|
Howick Local
Board
16 November
2020
|
|
Local
board views on private plan change 47 to amend two development standards in the
Flat Bush Precinct and provide for minor realignment of boundaries of sub
precincts H, J and K and underlying zone boundaries
File No.: CP2020/16004
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
invite local board views on a private plan change by BR Land Company Ltd to amend two development standards in the
Flat Bush Precinct and provide for minor realignment of boundaries of sub
precincts H, J and K and underlying zone boundaries. The area includes land
known as 315 Flat Bush School Road and includes 87 and 99 McQuoids Road and 361
Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Decision-makers
on a private plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local
boards’ views on the plan change, if the relevant local boards choose to
provide their views.
3. Each
local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences
of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents, including private
plan changes. A local board can present local views and
preferences when expressed by the whole local board.[1]
4. BR
Land Company Ltd lodged a private plan change to amend two
development standards in the Flat Bush Precinct –
sub precinct H, more particularly to reduce the side yards from 3m to 1.2m,
increase the building coverage from 35 per cent to 40 per cent for sites over
400 sqm and provide for minor realignment of boundaries of sub precincts H, J
and K and underlying zone boundaries. The area includes land known as 315 Flat
Bush School Road and includes 87 and 99 McQuoids Road and 361 Flat Bush School
Road, Flat Bush.
5. One submission in support of the plan change was received.
6. This
report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on
private plan change 47. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should
convey.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Howick Local Board:
a) provide their views on private plan change 47 by BR Land Company Ltd to amend two development standards in the
Flat Bush Precinct – sub precinct H, more particularly to reduce the
side yards from 3m to 1.2m, increase the building coverage from 35 per cent
to 40 per cent for sites over 400 sqm and provide for minor realignment of
boundaries of sub precincts H, J and K and underlying zone boundaries.
b) appoint
a local board member to speak to the local board views at a
hearing on private plan change 47.
c) delegate
authority to the chairperson of Howick Local Board to make a replacement
appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is
unable to attend the private plan change hearing.
|
Horopaki
Context
7. Each local board is responsible
for communicating the
interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of
Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards
provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers
must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these
policy documents.[2]
8. A private plan change request
will be included in the Auckland Unitary Plan if it is
approved. Local boards must have the
opportunity to provide their views on private plan change requests – when
an entity other than the council proposes a change to the Auckland
Unitary Plan.
9. If the local board chooses to
provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report.
Local board views are included in the analysis of the private plan change,
along with submissions.
10. If appointed by resolution,
local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to
commissioners, who decide on the private plan change request.
11. This report provides an
overview of the private plan change, and a summary of submissions’ key
themes.
12. The report does not recommend
what the local board should convey. The planner cannot advise the local board
as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views. The planner must
include any local board views in the evaluation of the private plan change.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
13. The private
plan change proposes to amend two development standards in the Flat Bush Precinct – sub precinct H, more
particularly to reduce the side yards from 3m to 1.2m and increase the building
coverage from 35 per cent to 40 per cent for sites over 400 sqm. The plan
change also includes minor realignment of boundaries of sub precincts H, J and
K.
14. The proposed plan change is intended to apply to the full extent of
sub precinct H as shown in Figure One and not just the
land within BR Land Company Ltd’s ownership. Sub-precinct H is
zoned Mixed Housing Suburban and the private plan change substantially relates
to this zoning, with the minor boundary changes affecting Sub precinct J
(Conservation and Stormwater Management) and Sub precinct K, being single house
zone to avoid split zoning of residential lots.
Figure One: Flat Bush
precinct - sub-precinct H outlined in blue
15. Figure Two
shows the operative zoning, Flat Bush precinct and sub-precincts. Figure Three
shows the land subject to zoning changes and Figure Four shows the land subject
to change in sub-precincts H, J and K.
Figure Two: Operative zoning,
Precinct and sub-precincts in Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) 2016 and surrounding area
Figure Three: Zoning – land
subject to change
Figure Four: Changes to
sub-precincts J, K and H
16. BR
Land Company Ltd included technical reports that evaluated urban design,
neighbourhood design, and massing study effects. The reports and other
application details are available from the council’s website at Unitary Plan modifications. Auckland
Council’s planner, and other experts, have evaluated these and will
report on:
· technical reports supplied by the applicant
· submissions
· views
and preferences of the local board, if the local board passes a resolution.
Themes from submissions received
17. One
submission was received in support of plan change 47.
18. Key
submission themes are:
· proposed amendments will
align development outcomes more closely with the expectations for medium
density housing that arise under the Mixed Housing Suburban zone
· proposed amendments will
avoid the inefficiencies and unnecessary compliance cost that would continue to
be generated if the sub-precinct H development standards remain unaltered
· proposed amendments will
facilitate the more efficient use of serviced residential land.
19. The submission is available
from the council’s website via this link: Unitary
Plan modifications.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
20. There were no submissions that raised specific climate concerns.
21. The
council’s climate goals as set out in Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri:
Auckland’s Climate Plan are:
· to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and
· to
prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change.
22. The
local board could consider if the private plan change:
· will
reduce, increase or have no effect on Auckland’s overall greenhouse gas
emissions (e.g. does it encourage car dependency, enhance connections to public
transit, walking and cycling or support quality compact urban form)
· prepare
the region for the adverse impacts of climate change. That is, does the
proposed private plan change elevate or alleviate climate risks (e.g. flooding,
coastal and storm inundation, urban heat effect, stress on infrastructure).
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
23. Auckland
Council’s urban design and visual landscape consultant has reviewed the
relevant technical reports and will continue to provide expert input into the
hearing report. Comments were sought from Resource Consents, Geotechnical
(engineering) and Healthy Waters on the proposed plan change. Neither
Geotechnical (engineering) and Healthy Waters had any comments or requests on
the proposed plan change. Given the current land use consent applications,
views from Resource Consents have been taken into consideration,
24. No
council-controlled organisation made a submission.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
25. The private
plan change request is to amend two development standards in the Flat Bush Precinct
– sub precinct H and includes minor realignment of boundaries of sub
precincts H, J and K and underlying zone boundaries. The area includes land
known as 315 Flat Bush School Road and includes 87 and 99 McQuoids Road and 361
Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush that are within the Howick Local Board
area.
26. Factors the
local board may wish to consider in formulating its view:
· interests
and preferences of people in local board area
· well-being
of communities within the local board area
· local
board documents, such as local board plan, local board agreement
· responsibilities
and operation of the local board.
27. BR Land Company Limited stated that they did not engage with
the local board prior to lodgement.
28. This report
is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker
will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the private plan
change.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
29. If the local
board chooses to provide its views on the plan change it includes the
opportunity to comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori, well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview).
Approximately 8000 residents in the local board area identify as Māori, in
2018 census results.
30. BR Land Company Limited advised
council that it contacted all thirteen iwi groups when it prepared the private
plan change.
31. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource
Management Act (RMA) which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions
shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o
Waitangi.[3]
The private plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified
in the Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori
Plan 2017.[4]
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
32. The private
plan change request does not pose any financial implications. If the plan
change is approved it will enable additional development for which development
contributions will be required to offset additional demand for services in the
local board area.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
33. There is a
risk that the local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences
on the plan change, if it doesn’t pass a resolution. This report
provides:
· the
mechanism for the Howick Local Board to express its views and preferences
· the
opportunity for a local board member to speak at a hearing.
34. If the local
board chooses not to pass a resolution at this business meeting, these
opportunities are forgone.
35. The power to
provide local board views regarding
the content of a private plan change cannot be delegated to individual local
board member(s).[5] This report enables the
whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to
determine what matters those views should include.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
36. The planner
will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing
report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s
views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that
purpose.
37. The planner
will advise the local board of the decision on the private plan change request
by memorandum.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Vanessa Leddra - Planner
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager
|
|
Howick Local
Board
16 November
2020
|
|
Approval for three new public road
names, and an existing rod name extension at 171 Murphys Road, Flat Bush
File No.: CP2020/16930
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
seek approval from the Howick Local Board to:
a) name three new public
roads, created by way of a subdivision
development at 171 Murphys Road, Flat Bush
b) continue the use of the
existing road name
‘Te Kura Road’, connecting the newly extended portion of that road
to Murphys Road, Flat Bush, created by way of
a subdivision development at 171 Murphys Road, Flat Bush.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. The
Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria
of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state that where a new
road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the
subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their
preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.
3. On
behalf of the developer and applicant, Jun Yue Investment
Limited, agent Mel Rodger of
Brian Cowley Surveying Limited
has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local
board for Road 1. There are three options provided.
4. The
proposed names for Roads 2 and 3 have been suggested by mana whenua Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki. There are two names and
one alternative option.
5. The
proposed names for the three new public roads at 171
Murphys Road, Flat Bush, are:
· Road
1: Bush View Place, Reserve View Place, or School House Mews
· Roads
2 and 3: Aronui Way, Tānekaha Road, or Uki Road.
6. The
proposed road name options have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road
Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All
technical standards are met, and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in
the region. Mana whenua have been consulted and have proposed the names for
Roads 2 and 3.
7. Formal
approval is also required to extend the existing road name ‘Te Kura Road’, on the
newly extended portion of that road (Road 4), connecting onto Murphys Road, Flat
Bush.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Howick Local Board:
a) approve the following road names for the three new public roads
created by way of subdivision at 171 Murphys Road, Flat Bush, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act
1974 (resource consent references BUN60341767 and SUB60341769).
· Road
1: Bush View Place (Applicant Preferred)
· Road
2: Tānekaha Road (Suggested by Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki)
· Road
3: Aronui Way (Suggested by Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki).
b) approve
the extension of the existing
road name ‘Te Kura Road’, for the newly extended portion of that
road (Road 4) connecting onto Murphys Road, Flat Bush, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act
1974 (extended under resource consent references BUN60341767
and SUB60341769).
|
Horopaki
Context
8. Resource consent reference BUN60341767 (subdivision reference number SUB60341769) was issued in January 2020 for the creation of 31 new residential lots,
two future residential development lots (Lots 300 and 301), a road to vest (Lot
100) that will form three new public roads (Roads 1, 2 & 3) and an
extension of existing ‘Te Kura Road’ (Road 4).
9. Site
and location plans of the development can be found in Attachment A.
10. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road
naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the three new public roads require
names because they each serve more than five lots.
11. Formal
approval is also required to extend the existing road name ‘Te Kura Road’ into the
newly extended portion of that road (Road 4), connecting to Murphys Road, Flat
Bush.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
12. The Auckland
Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the
council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been
applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the
Auckland Region.
13. Auckland Council’s road naming
criteria typically require that road names try to reflect one of the following
local themes, with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:
· a local historical,
cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area; or
· a particular local
landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or
· an existing or introduced thematic identity in the area.
14. The Applicant has proposed
names for Road 1 that reflect features of the site and surroundings. Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki’s proposed names for Roads 2 and 3 are also
locally themed.
15. It is
noted that Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki also suggested three additional name options for
Roads 2 and 3, making a total of three name options per road. However, LINZ
could not accept three of these names due to the same or similar names already
being in use in the area. As a result, only viable names have been presented in
the tables below for consideration by the local board. It was considered too
onerous on Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki to request further name
options as there are adequate available choices presented in the table below.
16. Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki provided the below additional commentary for their
proposed names:
“Thank you for the opportunity to
offer names for the sub-division as above. Ngāi Tai were born of these
lands, once heavily forested, a home and flight path to many of our native manu
species. These lands form a part of the large extent of lands lost to Ngāi
Tai via raupatu whenua, confiscated lands. These acts committed against
Ngāi Tai has seen the decline of our people being able to live in and
around the area, the wealth Ngāi Tai once enjoyed as the original
inhabitants of Tāmaki Makaurau severely impacted and now enjoyed by
developers and new comers to our whenua. Though road naming will not compensate
Ngāi Tai fully for that which we have lost, to see our identity in our
landscapes through our names eases some of the disconnect to who we are and to
whom we belong”.
17. The proposed name options and
meanings are set out in the table below:
Table One: Proposed road name options and meanings for Road
1
|
Road 1
Proposed names
|
Meaning - as described by
Applicant
|
|
Bush View
Place
|
the area was
originally largely native bush
|
|
Reserve View
Place
|
the site is
located near a local reserve
|
|
School House
Mews
|
the School
House is across the road.
|
Table Two: Proposed road name options and
meanings for Roads 2 & 3
|
Roads 2 and 3
Proposed names
|
Meaning - as
described by Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki
|
|
Aronui Way
(Road 2 or 3)
|
To be
agreeable, to have a desire
– to uplift Ngāi Tai mana within the area
|
|
Tānekaha Road*
(Road 2 only*)
|
A native tree
of the forest for which the bark was used to dye muka, one of the best flax
fibres for weaving
|
|
Uki Close / Court / Place or Way
(preferably
for use on Road 3 only*, but any of the above suffixes may be used)
|
Of ancient
times – reflecting
the ancestral homelands of Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki. This name
connects to one of the other names Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki
suggested; ‘Ipukarea Road’, meaning ‘Ancestral home,
homeland, native land, inherited land - significant water or geographical
feature of a tribe's homeland relating to the tribe's identity and the source
of their livelihood’. However, Ipukarea Street was already
in use nearby therefore Uki Road is a name
that follows a similar theme.
|
|
*Note:
Shorter names are recommended for shorter roads, therefore the longest name
‘Tānekaha’ is not recommended for use with Road 3, this
being a short cul-de-sac. Similarly, the shortest name ‘Uki’ is
not recommended for Roads 1 or 2.
|
18. All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by
the Auckland Council Subdivision team to ensure that they meet the Auckland
Council Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road
naming. All technical standards are met, and the names are not duplicated
anywhere else in the region, therefore it is up to the local board to decide
upon the suitability of the names within the local context.
19. Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the
proposed names listed in the table above are acceptable for use and not
duplicated elsewhere in the region.
20. It is again noted that Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki also suggested three other name options: Maumahara
Lane, Te Rau Nīkau Lane and Ipukarea Road. However, LINZ could
not accept these names due to the same or similar names already being in use in
the area.
21. As noted in Table Two, the guidelines and addressing standards state
that shorter names are recommended for shorter roads, therefore the longest
name ‘Tānekaha’ is not recommended for use with Road 3, this
being a short cul-de-sac. Similarly, the shortest name ‘Uki’ is not
recommended for Roads 1 or 2.
22. As per the road types set out in
Appendix 1 of the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines,
road types should suit the form and layout of the respective road:
· Road 1
– proposed ‘Place’ and ‘Mews’ are acceptable road
types. The Applicant originally suggested ‘Bush View Close’
but ‘Close’ is not appropriate for the layout of this road;
‘Close’ is meant for short enclosed roads only
· Road 2 –
the road type ‘Road’
is recommended for Road 2, or any other appropriate type from Appendix 1
of the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines such as ‘Street’
· Road 3 is a short
cul-de-sac, therefore the road types Close, Court, Place or Way would be
acceptable for this road.
23. Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and
requirements described in the Auckland Council Road
Naming Guidelines. Road naming is an opportunity to recognise Māori cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land. The guidelines
provide a process to enable mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on
all road naming applications. Commentary on the feedback received in this
situation is provided in the Tauākī
whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
24. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant
environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource
Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the
development.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
25. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on
other parts of the council group. The views of Council-controlled Organisations
were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
26. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant
policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those
outlined in this report.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
27. To aid local board decision making, the Auckland Council Road Naming
Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages
to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the
resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where
appropriate, as well as a process to enable mana whenua the opportunity to
provide feedback on all road naming applications.
28. On 5 February 2020 the Applicant sent an email to all iwi contacts
listed for the general area, as per the Auckland Council website
‘Find mana whenua contacts for your area’ page: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/building-and-consents/resource-consents/prepare-resource-consent-application/Pages/find-hapu-iwi-contacts-for-your-area.aspx.
29. On 19 February 2020, the
Aukaha Pākaekae of Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki
responded stating: “I am in receipt of your email in
respect of the above and would be pleased to offer some names. I further
advise that Ngāi Tai are the ancient iwi mana whenua of this area and do
not recognise any of the [other] iwi that have received this naming
request”. No other groups that were contacted responded or challenged
this statement.
30. Due to
the above advice received from Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki, that they were the
main mana whenua contact for this site address, the Applicant then engaged with
Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki alone for this road naming application.
31. Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki proposed names for Roads 2 and 3, as set out
earlier in this report. Three
other name options were also suggested as part of this consultation: Maumahara
Lane, Te Rau Nīkau Lane and Ipukarea Road. However, LINZ could
not accept these names due to the same or similar names already being in use in
the area. As a result, only viable names have been presented for consideration
by the local board. It was considered too onerous on Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki’s
resources to request further name options, as they had already supplied
adequate available choices for the local board, as outlined earlier in this
report.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
32. The
road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the council.
33. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate
signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new
road names.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
34. There are no
significant risks to the council as road naming is a routine part of the
subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the
process.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
35. Approved road
names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its
New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses
issued by local councils.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Site and Location plans
|
21
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Emerald James - Subdivision Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision
Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager
|
