	1
	Enough industrial land at Cornwall Rd	1
Infrastructure	Water supply/sewage issues	6	Development is difficult and expensive
	AT Code of Practice	1	Onerous requirements
	“Thank you” to gas company	1	Refers to new gas pipeline built
	Funding	1	Let development fund infrastructure

17. Analysis

17.1 Residential

As described within chapter 6 of this report there appears to be a reasonably active subdivision development market within Waiuku whereby land which has been zoned for residential purposes is being subdivided to create more sites for residential development.

The subdivisions approved or under consideration appears to generate a reasonable pipeline of residential sites for residential development and thus enables further capacity for residential growth of the town for a number of years, subject to market conditions.

The infill / redevelopment of existing urban areas can be seen as being in line with the AUP’s push for a compact urban form able to be serviced by infrastructure.

The capacity for residential development in Waiuku should continue to be monitored. Enabling some expansion of the urban area of Waiuku for residential purposes may be required in the future to cater to the future population growth needs. However, as discussed earlier in this report, future population growth is projected to be relatively small.

Future urban expansion for residential purposes, if proposed, would need to consistent with the relevant statutory tests including the objectives and policies of the Regional Policy Statement.

17.2 Industrial

In terms of industrial land, the current industrial subdivision at Fernleigh on the northern edge of the town will be generating 70+ lots for industrial purposes. This development is also likely to enable sufficient industrial growth capacity for next few years, subject to market conditions.

There is limited capacity for growth within the more centrally located industrial areas although redevelopment of existing sites may provide for greater intensification.

A landowner has expressed an interest in developing land for industrial purposes close to the Glenbrook steel mill (currently owned by Bluescope Steel). Supporting legal and economic documentation regarding the rationale for the proposal has been provided to Plans and Places. The documents reference work commissioned by Auckland Council which indicates demand for further heavy industrial land in the southern sector of the region. Discussion is also provided on the merits of the land in question, that the Heavy Industry zoning is (nearly) entirely owned by Bluescope and that buffering requirements mean that not all vacant land is necessarily available for industrial expansion in zone. The steel mill area is served by long established road, rail, electricity supply and other infrastructure. The analysis provided discusses potential co-locational benefits for businesses looking to take advantage of an expansion of the local Heavy Industry zoning.

As outlined in Appendix 1, the Franklin District Growth Strategy discussed the potential for industrial expansion near the steel mill and the submissions were made to this effect as part of the Unitary Plan process. The Independent Hearings Panel recommended a preference for no industrial expansion at Glenbrook^{^[18]}

Along with land zoned Business - Light Industry Zone, the Independent Hearings Panel recommended the Council develop further the approach used in the PAUP Business Land report to monitor demand for and supply of this capacity in order to inform future plan changes, and in the interim to respond expeditiously to any requests for operative Business - Heavy Industry Zones in the Future Urban Zones.

The Council is not currently looking to provide for further industrial land in the area by way of Council initiated plan changes.

Any proposed future expansion of the industrial / business land area around Waiuku and the steel mill by way of a private plan change would need to meet the relevant statutory tests inclusive of consistency with the relevant objectives and policies of the Regional Policy Statement.

18. Conclusions

Waiuku’s development capacity was only recently settled through the AUP process.

There appears to be sufficient development capacity being generated by subdivision activity within the existing urban zoned area to cater for Waiuku’s future industrial and residential needs, at least for the next few years.

The Council is not at this stage proposing to extend the urban area of Waiuku or the industrial zoned area close to the Glenbrook steel mill.

The Council will be preparing for the review of the next Unitary Plan in 2026. This will provide an opportunity for a comprehensive review of the development capacity of the region inclusive of Waiuku.

This study is not intended to be a comprehensive planning exercise for the future of Waiuku but is a high level planning scoping study for possible further work to come. This includes a settlements capacity study for the rural and coastal settlements in the wider southern area.

Appendix 1 – Franklin District Council Planning: Overview

Franklin District Plan (2000)

The Franklin District Plan was developed by the legacy Franklin District Council (FDC) and made operative in part^{^[19]} in 2000. In Waiuku, the residential area was zoned ‘Residential’ (grey colour on the map at Figure 2 below) whilst areas of ‘Rural Residential’ (pink on the maps below) were located to the north west and north east of the town. The residential zone enabled one dwelling per site or multi-unit housing at one unit per 350m² (up to 3 units as a permitted activity). The minimum vacant lot size for subdivision purposes was 350m²

In the rural residential zone, the size of lots was to be “in the range of 2500 to 8000 square metres, with an average of no less than 3000 metres”. ‘Industrial’ zoning (purple coloured on the maps) was provided for a large area of land in the Fernleigh area (expanded by way of a later plan change) whilst the central areas of industrial around Belgium and Pacific streets and at the town end of Constable Road were zoned ‘Business’ (red).

Figure 13 Franklin District Plan: Waiuku Zoning

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated A screenshot of a cell phone

Description automatically generated

‘Project Waiuku’ - Waiuku Concept Plan (2003)

In 2003 the FDC released ‘Project Waiuku’ which was developed following public engagement including a number of community design workshops, focus groups and public presentations. The project involved the formulation of a development framework for Waiuku that amongst other matters, sought to “promote sustainable use and integrated management of Waiuku’s resources over the next 30 years”.

Project Waiuku noted that a substantial amount of growth could occur within the existing zoning of the town. It also supported potential rezoning of some greenfields land to the west and south of the town “to provide greater choice and opportunity”. This area is centred on Constable Road with approximately 9ha which could become residential zoned, 27ha ‘deferred residential’ and 143ha of rural residential. The study also supported potential rezoning of around 12ha of greenfields land by the Franklin District Council or the land owners to become business/industrial and ‘deferred business’ zoned land, to the north east of the town in the Fernleigh area. Refer maps at figure 3 below.

Figure 14: Maps from Waiuku Concept Plan 2003

Franklin District Growth Strategy 2051 (2007)

The Franklin District Growth Strategy (FDGS) 2051 was developed over a period of several years by FDC to achieve a strategic direction consistent with the Auckland Regional Council’s proposed Change 6 to the Auckland Regional Policy Statement, the Southern Sector Agreement, the Auckland Regional Business Land Strategy 2006 and the Auckland Regional Land Transport Strategy while reflecting the particular needs and circumstances of the district. The FDGS was regarded as being a precursor to future FDC plan changes.

Residential

For Waiuku, the FDGS developed population projections whereby the anticipated population by 2051 was projected to reach 13,100 people. The study noted that Waiuku had a very low population density of 5.1 dwellings per hectare, with the current mean section size being 1,330 m².

The study proposed a future target density of 10 dwellings per hectare with the average lot size reducing to 750m² by 2051.

The FDGS considered that even when allowing for redesign / infill within the residential zone and the intensification of the rural residential zone, not all of the projected population growth could be accommodated within the then current urban boundaries.

Infill opportunities were considered to be limited by the Waiuku stream located south of the town centre. The topography associated with this stream meant that many sites were not considered to be suitable for infill. The FDGS proposed an additional urban area of 107 hectares of residential zoning to accommodate the projected population growth.

Constraints to urban development were considered and mapped in order to identify the areas suitable for urban development. Residential Areas A, B, C, and D shown in Figure 15 below were all identified for residential rezoning by 2021. Area B and D were already zoned Rural Residential, however by 2021 these areas were to be re-zoned residential with a target household density of 10 households per hectare. Area A and C were newly identified residential areas. By 2051, Area E and the rural residential south-eastern corner were to be intensified.

A picture containing text, map

Description automatically generated

Figure 15 – Waiuku 2051 Live (Residential Zones)

Business

The FDGS identified that the Franklin District Plan at the time provided 37 hectares of Business zoned land in Waiuku. An additional 53 hectares of new industrial land was proposed by the FDGS. 23 hectares was to be made available by 2021 comprising the land closest to the town centre. By 2051, a further 30 hectares was to be made available.

The FDGS identified that to the north of Waiuku, the Glenbrook Steel Mill occupied an area of approximately 333 hectares. The site is accessed via a district arterial route and a freight railway line. The FDGS noted that there was an opportunity to cluster similar activities and make use of the existing transport infrastructure in an area surrounding the Glenbrook Steel Mill. The FDGS also noted that further analysis was required to determine whether additional industrial land should be zoned around the Steel Mill, and if so, how much will be required. If additional industrial land was to be located around the Steel Mill, it was observed that the provision and release of land at Waiuku may need to be adjusted. The FDGS proposed industrial zoning expansion in Waiuku as shown in Figure 16 below.

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

Figure 16 – Waiuku 2051 Work (Business Zones)

In 2010 the legacy Councils within the Auckland region, including Franklin, were amalgamated to form the Auckland Council. Preparation for the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) followed shortly thereafter in 2012, superseding work done at a legacy Council level, including the FDGS.

There have been no private plan change requests proposed by land owners to develop land identified as being supported for rezoning in the DGS or Project Waiuku. Submissions were made to enable expansion through the Unitary Plan process. The two year ‘moratorium’ on private plan changes since the adoption of the Unitary Plan recently ended in November 2018. Several landowners continue to express an interest in developing land on the urban edge of Waiuku, picking up from the investigation work they did over the past decade.

Appendix 2 - AUP zone key information

Single house zone

The purpose of the Single House Zone is to maintain and enhance the amenity values of established residential neighbourhoods in number of locations. The particular amenity values of a neighbourhood may be based on special character informed by the past, spacious sites with some large trees, a coastal setting or other factors such as established neighbourhood character. To provide choice for future residents, Single House Zone zoning may also be applied in greenfield developments. To support the purpose of the zone, multi-unit development is not anticipated, with additional housing limited to the conversion of an existing dwelling into two dwellings and minor dwelling units. The zone is generally characterised by one to two storey high buildings consistent with a suburban built character. To create a new lot, under the Auckland Unitary Plan, each site in this zone needs to be a minimum of 600m².

Mixed housing urban

The Mixed Housing Urban Zone is a reasonably high-intensity zone enabling a greater intensity of development than previously provided for. Over time, the appearance of neighbourhoods within this zone will change, with development typically up to three storeys in a variety of sizes and forms, including detached dwellings, terrace housing and low-rise apartments. This supports increasing the capacity and choice of housing within neighbourhoods as well as promoting walkable neighbourhoods, fostering a sense of community and increasing the vitality of centres. Up to three dwellings are permitted as of right subject to compliance with the standards. This is to ensure a quality outcome for adjoining site and the neighbourhood, as well as residents within the development site. Resource consent is required for four or more dwellings.

To create a new lot, under the Auckland Unitary Plan, each site in this zone needs to be a minimum of 300 m².

Mixed housing suburban

The Mixed Housing Suburban Zone is the most widespread residential zone covering many established suburbs and some greenfields areas. Much of the existing development in the zone is characterised by one or two storey, mainly standalone buildings, set back from site boundaries with landscaped gardens. The zone enables intensification, while retaining a suburban built character. Development within the zone will generally be two storey detached and attached housing in a variety of types and sizes to provide housing choice. To create a new lot, under the Auckland Unitary Plan, each site in this zone needs to be a minimum of 400m², although there are some specific exceptions.

Mixed Use

The Mixed Use Zone is typically located around centres and along corridors served by public transport. It acts as a transition area, in terms of scale and activity, between residential areas and the City Centre Zone, Metropolitan Centre Zone and Town Centre Zone. It also applies to areas where there is a need for a compatible mix of residential and employment activities.

The zone provides for residential activity as well as predominantly smaller scale commercial activity that does not cumulatively affect the function, role and amenity of centres. The zone does not specifically require a mix of uses on individual sites or within areas. There is a range of possible building heights depending on the context. Provisions typically enable heights up to four storeys. The minimum lot size is 200m².

Light Industry

The Light Industry Zone anticipates industrial activities that do not generate objectionable odour, dust or noise. This includes manufacturing, production, logistics, storage, transport and distribution activities. The anticipated level of amenity is lower than the centre zones, General Business Zone and Mixed Use Zone. Due to the industrial nature of the zone, activities sensitive to air discharges are generally not provided for.

Large Lot

The Large Lot Zone provides for large lot residential development on the periphery of urban areas. Large lot development is managed to address one or more of the following factors:

• it is in keeping with the area’s landscape qualities; or

• the land is not suited to conventional residential subdivision because of the absence of reticulated services or there is limited accessibility to reticulated services; or

• there may be physical limitations to more intensive development such as servicing, topography, ground conditions, instability or natural hazards where more intensive development may cause or exacerbate adverse effects on the environment.

The minimum lot size is 4,000m2.

Franklin Local Board

05 May 2020

Appendix 3 – Waiuku Subdivision Consents

Site	Zoning	Number of lots created / proposed	Application status	Stage in the subdivision process	Consent application number(s)
9A Karioitahi Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	12	Granted 22/12/2016	s224c certificates issued 20/02/2017 and 11/06/2018 (Stage 1–2).	SUB60222242
1 Trosk Place	Mixed Housing Suburban	10	Granted 19/04/2017	s224c certificate issued 03/11/2017.	SUB60214499
2D Masters Road	Large Lot	5	Granted 27/03/2018	s224c certificate issued 15/02/2019.	SUB60215460
7D Collingwood Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	4	Granted 15/03/2016	Subdivision finalised and Record of Title issued 10/05/2018.	SUB60235946
14 Racecourse Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	3	Granted 19/10/2017	s224c certificate issued 05/09/2018.	SUB60304168
90 Victoria Avenue	Large lot	3	Granted 19/08/2016	s224c certificate issued 12/10/2017.	SUB60215200
33 Colombo Road	Large Lot	3	Granted 16/09/2016	s224c certificate issued 25/09/2017.	SUB60214554
70A Racecourse Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	3	Granted 12/04/2017	s224c certificate issued 22/09/2017.	SUB60222317
2A Masters Road	Large Lot	3	Granted 22/08/2016	s224c certificate issued 23/05/2017.	SUB60234796
93 Kitchener Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 12/12/2018	s224c certificate issued 25/10/2019.	SUB60329931
22 King Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 26/10/2018	s224c certificate ready for release 17/10/2019.	SUB60326087
94 Sandspit Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 11/12/2017	s224c certificate issued 15/05/2019.	SUB60310594
26 Colombo Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 17/05/2018	s224c certificate issued 05/04/2019.	SUB60316601
17 Racecourse Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 27/02/2018	s224c certificate issued 13/12/2018.	SUB60314063
42 King Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 18/10/2017	s224c certificate issued 30/11/2018.	SUB60306633
23 Sandspit Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 19/05/2017	s224c certificate issued 30/10/2018.	SUB60232255
25 Colombo Road	Large Lot	2	Granted 15/09/2017	s224c certificate issued 11/10/2018.	SUB60306040
17 Mellsop Avenue	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 05/05/2017	s224c certificate issued 07/09/2018.	SUB60215969
73 Kitchener Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 17/05/2017	s224c certificate issued 10/05/2018.	SUB60235004
8 Campbell Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 29/11/2016	s224c certificate issued 24/11/2017.	SUB60223301
18 Sandspit Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 25/10/2016	s224c certificate issued 14/08/2017.	SUB60230750
12 Rossiter Avenue	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 22/12/2016	s224c certificate issued 29/06/2017.	SUB60216714
64 Cameron Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 09/02/2016	s224c certificate issued 29/06/2017.	SUB60240559
43 Colombo Road	Large Lot	4	Granted 15/08/2016	s223 survey plan approved 04/02/2020.	SUB60222219
9 Collingwood Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	3	Granted 01/02/2019	s223 survey plan approved 12/12/2019.	SUB60329506
45 Sandspit Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 14/11/2019	s223 survey plan approved 28/02/2020.	SUB60344637
32 Sandspit Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 02/04/2019	s223 survey plan approved 04/02/2020. s224c process underway.	SUB60334103
3 View Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 08/08/2018	s223 survey plan approved 08/05/2019.	SUB60321213
25 and 30 Fernleigh Avenue, and 9 Ron Wyatt Lane (71 Kitchener Road)	Mixed Housing Suburban	92	Granted 10/10/2019	Bundled consent^{^[20]} – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60332941
45 Constable Road	Mixed Housing Suburban and Mixed Rural	38	Granted 23/05/2019	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60237908
44 Collingwood Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	37	Granted 03/02/2020[KA1]	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60317687
41 Matai Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	13	Granted 18/02/2019	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60326554
29 Owens Road	Single House	10	Granted 09/03/2017	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60228449
71 Martyn Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	6	Granted 07/09/2017	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60240283
23 Kitchener Road	Business – Mixed Use Zone	5	Granted 10/11/2016	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet[KA2] .	SUB60229392
43 Constable Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	5	Granted 07/02/2019	Bundled consent monitoring. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60329021
39 Kaiwaka Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	4	Granted 9/02/2016	s223/224c information unavailable on system.[KA3]	SUB60240456
6 Kirk Street	Mixed Housing Urban	4	Granted 30/07/2019	Bundled consent monitoring. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60340518
1 View Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	4	Granted 20/07/2018	Bundled consent monitoring. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60221991
156 Colombo Road	Large Lot	4	Granted 14/06/2017	Bundled consent monitoring. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60215556
15 Collingwood Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	4	Granted 20/08/2018	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60310319
93 Sandspit Road	Single House	4	Granted 13/07/2018	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60319960
18 George Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	3	Granted 13/09/2018	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60321518
11 Valley Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	3	Granted 03/05/2019	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60335604
2 Trosk Place	Mixed Housing Suburban	3	Granted 20/05/2019	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60335707
116 Racecourse Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 30/10/2018	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60327624
12A Kaiwaka Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 12/10/2018	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60325436
22 Domain Street	Mixed Housing Urban	2	Granted 22/05/2019	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60334888
24 Rangiwhea Road	Single House	2	Granted 29/09/2016	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60215358
43 King Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 20/06/2019	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60336027
45 Martyn Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 11/12/2017	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60310480
64 King Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 16/01/2019	No s223 survey plan submitted on system yet.	SUB60329275
7 Magnolia Drive	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 14/06/2018	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60320051
2 Noble Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Granted 05/08/2019	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60337944
31 Colombo Road	Large Lot	2	Granted 04/11/2019	Bundled consent – monitoring stage. No s223 survey plan submitted yet.	SUB60343496
141 Collingwood Road	Light Industry, Rural Production, Mixed Housing Suburban	74 industrial	Received 24/05/2019. Application on hold.	---	SUB60339258
48 Kaiwaka Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	7	Received 29/11/2019. Application on hold.	---	SUB60349764
5 Kaiwaka Road	Mixed Housing Suburban	4	Received 20/12/2018. Application in progress.[KA4]	---	SUB60332184
144 Queen Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Received 15/04/2019. Application on hold.	---	SUB60337247
37 King Street	Mixed Housing Suburban	2	Received 04/11/2019. Application on hold.	---	SUB60348164

	s224(c) completion certificate has been issued for the subdivision.
	s223 survey plan has been approved by Council, but s224(c) has not been issued yet.
	Only the underlying subdivision consent has been granted – no s223 or s224(c) sign-off yet.
	Subdivision consent application is on hold or in progress.

Franklin Local Board

05 May 2020

Appendix 4 - Formulas (simplified versions) used by RIMU to infill and redevelopment assessments

Infill assessment

cid:image005.jpg@01D590AC.95607940 Redevelopment assessment

cid:image006.jpg@01D590AC.95607940

Appendix 5 - Capacity Maps for Waiuku: Redevelopment and Infill

Appendix 6 National Policy Statement – Urban Development Capacity: Key objectives and Policies

· OC1. Planning decisions, practices and methods that enable urban development which provides for the social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing of people and communities and future generations in the short, medium and long term of people and communities and future generations, in a timely way.

· OC2. Local authorities adapt and respond to evidence about urban development, market activity and the social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing of people and communities and future generations in the short, medium and long term.

· OD1. Urban environments where land use, development, development infrastructure and other

· infrastructure are integrated with each other.

· PA1. Local Authorities shall ensure that at any one time there is sufficient development capacity available as follows:

· Short term capacity must be feasible, zoned and serviced with development infrastructure

· Medium term capacity must be feasible, zoned and either serviced with development infrastructure or development infrastructure identified in the long-term plan under the LGA

· Long term capacity must be feasible, identified in relevant plans and strategies, and the development infrastructure to support it must be identified in an infrastructure strategy under the LGA.

· PA2. Local authorities shall satisfy themselves that other infrastructure required to support urban

· development is likely to be available.

PA3. When making decisions that affect the way and rate at which development capacity is provided, decision-makers shall provide for the social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing of people and communities and future generations, having regard to:

· Providing choices that will meet the needs of people and communities and future generations for a range of dwelling types and locations, working environments and places to locate businesses

· Promoting efficient use of scarce urban land and infrastructure

· Limiting as much as possible adverse impacts on the competitive operation

PA4. When considering the effects of urban development, decision makers shall take into account:

· The benefits that urban development will provide with respect to the ability of people, communities and future generations to provide for their social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing

· The benefits and costs of urban development at a national, inter regional, regional and district scale, as well as local effects.

PC3. When the housing and business development capacity assessment or monitoring indicates development capacity is not sufficient in any of the short, medium terms or long term, local authorities shall respond by providing further development capacity and enabling development.

PC4. Local authorities shall consider all practicable options for providing sufficient, feasible development capacity and enabling development to meet demand including:

· Changes to plans and regional policy statements including zoning, objectives, policies, rules and

· overlays that apply in both existing urban environments and greenfield areas

· Integrated and coordinated consenting processes that facilitate development

· Statutory tools and other methods available under other legislation.

Appendix 7 Travel to Work analysis 2013

Employed - living in Waiuku 3-CAU:

68% commute to Zone 1,

6% commuted to Zone 2,

11% commuted to Zone 3, and 1

5% commuted to Zone 4.

The balance worked from home.

· A picture containing text, map

Description automatically generated

Area Unit Description	2013 Census, main means of travel to work, for the employed census usually resident population count aged 15 years and over
Area Unit Description	Worked at Home	Did Not Go to Work Today	Commuted	Total people stated
3-CAU Waiuku	5%	13%	82%	100%

Appendix 8 Extracts from AUP Regional Policy Statement Objectives and Policies

Chapter B2. Tāhuhu whakaruruhau ā-taone addresses urban growth and form.

B2.1. Issues

Auckland’s growing population increases demand for housing, employment, business, infrastructure, social facilities and services. Growth needs to be provided for in a way that does all of the following:

(1) enhances the quality of life for individuals and communities;

(2) supports integrated planning of land use, infrastructure and development;

(3) optimises the efficient use of the existing urban area;

(4) encourages the efficient use of existing social facilities and provides for new social facilities;

(5) enables provision and use of infrastructure in a way that is efficient, effective and timely;

(6) maintains and enhances the quality of the environment, both natural and built;

(7) maintains opportunities for rural production; and

(8) enables Mana Whenua to participate and their culture and values to be recognised and provided for.

B2.2. Urban growth and form

B2.2.1. Objectives

(1) A quality compact urban form that enables all of the following:

(a) a higher-quality urban environment;

(b) greater productivity and economic growth;

(c) better use of existing infrastructure and efficient provision of new

infrastructure;

(d) improved and more effective public transport;

(e) greater social and cultural vitality;

(f) better maintenance of rural character and rural productivity; and

(g) reduced adverse environmental effects.

(2) Urban growth is primarily accommodated within the urban area 2016 (as identified in Appendix 1A).

(3) Sufficient development capacity and land supply is provided to accommodate residential, commercial, industrial growth and social facilities to support growth.

(4) Urbanisation is contained within the Rural Urban Boundary, towns, and rural and coastal towns and villages.

(5) The development of land within the Rural Urban Boundary, towns, and rural and coastal towns and villages is integrated with the provision of appropriate infrastructure.

B2.2.2. Policies

Development capacity and supply of land for urban development

……

Quality compact urban form

(4) Promote urban growth and intensification within the urban area 2016 (as identified in Appendix 1A), enable urban growth and intensification within the Rural Urban Boundary, towns, and rural and coastal towns and villages, and avoid urbanisation outside these areas.

B2.5. Commercial and industrial growth

B2.5.1. Objectives

(1) Employment and commercial and industrial opportunities meet current and

future demands.

…..

(3) Industrial growth and activities are enabled in a manner that does all of the

following:

(a) promotes economic development;

(b) promotes the efficient use of buildings, land and infrastructure in industrial

zones;

(c) manages conflicts between incompatible activities;

(d) recognises the particular locational requirements of some industries; and

(e) enables the development and use of Mana Whenua’s resources for their

economic well-being.

B2.5.2. Policies

(7) Enable the supply of land for industrial activities, in particular for

land-extensive industrial activities and for heavy industry in areas where the

character, scale and intensity of the effects from those activities can be

appropriately managed.

(8) Enable the supply of industrial land which is relatively flat, has efficient access

to freight routes, rail or freight hubs, ports and airports, and can be efficiently

served by infrastructure.

(9) Enable the efficient use of industrial land for industrial activities and avoid

incompatible activities by all of the following:

(a) limiting the scale and type of non-industrial activities on land zoned for

light industry;
(b) preventing non-industrial activities (other than accessory activities) from establishing on land zoned for heavy industry; and
(c) promoting co-location of industrial activities to manage adverse effects
and to benefit from agglomeration.
(10) Manage reverse sensitivity effects on the efficient operation, use and development of existing industrial activities, including by preventing inappropriate sensitive activities locating or intensifying in or adjacent to heavy industrial zones.

B2.6. Rural and coastal towns and villages

B 2.6.1. Objectives

(1) Growth and development of existing or new rural and coastal towns and villages is enabled in ways that:

(a) avoid natural and physical resources that have been scheduled in the Unitary Plan in relation to natural heritage, Mana Whenua, natural resources, coastal environment, historic heritage or special character unless growth and development protects or enhances such values; and

(b) avoid elite soils and avoid where practicable prime soils which are significant for their ability to sustain food production; and

(c) avoid areas with significant natural hazard risks;

(d) are consistent with the local character of the town or village and the

surrounding area; and

(e) enables the development and use of ManaWhenua’s resources for their

economic well-being.

(2) Rural and coastal towns and villages have adequate infrastructure.

B2.6.2. Policies

(1) Require the establishment of new or expansion of existing rural and coastal towns and villages to be undertaken in a manner that does all of the following:

(a) maintains or enhances the character of any existing town or village;

(b) incorporates adequate provision for infrastructure;

(c) avoids locations with significant natural hazard risks where those risks

cannot be adequately remedied or mitigated;

(d) avoids elite soils and avoids where practicable prime soils which are significant for their ability to sustain food production;

(e) maintains adequate separation between incompatible land uses;

(f) is compatible with natural and physical characteristics, including those of the coastal environment; and

(g) provides access to the town or village through a range of transport options including walking and cycling.

(2) Avoid locating new or expanding existing rural and coastal towns and villages in or adjacent to areas that contain significant natural and physical resources that have been scheduled in the Unitary Plan in relation to natural heritage, Mana Whenua, natural resources, coastal environment, historic heritage or special character, unless the growth and development protects or enhances

such resources including by any of the following measures:

(a) the creation of reserves;

(b) increased public access;

(c) restoration of degraded environments;

(d) creation of significant new areas of biodiversity; or

(e) enablement of papakāinga, customary use, cultural activities and

appropriate commercial activities.

(3) Enable the establishment of new or significant expansions of existing rural and coastal towns and villages through the structure planning and plan change processes in accordance with Appendix 1 Structure plan guidelines.

(4) Enable small-scale growth of and development in rural and coastal towns and villages without the need for structure planning, in a manner consistent with policies B2.6.2(1) and (2).

(5) Enable papakāinga, marae, customary use, cultural activities and appropriate

commercial activities on Māori land and on other land where Mana Whenua have collective ownership.

Chapter B9. - Rural environment

B9.1 Issues

The Auckland region…..,,,, The outward expansion of urban areas and people’s lifestyle choices and recreational activities place significant pressures on maintaining the amenity values and the quality of the environment in rural areas. Specific issues in the Auckland region are:

• protecting the finite resource of elite quality soils from urban expansion;

• managing subdivision to prevent undue fragmentation of large sites in ways

that restrict rural production activities;

• addressing reverse sensitivity effects which rural-residential development can

have on rural production activities; and

• managing the opportunities for countryside living in rural areas in ways that

provide for rural-residential development in close proximity to urban areas

and the larger rural and coastal towns and villages while minimising the loss

of rural production land.

B9.2. Rural activities

B9.2.1. Objectives

(1) Rural areas make a significant contribution to the wider economic productivity

of, and food supply for, Auckland and New Zealand.

(2) Areas of land containing elite soil are protected for the purpose of food supply

from inappropriate subdivision, urban use and development.

…..(

(4) Auckland’s rural areas outside the Rural Urban Boundary and rural and

coastal towns and villages are protected from inappropriate subdivision,

urban use and development.

(5) Auckland’s rural areas inside the Rural Urban Boundary are not compromised

for future urbanisation by inappropriate subdivision, use and development

B9.2.2. Policies

(1) Enable a diverse range of activities while avoiding significant adverse effects

on and urbanisation of rural areas, including within the coastal environment,

and avoiding, remedying, or mitigating other adverse effects on rural

character, amenity, landscape and biodiversity values.

…..(

B9.3. Land with high productive potential

B9.3.2. Policies

(1) Avoid new countryside living subdivision, use and development on land

containing elite soil and discourage them on land containing prime soil.

(2) Encourage activities that do not depend on using land containing elite and

prime soil to locate outside these areas.

…..(

B9.4. Rural subdivision

B9.4.1. Objectives

(1) Further fragmentation of rural land by sporadic and scattered subdivision for

urban and rural lifestyle living purposes is prevented.

(2) Subdivision does not undermine the productive potential of land containing

elite soils.

(3) Subdivision of rural land avoids, remedies or mitigates adverse effects on the

character, amenity, natural character, landscape and biodiversity values of

rural areas (including within the coastal environment), and provides resilience

to effects of natural hazards.

….

B9.4.2. Policies

….

(4) Provide for new rural lifestyle subdivision in locations and at scales and

densities so as to:

(a) avoid areas that would undermine the integrity of the Rural Urban

Boundary or compromise the expansion of the satellite towns of

Warkworth and Pukekohe, and rural and coastal towns and villages;

(b) protect areas where natural and physical resources have been scheduled

in the Unitary Plan in relation to natural heritage, Mana Whenua, natural

resources, coastal, historic heritage and special character;

(c) avoid land containing elite soil;

(d) avoid where practicable land containing prime soil;

… (f) maintain or enhance landscape, rural and, where relevant, coastal,

character and amenity values;

….

Franklin Local Board

05 May 2020

Urgent Decision - Franklin Local Board agenda items from the cancelled 24 March 2020 business meeting

File No.: CP2020/04748

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To report on the urgent decision made by Franklin Local Board on the substantive agenda items from the cancelled 24 March 2020 business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. At its meeting on 26 November 2019 the Franklin Local Board resolved (FR/2019/168) the following in relation to urgent decision-making:

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) adopt the urgent decision-making process for matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and meeting with requirements of a quorum.

b) delegate authority to the chair and deputy chair, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board.

c) agree that the relationship manager (or any person/s acting in this role) will authorise the urgent decision-making process by signing off an authorisation memo.

d) note that all urgent decisions will be reported to the next ordinary business meeting of the local board.

3. The Relationship Manager for the Franklin Local Board authorised the urgent decision-making process as a result of the COVID-19 lockdown that did not allow for resolution by the full local board.

4. The Franklin Local Board held an informal Skype meeting on 24 March 2020 to discuss the substantive items from the agenda prepared for the 24 March 2020 business meeting, which was cancelled due to COVID-19 restrictions.

5. Feedback on the proposed agenda items was received from Franklin Local Board members, and local board resolutions were approved under delegated authority of the Chair and Deputy Chair as an urgent decision.

6. Member Alan Cole was an additional signatory for Item 11 – Karaka Sports Park detailed business case, due to a declared conflict of interest from the Chair (Attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board note the urgent decision as follows:

i) Karaka Sports Park One Local Initiative, Detailed Business Case

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) endorse the Karaka Sports Park detailed business case

b) approve the sports field layout and multisport facility concept plans and location as the preferred development options for the Karaka Sports Park development as outlined in the report

c) support a report being progressed to the Finance and Performance Committee in May 2020 requesting $28.3 million from the One Local Initiative 10 Year Programme to enable the development of Karaka Sports Park as outlined in the detailed business case

d) Note the successful approach to stakeholder engagement as part of detailed business case development and congratulate staff for their good work.

ii) Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan - allocation of funding for projects in 2019/2020.

That Franklin Local Board approve the following grants from line item 1256 of the 2019/2020 local board work programme:

a) $50,000 to Counties Manukau Hockey Association towards renewal of a hockey turf at Rosa Birch Park, Pukekohe

b) $50,000 to Franklin Gymsports Incorporated towards updating its feasibility study and preparing a business case for a gymsports facility.

iii) Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund - applications from sports groups in the Franklin Local Board area.

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) does not endorse a Sport and Recreation Facility Investment Fund application from Franklin Gymsports for $56,000 to the 2019/2020 grant fund to update its feasibility study and prepare a business case for a new purpose built gymsports facility. The local board has already funded this initiative at its March 2020 business meeting in item 12.

b) endorse an application from the Pōhutukawa Coast Mountain Bike Club for $150,000, to the 2019/2020 Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund, to winterproof mountain bike tracks in the Maraetai/Waiho block of Whitford Forest and construct new tracks in Whitford Forest.

c) endorse an application from Franklin Mountain Bike Club for $50,000 to the 2019/2020 Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund, to winterproof mountain bike tracks and extend a track at Puni Recreation Reserve

d) endorse an application from Bombay Rugby Club for $52,500 to the 2019/2020 Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund, to complete a needs assessment, feasibility and business case to upgrade sports fields and field B lights at Bombay Rugby Club.

iv) Auckland Transport monthly update to the Franklin Local Board - March 2020

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) receive the March 2020 Auckland Transport monthly update.

b) appoint the following members to be the nominated local board members as transport representatives within their subdivision for the 2019-2022 electoral term:

• Lance Gedge for the Wairoa sub-division

• Matthew Murphy for the Waiuku sub-division

• Andrew Baker for the Pukekohe sub-division

c) appointed Transport Representatives are authorised by the board to:

i. prepare and provide local board area views on transport issues, works or projects within their area that are time-sensitive and that are unable to be presented to the whole board via weekly workshops

ii. receive staff notifications of areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk.

d) note that appointed transport representatives are expected to consult with other board members where practical, ensure board members are updated on views provided at the next available opportunity.

e) request that the Local Board Chair is copied in on all requests.

v) Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework - Proposed changes

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) support the changes to the draft Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Framework including:

• introducing three pillars representing the core drivers for climate action (i.e. a place-based approach; emissions reduction; preparing for climate change)

• moving from eleven key moves to eight priorities

• changing the title from Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Framework to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

a) note that isolation from services and employment centres can prevent immediate adoption of alternative, more environmentally friendly choices. For example, road design should continue to consider car ownership in greenfield development and rural areas to recognise that public transport is not available and that key employers, such as NZ Steel in Waiuku, have a disproportionate importance to small settlements.

vi) Local Board feedback to the Independent Council-Controlled Organisations Review

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) note that the timing of the public engagement of the Council Controlled Organisations (CCO) Review precludes the Franklin Local board receiving and reflecting on current local views in providing local feedback; however, the board is comfortable providing feedback based on its own experiences

b) agree that the Council Controlled Organisations are an effective and efficient model for delivering services to Council and Aucklanders

c) agree that the CCO decision-making model enables sufficient political oversight, public transparency and accountability; however note that culture and CCO priorities influence the degree to which a CCO delivers sufficiently to local outcomes

d) agree that it is appropriate that CCOs operate and present themselves as distinct from Auckland Council externally, if they are sufficiently and demonstrably connected with Auckland Council and each other internally and strategically.

e) identify the following opportunities to foster greater internal connection between Auckland Council, including local boards and the community:

i. CCO staff and board members should receive governance inductions to create a shared understanding of the Auckland governance model and to generate a greater respect for respective roles and responsibilities.

ii. CCOs should actively engage in the development of local strategic plans and reference local strategic priorities in the development of the statement of intent to facilitate regular, relevant and joined-up reporting and engagement.

f) propose that Auckland Council should facilitate local board input into the development and approval of CCO Statement of Intent (SOIs), including providing analysis of SOIs in terms of local outcomes and facilitating formal feedback, and in doing so provide a platform for ongoing engagement and delivery partnerships. The board suggests that a stronger role in prescribing the priorities and key performance indicators of CCOs could be modelled on Central Government and State-Owned Enterprise accountability processes. This will strengthen Auckland Council and CCO collaboration and address the perception that CCOs do not adequately respond to Council and community priorities.

g) note that, with the exception of Panuku Development Auckland, CCOs do not take a place-based approach to delivery, which creates a disconnect with local and community aspirations. The independent panel has an opportunity to consider and clarify the mandate of CCOs in the place-shaping space and emphasise that every CCO should factor this into their projects, in collaboration with the relevant local board.

h) provide the following feedback on the approach to roles and responsibilities, accountability and engagement with council and community by CCOs:

I. Auckland Transport

• does not sufficiently and consistently enable local boards to represent the views of their community through their consultation and engagement initiatives

• does not recognize local priorities and outcomes in the planning and delivery of projects and initiatives. Consideration could be given to Auckland Council taking on some AT responsibilities less suited to a roading authority eg design and specifications of roads in green field areas, and footpaths and trails in rural areas

• does not proactively participate in integrated delivery initiatives at the local level

• culture does not demonstrate a respect for the role of local boards i.e. as having governance responsibility at the local level. AT Board Relationship Managers are not well supported by organisational culture and are therefore largely ineffective in identifying and promoting partnership approaches to delivery

II. Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development

• beyond event delivery, displays limited support for opportunities to develop or deliver business and business sector (including tourism) development initiatives outside the city centre

• are making local engagement improvements following the initiation of the local board engagement plan and appointment of a local board liaison resource

• note that this resource will need to be supported by organizational culture, be adequately positioned within the organization to be successful

• has enabled Local Board and ATEED board engagement which is applauded and supported.

III. Panuku Development Auckland

• are successful in engaging with local communities in the development of projects and activities

• are accessible and approachable at both a staff and board level and try to understand the strategic and operation constraints of the local environment

• could do some work to improve relationships with council departments and other CCOs who from time to time demonstrate they are not engaged in Panuku activities.

• has enabled local board and ATEED board engagement which is applauded and supported.

IV. Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA)

• noting that while the Franklin Local Board area does not have any regional facilities, Regional Facilities regularly and adequately engages with the local board through their Elected Member Relationship Manager.

• could work more proactively to create opportunities to service local communities, including understanding what the local priorities are and how RFA resources could support delivery.

• has enabled local board and RFA board engagement, however note that while this annual social event is enjoyable, it does not effectively establish and maintain governor-to-governor relationships.

V. Watercare

• are successful in engaging with local communities in the development of projects and activities

• are accessible and approachable at both a staff and board level and try to understand the local environment, noting that part of their operation is based in the Franklin Local Board area

• have successfully demonstrated an ability to work across Auckland and CCOs in their support for the Hūnua Trail (with Community Services and ATEED), and through the development of the Clevedon Water Reticulation Targeted Rate initiative (with Healthy Waters).

vii) Public feedback on proposed new Food Safety Information Bylaw 2020

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) note the public feedback to the proposed new Food Safety Information Bylaw 2020 by people from the Franklin Local Board area contained in this agenda report.

viii) McNicol Homestead Reserve - Classification as Historic Reserve

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) approve the classification of the following parcels of land as historic reserve under section 16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 being part of McNicol Homestead, 2R, 12 R and 80R McNicol Road, Clevedon:

i. Lot 8, Deposited Plan 356440 contained in Record of Title 230156 and comprising 1,0966 hectares is held as an unclassified local purpose (recreation) reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 (2R McNicol Road);

ii. Lot 1, Deposited Plan 89145 contained in Record of Title A46B/268 comprising 4315m² more or less and held as an unclassified historic reserve under Reserves Act 1977 (12R McNicol Road);

iii. Lot 1, Deposited Plan 429258 contained in Record of Title 580536 comprising 2706 m² more or less and is held as unclassified recreation reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 (80R McNicol Road).

iix) Prospect Terrace foot path extension concept design

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) approve the pathway extension concept design connecting Prospect Terrace and Franklin Road as provided in Attachment A of the report.

ix) Correction to a road type (Suffix) at the new subdivision within Stage 6 of the Auranga development in Drury.

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) rescind resolution FR/2019/16 to name ROAD 6 ‘Ata Drive’ (due to incorrect road type used), within the subdivision at the Auranga Development (Stage 6) in Drury (Council reference BUN60310376 & SUB60310378), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

b) approve the replacement road type for ROAD 6 as ‘Ata Road’ within the subdivision at the Auranga Development (Stage 6) in Drury (Council reference BUN60310376 & SUB60310378), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

x) Franklin Local Board Grants Programme 2020/2021

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) adopt the Franklin Grants Programme 2020/2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Local Board Urgent Decision 27 March 2020 on substantive agenda items from the cancelled business meeting on 24 March 2020	169
b ⇩	Franklin Local Board Authorisation Memo for 24 March 2020 agenda items	179
c ⇩	COVID-19 Lockdown information March 2020	181
d ⇩	Franklin Local Board agenda for 24 March 2020 business meeting	183

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Denise Gunn - Democracy Advisor - Franklin
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager for Franklin and Howick Local Boards

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Local Board Urgent Decision - Feedback on Auckland Roads and Streets Refresh	187

[1] Source: Research, Investigation and Monitoring Unit (RIMU), Auckland Council, Dec 2019. RIMU advise that the population figure is a product of the 2018 census results plus ‘administrative data’, given the known issues with the 2018 census.

[2] RIMU, Auckland Council, Dec 2019 - with the information having been sourced from Auckland Council’s rating database.

[3] Source of projections: RIMU Unit, Auckland Council December 2019

[4] Or equivalent – as the regional model numbering may change from an I series number to become a J series number.

[7] Source: GIS unit, Plans and Places, Auckland Council

[9] I.e., a section 224(c) completion certificate has been issued.

[10] I.e., a section 223 survey plan has been approved and found to be in accordance with the underlying consent conditions.

[14] Source: GIS team, Plans and Places, Auckland Council

[15] Auckland Council Quarterly Monitoring Report for the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity

[18] July 2016 Recommendations Report on Topic 081

[19] At the time of being made operative in part there were several outstanding appeals.

[20] Bundled consents are those resource consent applications which are comprised of multiple components requiring assessment and monitoring. E.g., a subdivision consent bundled with a land use consent.

Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Deputy Chairperson	Angela Fulljames
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Sharlene Druyven
	Lance Gedge
	Amanda Kinzett
	Matthew Murphy
	Logan Soole