I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Planning Committee will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 30 June 2022

10.00am

Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

 

Kōmiti Whakarite Mahere / Planning Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Chris Darby

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Josephine Bartley

 

Members

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

Cr Tracy Mulholland

 

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

Cr Greg Sayers

 

Cr Pippa Coom

Cr Desley Simpson, JP

 

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

Cr Angela Dalton

Cr Wayne Walker

 

Cr Alf Filipaina, MNZM

Cr John Watson

 

Cr Christine Fletcher, QSO

IMSB Member Karen Wilson

 

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

Cr Paul Young

 

IMSB Member Hon Tau Henare

 

 

Cr Shane Henderson

 

 

Cr Richard Hills

 

 

(Quorum 11 members)

 

 

 

Kalinda Iswar

Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor

27 June 2022

 

Contact Telephone: 021 723 228

Email: kalinda.iswar@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


 

Terms of Reference

 

Responsibilities

 

This committee guides the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on land use, transport and infrastructure strategies and policies relating to planning, growth, housing and the appropriate provision of enabling infrastructure, as well as programmes and strategic projects associated with these activities. The committee will establish an annual work programme outlining key focus areas in line with its key responsibilities, which include:

 

·         relevant regional strategy and policy

·         transportation

·         infrastructure strategy and policy

·         Unitary Plan, including plan changes (but not any wholesale review of the Plan)

·         Resource Management Act and relevant urban planning legislation framework

·         oversight of Council’s involvement in central government strategies, plans or initiatives that impact on Auckland’s future land use and infrastructure

·         Auckland Plan implementation reporting on priorities and performance measures

·         structure plans and spatial plans

·         housing policy and projects

·         city centre and waterfront development

·         regeneration and redevelopment programmes

·         built and cultural heritage, including public art

·         urban design

·         acquisition of property relating to the committee’s responsibilities and in accordance with the LTP

·         working with and receiving advice from the Heritage Advisory Panel, the Rural Advisory Panel and the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board to give visibility to the issues important to the communities they represent and to help effect change.

 

Powers

 

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

(a)     approval of a submission to an external body

(b)     establishment of working parties or steering groups.

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

(iii)     If a policy or project relates primarily to the responsibilities of the Planning Committee, but aspects require additional decisions by the Environment and Climate Change Committee and/or the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee, then the Planning Committee has the powers to make associated decisions on behalf of those other committee(s). For the avoidance of doubt, this means that matters do not need to be taken to more than one of those committees for decisions.

(iii)     The committee does not have:

(a)     the power to establish subcommittees

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

 

Code of conduct

 

For information relating to Auckland Council’s elected members code of conduct, please refer to this link on the Auckland Council website - https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/elected-members-remuneration-declarations-interest/Pages/elected-members-code-conduct.aspx

Auckland Plan Values

 

The Auckland Plan 2050 outlines a future that all Aucklanders can aspire to. The values of the Auckland Plan 2050 help us to understand what is important in that future:

 

 


 

Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

 

Members of the public

 

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

 

Those who are not members of the public

 

General principles

 

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

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

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

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

 

Members of the meeting

 

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

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

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

 

Independent Māori Statutory Board

 

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

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

 

Staff

 

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

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

 

Local Board members

 

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

 

Council Controlled Organisations

 

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

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        9

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   9

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               9

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          9  

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    9

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          9

6.1     Local Board Input: Albert-Eden Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                             9

6.2     Local Board Input: Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                   10

6.3     Local Board Input: Henderson-Massey Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                   10

6.4     Local Board Input: Kaipatiki Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                                       11

6.5     Local Board Input: Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                      11

6.6     Local Board Input: Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                   12

6.7     Local Board Input: Orakei Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                                       12

6.8     Local Board Input: Puketapapa Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                           13

6.9     Local Board Input: Waitemata Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                           13

6.10   Local Board Input: Whau Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development                                                                                                       14

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                              14

8          Auckland Unitary Plan - Making Operative Plan Change 20 - Rural Activity Status                                                                                                                                       15

9          Auckland Unitary Plan - Making operative provisions for land in Takapuna       89

10        Auckland Unitary Plan - Making operative Plan Change 68 - Addition of a tree at 8 Eglinton Avenue to Schedule 10 Notable Tree Schedule                                       95

11        To make Private Plan Change 61 - Waipupuke to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) operative in part                                                                        133

12        Summary of Planning Committee information items and briefings (including the forward work programme) – 30 June 2022                                                             163

13        Summary of Confidential Decisions and related information released into Open 181

14        National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions              183

15        Consideration of Extraordinary Items


 

 

 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

16        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               301

C1       Make a decision on Auckland Unitary Plan provisions for land in Albany (Covering report)                                                                                                                          301


1          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

 

2          Declaration of Interest

 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Planning Committee:

confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 2 June 2022, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

4          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

 

5          Public Input

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.  A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for public input had been accepted.

 

6          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input.  The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time.  The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

 

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.

 

6.1       Local Board Input: Albert-Eden Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Margi Watson, Chairperson Albert-Eden Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD, ancillary plan changes, and implementation.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Albert-Eden Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Chair Margi Watson for attending the meeting.

 

Attachments

a          Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on National Policy Statement on Urban Development...................................................................................... 305

 

 

6.2       Local Board Input: Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Chairperson, Ruth Jackson and Member Trish Deans will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Chair Ruth Jackson ad Member Trish Deans for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

6.3       Local Board Input: Henderson-Massey Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Member Brooke Loader of the Henderson-Massey Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Henderson-Massey Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank Member Brooke Loader for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

6.4       Local Board Input: Kaipatiki Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Danielle Grant, Deputy Chairperson of the Kaipātiki Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Kaipātiki Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Deputy Chair Danielle Grant for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

6.5       Local Board Input: Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Chairperson Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich and Deputy Chair Christine O’Brien will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Chair Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich and Deputy Chair Christine O’Brien for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

6.6       Local Board Input: Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Chris Makoare, Deputy Chair of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Deputy Chair Chris Makoare for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

6.7       Local Board Input: Orakei Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Scott Milne, Chairperson and Member Troy Churton of the Ōrākei Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Ōrākei Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Chair Scott Milne and Member Troy Churton for attending the meeting.

 

Attachments

a          Ōrākei Local Board feedback on the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 and RMA amendments 2021 - Council’s preliminary response.................................................................................... 309


 

 

6.8       Local Board Input: Puketapapa Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Jon Turner, Deputy Chairperson of the Puketāpapa Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Puketāpapa Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Deputy Chair Jon Turner for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

6.9       Local Board Input: Waitemata Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Richard Northey and Alexandra Bonham, Chair and Deputy Chair of the Waitematā Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Waitematā Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Chair Richard Northey, and Deputy Chair Alexandra Bonham, for attending the meeting.

 

Attachments

a          Waitemata Local Board feedback on National Policy Statement on Urban Development...................................................................................... 339

 


 

6.10     Local Board Input: Whau Local Board - National Policy Statement on Urban Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Kay Thomas, Chairperson of the Whau Local Board will speak to the committee about the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). Specifically, the input will cover the local board’s feedback to the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD.

2.       This input relates to report(s) on the committee agenda National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      receive the Whau Local Board input regarding National Policy Statement on Urban Development and thank local board Chair Kay Thomas for attending the meeting.

 

 

 

7          Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local  authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Auckland Unitary Plan - Making Operative Plan Change 20 - Rural Activity Status

File No.: CP2022/07258

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To make operative Plan Change 20 to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part): Rural Activity Status.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Plan Change 20 (PC20) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) is a council-initiated plan change.  PC20 as notified sought to amend the rural zone activity table so that any activity not specifically listed in the table would become a non-complying activity (rather than a discretionary activity); and to amend the references to ‘residential’ in specific rural policies and zone descriptions to refer to ‘dwelling’ or ‘dwellings’ instead.

3.       The intention with the amendment of the activity status was to ensure a fuller assessment of unanticipated activities against the objectives and policies in the AUP. The proposed replacement of the term ‘residential’ with the term ‘dwelling or dwellings’ makes clearer what specific types of development are and are not anticipated in the rural zones. The key concern being that ‘residential’ can include a wide range of activities such as retirement villages and other residential development types. This was never intended in the rural zones.

4.       PC20 was publicly notified on 21 March 2019 with 231 submissions received and ten further submissions also lodged. Most submissions were in opposition to the Plan Change.

5.       A hearing of submissions on PC20 by Hearing Commissioners with delegated authority from the Council to hear and determine submissions on PC 20 took place on 19 and 20 November 2019. A decision was released on 20 February 2020. The Hearing Commissioner’s decision confirmed the proposed changes relating to the ‘residential’ terminology. However, it rejected the proposal to add to the activity tables a default non-complying activity status for activities not provided for. The decisions version of the Plan Change is provided as Attachment A.

6.       Two appeals were received to the decision. The appellants challenged only the decision to change the references relating to the term ‘residential’. The Environment Court hearing of the appeals took place on 3 and 4 May 2021. The Environment Court decision on the appeals (refer to Attachment B) was released on 11 May 2022. The Court decision upheld the Council decision with a minor modification to Policy H19.2.4(b) which was sought by the council through the appeals process to clarify the position of buildings accessory to dwellings in the rural zones. There are no High Court appeals against the Environment Court decision therefore the plan change can now be made operative.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve Plan Change 20 to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

b)      request staff to complete the necessary statutory processes to publicly notify the date on which the plan change becomes operative as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements in clause 20(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Horopaki

Context

Background

7.       PC20 is a Council plan change relating to the rural land use chapter (Chapter H19 Rural zones) of the AUP. The intent of the Plan Change was to more appropriately deal with unanticipated activities in rural areas.  The report prepared under section 32 in support of the plan change identified two solutions as an appropriate response to this issue. The first was to amend the rural activity tables to add a new activity into the table, being “Any activity not provided for” and making its activity status non-complying. The second was to amend references to ‘residential buildings’ in the Rural chapter to ‘dwellings’.

The plan change as notified

8.       PC20 was notified on 21 March 2019 with 231 submissions received, and ten further submissions received during the further submission period. The majority of submissions opposed the proposal to amend activity status of activities not provided for in the activity table.

9.       The Council hearing for PC20 took place on 19 and 20 November 2019. The hearing was conducted by Independent Hearing Commissioners who were given full delegation to decide upon the plan change.

10.     The Commissioners’ decision was notified on 20 February 2020. The decision confirmed the proposed changes relating to the ‘residential’ terminology. However, it rejected the proposal to add to the activity tables a default non-complying activity status for activities not provided for. The decisions version of the Plan Change as amended by decisions on submissions is provided as Attachment A.

Appeals

11.     Two appeals to the decision were lodged with the Environment Court, these were:

ENV-2020-AKL-000031 Pipers Limited Partnership v Auckland Council

ENV-2020-AKL-000032 Waiiti Headwaters Limited v Auckland Council

12.     The appellants challenged only the decision to change the references relating to ‘residential’.

13.     Council’s position in the appeals was to defend Council’s decision to PC20 arguing that not all residential development is appropriate, and that by amending the term ‘residential’ to ‘dwelling’ the Regional Policy Statement chapter of the AUP the higher order rural objectives and policies are better achieved. Retention of the reference to ‘residential’ in the objectives and policies could encourage a range of activities in the rural zones that had not been intended, such as retirement villages.

14.     Council also proposed a minor amendment to Policy H19.2.4(b) to clarify the position of buildings accessory to dwellings in the rural zones, as it considered that, as written, the sub-clause would be interpreted to include buildings accessory to farming but not those accessories to dwellings. The proposed addition is as follows (proposed amendment in bold, decisions version amendments struck through and underlined):

Policy H.19.2.4:

(1) Manage the effects of rural activities to achieve a character, scale, intensity

and location that is in keeping with rural character, amenity and biodiversity

values, including recognising the following characteristics:

(a) a predominantly working rural environment;

(b) fewer buildings of an urban scale nature and design other than

residential buildings dwellings and their accessory buildings and

buildings accessory to farming;

15.     The Environment Court hearing of the appeals to PC20 took place on 3 and 4 May 2021. The Environment Court decision, released on 11 May 2022, confirmed the Council’s decision on PC20 with the further amendment to Policy H19.2.4 sought by Council. A copy of the decision of the Environment Court is provided as Attachment B.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.     Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) sets out the statutory process for plan changes. Clause 17(2) enables the council to approve the plan change if all appeals relating to the plan change have been disposed of. As the appeals have been disposed of it is appropriate to approve PC20.

17.     Clause 20 of Schedule 1 sets out the process that is required to be undertaken for the notification of the operative date. Staff within the Plans and Places department will notify the operative date as soon as possible following the Planning Committee’s resolution.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     As a procedural request, impacts on climate change are not relevant to this recommendation.

19.     However, it is worth noting that the plan change will assist in achieving a compact built environment as sought under the AUP Regional Policy Statement, by protecting the rural environment against urbanisation and associated increases in greenhouse gas emissions (such as increased private vehicle trips). In this way the plan change would assist in meeting Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri, Auckland’s Climate Action Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20.     Subject matter experts from relevant council departments were consulted during the proposed Plan Change development process. This included staff from Resource Consents department.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21.     Local board views were not sought for this report as making a plan change operative is a procedural matter. During preparation of the Plan Change all local boards were contacted and provided with information on the proposals. Follow up consultation was undertaken with both the Franklin and Rodney Local Boards. These two local boards have most of the Auckland region’s rural land within their operational boundaries. Both local boards indicated that they were supportive of the plan change.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22.     All iwi within the Auckland Region which had rural zoned land within their rohe were consulted on the plan change during its preparation, with Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara noting that they were generally in support of PC20.


 

23.     Extensive consultation with the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) also occurred during preparations, particularly in relation to the proposal to amend the status of activities not listed in the activity table to non-complying. Once the plan change was notified the IMSB, the Ngāti Tamaoho Trust and three other submitters lodged submissions seeking to retain the default discretionary activity status for activities not listed in the activity table. This was on the basis that papakainga on general land (as opposed to Māori land and treaty settlement land) would become non-complying instead of discretionary. Those submissions were accepted. The decision retained the status as discretionary, as sought by the IMSB and submitters concerned with the activity status of papakainga in rural zones.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24.     There are no financial implications associated with making PC20 operative. Approving plan changes and amending the Auckland Unitary Plan is a statutory requirement and is budgeted expenditure for the Plans and Places department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25.     There are no risks associated with making PC20 operative.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26.     The final step in making the plan change operative is to publicly notify the date on which it will become operative, and to update the Auckland Unitary Plan.

27.     Plans and Places staff will undertake the actions required under Schedule 1 of the RMA to make PC20 operative, including the public notice and ‘fixing’ of the council seal. The update of the Auckland Unitary Plan is expected to occur in June 2022.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Council decision - Plan Change 20: Rural Activity Status – PC20 text as amended by decisions on submissions

19

b

Decision of the Environment Court on appeals to PC20

47

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Alison Pye - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, text, application, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Auckland Unitary Plan - Making operative provisions for land in Takapuna

File No.: CP2022/08123

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To make operative the zoning of Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings Zone (THAB) and associated Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) provisions for areas of land in Takapuna.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Two areas of land (the subject THAB land) zoned THAB in Takapuna with Height Variation Controls (HVC) of 22.5m, shown in Figure One below, can be made operative as they are not challenged by any legal proceedings and are ‘deemed approved’ under the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010. Once operative, the council will be able to include these areas in the council’s intensification planning instrument (IPI), which will be incorporating the medium density residential standards (MDRS) into all relevant residential zones and giving effect to Policy 3 of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020. The Council’s IPI will be notified on or before 20 August 2022.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      request staff to complete the necessary statutory processes to publicly notify the date on which the zoning of the Terraced Housing and Apartment Building land and the associated Height Variation Control of 22.5m in Takapuna (described fully in the agenda report) is to become operative, as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements in clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

 

Horopaki

Context

3.       The subject THAB land is no longer subject to appeal or judicial review proceedings and the zoning of THAB and HVC of 22.5m are ‘deemed approved’ in line with the Council’s 2016 decisions on the Independent Hearings Panel recommendations on the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP). This Committee is not required to approve the provisions, but rather to direct staff to undertake the necessary steps to make the zoning and height provisions operative.

4.       The status of the zoning and the HVC of 22.5m as ‘deemed approved’ arises from section 152(2)(b) of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (LGATPA). The proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) was prepared under the LGATPA and it provides under section 152(2)(b) for automatic ‘approval’ of provisions where a relevant appeal has been finally determined, which is the case here. The two blocks are not subject to ongoing appeal proceedings. The original appeal proceedings commenced in late 2016 and affected the whole of the Takapuna commercial area and its immediate surrounds. Subsequent legal proceedings have reduced the areas of land in Takapuna where the zoning is challenged.

5.       The subject THAB areas were previously challenged in legal proceedings by Franco Belgiornio-Nettis. However, his most recent legal proceedings do not include these areas of THAB as subject to challenge. On 8 February 2021 the High Court issued an order that prohibited the Council from making operative the zonings of the reduced areas that were still the subject of judicial review proceedings, as outlined in the proceedings filed by Mr Belgiorno-Nettis. The two areas of THAB land were not included in the areas of land identified by Mr Belgiorno-Nettis as still subject to challenge. These areas of THAB land are shown with bold outlining and cross-hatching. The areas of land without the bold outlining, but with cross-hatching, are the areas (of the ‘Lake Road block’) that are still subject to challenge by Mr Belgiorno-Nettis. Another area at the north-eastern end of Takapuna, ‘the Promenade block’, is also still subject to challenge (refer Attachment A).

6.       The absence of ongoing proceedings over the subject THAB land (Figure One) was overlooked at the time the legal proceedings were served on the Council. Council staff have confirmed with Council’s lawyers that there is no impediment to the Committee directing that the zoning and heights for these two areas of land are made operative. Staff therefore seek a direction that they take the necessary steps to make the zoning and height operative.

 

Chart, treemap chart

Description automatically generated

Figure One: Subject areas of Takapuna land zoned THAB, with HVC of 22.5m, demarcated with a bold black line, having ‘approved’ status and which can be made operative.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       The direction requested of the committee, to enable the subject THAB areas to become operative, is the final administrative step in the plan making process. Normally an ‘approval’ would be required, but due to the special provisions of LGATPA outlined above that govern the Auckland Unitary Plan process, that approval is deemed to have been made already and that only leaves the final step of notification, for which there is a delegation to staff to carry out the necessary statutory steps following the Committee’s direction.


 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

8.       There are no issues of significance for greenhouse gas emissions arising from the procedural direction recommended. It is noted however that the subject land areas will assist in achieving a compact built environment as sought under the AUP Regional Policy Statement and in this way assist in meeting Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri, Auckland’s Climate Action Plan

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

9.       The views of the wider council group are not relevant to the recommended procedural decision. The wider Council group was involved in contributing to the IHP recommendations and Council decisions that gave rise to the approved zoning and 22.5m HVC of the subject land.

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

Local impacts and local board views

10.     There are no local impacts of significance arising from the procedural direction recommended and local board views are not relevant at this stage in the plan making process. There will be positive impacts for the owners of land directly affected because the current uncertainty will be resolved as at the date the zoning and HVC are notified as operative. This in turn will make the impact of the IPI plan change process clearer for these land areas as of 20 August 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

11.     There are no issues of significance for Māori arising from the procedural direction recommended.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

12.     The costs of notifying the operative status of the zoning and HVC of the subject land are covered by the normal operating budget of the Plans and Places Department. They are not significant and cannot be recovered from any other party in this case.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

13.     There are cost implications for both the council and the relevant landowners if the zoning and HVC of the subject THAB land are not made operative prior to 20 August 2022, the date by which the council is required to have notified its IPI plan change. The risk of the operative status not being notified and the AUP being updated prior to that date is very low, assuming the recommended direction is made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

14.     The council delegations register provides for staff to carry out the necessary statutory steps following a committee decision in line with the recommended direction. The AUP will be updated in July 2022.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Map showing all Takapuna areas subject to legal proceedings

93

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ewen Patience - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Diagram

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Auckland Unitary Plan - Making operative Plan Change 68 - Addition of a tree at 8 Eglinton Avenue to Schedule 10 Notable Tree Schedule

File No.: CP2022/08367

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To make operative Plan Change 68 - Addition of a tree at 8 Eglinton Avenue to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       On 3 June 2021 the Planning Committee resolved to publicly notify a plan change to add the pōhutukawa at 8 Eglinton Avenue, Mt Eden to Schedule 10 Notable Tree Schedule of the AUP (Resolution Number PLA/2021/55).

3.       The key objective of Proposed Plan Change 68 was to ensure the protection of the section 6 and 7 values (as reflected in the Regional Policy Statement criteria within the AUP) of a pōhutukawa at 8 Eglinton Avenue, Mt Eden (the property) from inappropriate use and development.

4.       The decision on Plan Change 68 was notified on 28 April 2022 (Attachment A). No appeals have been received against the decision.

5.       The relevant parts of the AUP can now be amended and made operative in accordance with the hearing commissioners’ decisions.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve the proposed amendments to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) under Plan Change 68 - Addition of a tree at 8 Eglinton Avenue as set out in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b)      request staff to undertake the steps in Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 to make Plan Change 68 operative in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

Horopaki

Context

6.       PC 68 sought to correct an error regarding the omission of a pōhutukawa at 8 Eglinton Avenue from Schedule 10 Notable Tree Schedule and the maps of the AUP. A copy of the plan change is included as Attachment B. This addition reintroduced protection to the pōhutukawa, as was always intended.

7.       The pōhutukawa tree has been the subject of court action, negotiation and agreement by relevant parties (parties include the property owner and Auckland Council) and subsequent Environment Court direction. In accordance with the Court direction (Attachment C), the scope of the plan change is very narrow and is limited to a single addition.


 

8.       PC68 does not propose to add any additional trees beyond the site at 8 Eglinton Avenue to the Schedule or to re-evaluate existing trees in the Schedule. Any inclusions, deletions or re-evaluations of any existing notable tree currently listed in the Schedule will be considered in a separate plan change at a later date.

9.       The Planning Committee approved Plan Change 29 for public notification on 3 June 2021 (PLA/2021/55). Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) sets out the process for a change to a policy statement or plan. Following Schedule 1 of the RMA, Plan Change 29 was:

·   publicly notified on 23 September 2021

·   open for public submissions until 21 October 2021

·   open for further submissions until 2 December 2021

·   heard by independent commissioners on 22 Mar 2022

·   the decision was publicly notified on 28 April 2022 (Attachment D).

10.     Independent commissioners were delegated the authority to make decisions by the Regulatory Committee under section 34 of the RMA. The commissioners approved the plan change without amendments on 14 April 2022.

11.     The commissioners’ decision was dated 14 April 2022

12.     The appeal period on PC 68 decision closed on 9 June 2022. No appeals have been received. Therefore, the relevant parts of the AUP can now be amended and made operative as set out in the decision dated 14 April 2022 (refer to Attachment A).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13.     Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out the statutory process for plan changes.

14.     Clause 17(2) states that “a local authority may approve part of a policy statement or plan, if all submissions or appeals relating to that part have been disposed of”. Decisions were made on all submissions and no appeals were received. On this basis Plan Change 68 can now be approved.

15.     Clause 20 of Schedule 1 sets out the process that is required to be undertaken for the notification of the operative date. Plans and Places staff will notify the operative date as soon as possible following the Planning Committee’s resolution.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16.     As a procedural step, impacts on climate change are not relevant to the recommendation to approve Plan Change 68.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

17.     As a procedural step, there are no council group impacts associated with the approval of Plan Change 68.

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

Local impacts and local board views

18.     As a procedural step, there are no local impacts associated with the approval of Plan Change 68.


 

19.     The tree is in the Albert - Eden Local Board area. The Local Board provided the following input on the plan change:

a) support the scheduling of the tree at 8 Eglinton Avenue, Mt Eden

b) note that the tree plays an important part in the natural landscape being highly prominent in the immediate local area, dominant in size, easily visible from the bowling club, recognisable from further afield on surrounding high points and estimated to be more than 150 years old.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20.     As a procedural step, there are no impacts on Māori associated with the approval of Plan Change 68.

21.     All iwi authorities were sent letters when Plan Change 68 was publicly notified. Feedback was received from Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki who supported the proposed plan change and Waikato Tainui who supported mana whenua in the plan change area to take the lead role. No formal submissions were received from iwi authorities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

22.     There are no financial implications arising from this procedural decision. Approving plan changes and amending the AUP is a statutory requirement and is budgeted expenditure for the Plans and Places Department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23.     There are no risks associated with making the plan change operative.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

24.     The final step in making Plan Change 68 operative is to publicly notify the date on which they will become operative, and to the update the AUP.

25.     Plans and Places staff will undertake the actions required under Schedule 1 of the RMA to make Plan Change 68 operative, including the public notice and seals. The update of the AUP is expected to occur July 2022.


 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Plan Change 68-decision

99

b

Plan Change 68 Proposed amendments to Schedule 10 Isthmus section

117

c

Plan Change 68 Environment Court Decision [2021]-nzenvc-069

121

d

Plan Change 68 public notice decision

131

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Teuila Young - Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, application

Description automatically generated

Chart, surface chart

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Table

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

To make Private Plan Change 61 - Waipupuke to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) operative in part

File No.: CP2022/08500

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To make Private Plan Change 61 - Waipupuke to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) operative in part.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Plan Change 61 (PC61) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) comprises a private plan change request that seeks to rezone a 56ha block of land to the north of Karaka Road (State Highway 22) (SH22), west of Jesmond Road and east of Oira Road from the current Future Urban Zone to a variety of urban zones to enable residential development.

3.       In addition, a precinct is proposed over the land subject to the Plan Change, in order to enable specific activities and transport outcomes.

4.       PC61 is located within the Auckland Council Drury-Opāheke Structure Plan (Structure Plan) area and falls within the Stage 1 area of the Future Urban Land Supply Strategy 2017 (FULSS).

5.       The hearing on PC61 was held in October 2021 and the decision declining PC61 (Decision) was issued on 15 December 2021. The applicant, Lomai Properties Limited (Lomai), subsequently appealed the Decision and six section 274 parties joined the appeal pursuant to section 274 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). 

6.       The Decision clearly sets out the reasons for declining PC61. Numerous meetings with the section 274 parties and Auckland Council (as respondent) were undertaken to work through the issues in the post appeal period.

7.       Following informal caucusing, and later Environment Court mediation, the parties reached an agreement to resolve the majority of this appeal.

8.       One matter remains outstanding between the parties – this being settling on attenuation provisions to protect land use activities sensitive to noise from adverse noise effects arising from the arterial road traffic associated with the operation of SH22 and Jesmond Road.  This issue remains subject to appeal.

9.       The Environment Court has recently approved the consent order which will resolve the majority of the appeal by Lomai and will enable PC61 to become operative in part, while the acoustic attenuation provisions are resolved.

10.     The relevant parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) can now be amended to make PC61 operative in part as set out in the Appendix A of the Environment Court consent order (and included in Attachment A of the agenda report).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      approve in part Private Plan Change 61 to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) as set out in the Appendix A of the Environment Court consent order (and included in Attachment A of the agenda report) under clause 17(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

b)      request staff to complete the necessary statutory processes to publicly notify the date on which the plan change becomes operative in part as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements in clause 20(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Horopaki

Context

Background

11.     PC61 – Waipupuke seeks to:

·   rezone a 56.05 hectare (ha) block of FUZ land bounded by Oira, Jesmond and Karaka (State Highway 22) Road within the Drury-Opāheke Structure Plan area; and

·   apply the Waipupuke Precinct provisions in order to enable the comprehensive and integrated development of the site for residential, commercial and open space purposes.

12.     PC61 proposed to rezone the current Future Urban Zone to a variety of urban zones including:

·   Residential – Terrace House and Apartment Building (THAB);

·   Residential – Mixed Housing Urban (MHU);

·   Business – Neighbourhood Centre (BNC); and

·   Open Space – Informal Recreation (OSIR).

13.     PC61 is located within the Drury-Opāheke Structure Plan area and falls within Stage 1 of the structure plan.  The structure plan recognises that Stage 1 is to be ‘development ready’ by 2022.  This Stage 1 timeframe is envisaged for the land north of SH22 and west of State Highway 1. The FULSS also reflects the same timeframe for this land to be development ready. PC61 was notified on 28 January 2021 with 28 submissions received, and seven further submissions received during the further submission period.

14.     The council hearing for PC61 was held on 6 October 2021 and lasted 5 days. The hearing was conducted by Independent Hearing Commissioners who were given full delegation to decide upon the plan change.

15.     The council decision was notified on 16 December 2021, with the decision declining the plan change.  While the decision declined the plan change, the decision clearly set out what would need to be changed in PC61 if PC61 were to be approved with modifications.

Appeal

16.     Following notification of council’ decision, Lomai lodged an appeal with the Environment Court:

·   ENV-2022-AKL-21 Lomai Properties Limited v Auckland Council

17.     The appellant challenged the entirety of the decision.

18.     The following parties joined the appeal under section 274 of the RMA 1991:

·   Auckland Council (in its capacity as a submitter);

·   Auckland Transport;

·   Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi);

·   Watercare Services Limited (Watercare);

·   Elly S Pan; and

·   Kāinga Ora.

19.     All parties, except Watercare, gave notice of their intention to participate in, and attended, Court-assisted mediation.

20.     Watercare sought leave to be excused from attending the mediation on the basis that its interest in the proceedings was unrelated to the interests of other parties, and was being discussed with the Appellant off line.  On the basis of two minor agreed amendments to PC61 relating to water infrastructure, Watercare confirms it is comfortable with the position reached between the parties during the mediation. 

21.     With the exception of Ms Pan, all of the other parties participated in Court-assisted mediation on 27 April 2022.

22.     Ms Pan withdrew her interest in these proceedings, by way of letter from her agent, Mr Hosken, dated 4 May 2022.  The Environment Court noted the withdrawal, with no issue as to costs, on 6 May 2022.

 

Agreement reached

23.     Following direct discussion and Environment Court assisted mediation, on 27 April 2022, the parties agreed to resolve the majority of the appeal. The exception is a road noise (acoustic attenuation) matter that is discussed below. The agreement by the Council (as Respondent) was conditional on receiving approval from the Planning Committee. That approval was subsequently obtained.

Noise attenuation provisions 

24.     There is one discrete matter, relating to the noise attenuation provisions, that has not been fully agreed between the parties.

25.     The road noise (acoustic attenuation) provisions that remain subject to appeal in PC61 will be the subject of further discussions between the parties. Hearing time may be required to resolve those provisions. In the meantime, the Environment Court has approved a set of interim road noise provisions.

Environment Court Consent Order  

26.     By Joint Memorandum dated 10 May 2022, Lomai Properties Limited, Auckland Council (in its capacity as decision-maker and submitter), Auckland Transport, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, Watercare Services Limited and Kāinga Ora (together, the parties) filed a draft consent order to resolve the majority of the appeal by consent.

27.     On 16 May 2022, the Court directed the parties to file a joint memorandum accompanied by a joint statement or affidavit by 1 June 2022 to address issues it raised with the consent documents.

28.     Following the Court’s request, a second joint memorandum was filed on 1 June 2022.

29.     On 7 June 2022, a consent determination was received from the Court. The Environment Court, by consent, orders that:

o the Lomai Properties Limited appeal be resolved in part, with PC61 approved with modifications as set out in Appendix A.

o There is one aspect of the appeal that remains outstanding in relation to the road noise (acoustic attenuation) provisions in PC61. The road noise (acoustic attenuation) provisions in PC61 that remain subject to appeal are referenced by placeholders “[subject to appeal]” in Appendix A.

o The road noise (acoustic attenuation) provisions in PC61 will be the subject of further discussions between the parties. Hearing time may be required to resolve those provisions. In the meantime, the Court approves the set of interim road noise provisions included in Appendix A.

o The parties are to report on resolution of the noise attenuation issue by 2 September 2022. If not resolved parties are to agree a timetable to hearing.

30.     PC61 can now be approved in part in accordance with Appendix A of the consent order which is attached as Attachment A to this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

31.     Schedule 1 of the RMA 1991 sets out the statutory process for plan changes. Clause 17(2) enables the council to approve part of the plan change if all appeals relating to that part have been disposed of. The majority of PC61 can be approved, with only the matters relating to acoustic attenuation remaining subject to appeal.

32.     Clause 20 of Schedule 1 sets out the process that is required to be undertaken for the notification of the operative date. Staff within the Plans and Places department will notify the operative date as soon as possible following the Planning Committee’s resolution.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33.     As a procedural request, impacts on climate change are not relevant to this recommendation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

34.     As a procedural request, no views are being sought from any council departments.

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

Local impacts and local board views

35.     The views of the Papakura and Franklin Local Boards were sought on the private plan change following lodgement of the request.

36.     Local board views were not sought for this report as making a plan change operative is a procedural matter.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37.     The hearing panel in their decision, acknowledged the very strong support and endorsement of the Plan Change by Mana Whenua.

38.     The applicant established a Mana Whenua Working Group which set out a partnership between themselves and Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Te Ākitai and Ngāti Tamaoho. Workshops were held which covered a range of issues important to the iwi including: water quality; master plan / neighbourhood centre; parks / open spaces, and the cultural design framework for the whole Waipupuke Precinct.

39.     The engagement with Mana Whenua was documented by the Mana Whenua Engagement Report commissioned by the applicant, which outlined the engagement with participating iwi and highlighted options for further engagement with iwi in future development of the plan change area.

40.     The hearing panel were supportive of the outcomes sought by Mana Whenua. The provisions around Mana Whenua Cultural Identity Markers and open space which they would have included in the precinct had plan change been approved, is now included in the consent documentation.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41.     There are no financial implications associated with making PC61 operative in part. Approving plan changes and amending the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) is a statutory requirement and is a budgeted expenditure for the Plans and Places department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42.     There are no risks associated with making PC61 operative in part.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43.     The final step in making the plan change operative in part is to publicly notify the date on which it will become operative in part, and to update the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

44.     Plans and Places staff will undertake the actions required under Schedule 1 of the RMA to make PC61 operative in part.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Appendix A - Consent Determination

139

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jimmy Zhang - Planner

Authorisers

Celia Davison - Manager Planning - Central/South

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

A picture containing background pattern

Description automatically generated

Chart

Description automatically generated

Chart

Description automatically generated

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Chart

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Diagram

Description automatically generated

A picture containing text, receipt

Description automatically generated

A picture containing text, receipt

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Summary of Planning Committee information items and briefings (including the forward work programme) – 30 June 2022

File No.: CP2022/09352

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the progress on the forward work programme included as Attachment A.

2.       To receive a summary and provide a public record of memos or briefing papers that have been held or been distributed to committee members.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of information circulated to committee members via memo/briefing or other means, where no decisions are required.

4.       The following workshops and briefings have taken place:

Date

Subject

8/6/2022

5.       Confidential: National Policy Statement on Urban Development – final policy directions 1 (no attachment)

15/6/2022

Confidential: National Policy Statement on Urban Development related plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan – Transport (no attachment)

22/6/2022

Confidential: National Policy Statement on Urban Development – council-identified qualifying matters (no attachment)

 

6.       The following memoranda and information items have been sent:

Date

Memoranda, Correspondence, Information Item

June 2022

Auckland Monthly Housing Update – June 2022

9/6/2022

7.       Memo: Implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 for Auckland

23/6/2022

8.       Memo: Update on the Wai Horotiu Queen Street Project

9.       These documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:

http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

at the top left of the page, select meeting/Te hui “Planning Committee” from the drop-down tab and click “View”;

under ‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.

10.     Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary.  Planning Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      tuhi / note the progress on the forward work programme included as Attachment A of the agenda report.

b)      tūtohi / receive the Summary of Planning Committee information items and briefings – 30 June 2022.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Planning Committee forward work programme

165

b

Auckland Monthly Housing Update – June 2022 (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Memo: Implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 for Auckland (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Memo: Update on the Wai Horotiu Queen Street Project (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kalinda Iswar - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor

Authoriser

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

 

Kōmiti Whakarite Mahere / Planning Committee

Forward Work Programme 2022

This committee guides the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on land use, transport and infrastructure strategies and policies relating to planning, growth, housing and the appropriate provision of enabling infrastructure, as well as programmes and strategic projects associated with these activities. The full terms of reference can be found here.

 

Area of work and Lead Department

Reason for work

Committee role

(decision and/or direction)

Expected timeframes

Highlight the meeting(s) this is expected to come to committee in 2022

  3 Feb 

  3 Mar 

  31 Mar 

  5 May 

  2 Jun

  30 Jun 

  4 Aug 

  1 Sep 

Urban Growth and Housing

National Policy Statement on Urban Development and related enactments

Chief Planning Office

The National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS UD) was gazetted by the government on 20 July 2020 and comes into force on 20 August 2020 with ongoing timeframes for implementation. The purpose of the NPS UD is to require councils to plan well for growth and ensure a well-functioning urban environment for all people, communities and future generations. The Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021 will result in significantly more land within urban Auckland being affected by the intensification plan change required under the NPS UD. The Act requires medium density residential standards be incorporated into the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Decisions sought will include:

·         consideration of the significant policy and implementation issues that are presented by the NPS on Urban Development, approve the detailed work programme for the next phase of work

·         approval to proceed with plan changes and to notify plan changes;

·         consider engagement approach with Aucklanders (proposed to take place in April) on the NPS UD/Enabling Housing Supply Act ‘intensification plan change

Progress to date:

Endorsed work programme PLA/2021/8 and workshops held Feb – March 2022.

Received findings of Housing Development Capacity Assessment PLA/2021/77

Approved development of a plan change to Regional Policy Statement of the Auckland Unitary Plan PLA/2021/78

Endorsed approaches to the intensification provisions relating to walkable catchments, special character areas and qualifying matters PLA/2021/80 and all other locations PLA/2021/97

Endorsed the development of a plan change to address matters arising from the removal of carparking minimums PLA/2021/104

Endorsed principles for the application of new policy 3(d) in the NPD UD arising from the Enabling Housing Supply Amendment Act PLA/2022/11

Endorsed council’s preliminary response to the NPS UD and Enabling Housing Supply Act for public engagement PLA/2022/31

The 2022 work programme includes workshops in February, March, May, June and July with reports due on 31 March, 30 June and 4 August. Topics include:

·      Implementation of the NPS UD in the city centre

·      Quality built environment and enabling 6+ storey within ‘walkable catchments’

·      Issues arising from the removal of parking minimums and private ways

·      Intensification plan change proposals

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Future Development Strategy

Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

Within the NPS UD framework, there is a requirement to complete a Future Development Strategy (FDS) in time to inform the 2024 Long-term Plan. The purpose of the FDS is to help Council set the high-level vision for accommodating urban growth over the long term and identify strategic priorities to inform other development-related decisions. The FDS will spatially identify where long- term growth should happen.

Decision required: endorsement of the interim strategic direction of the Future Development Strategy

Progress to date:

Workshops are planned for March, May, and July 2022.

Report due 1 September.

Further committee decisions will be needed in the first half of 2023.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Affordable Housing

Chief Planning Office

To progress the resolution (PLA /2019/17) on Auckland Council’s role and position on affordable housing in phases:

Progress report and approach to advice

Decision required: receive Affordable Housing progress update and insights

Progress to date:

Forward work programme approved and political working party formed PLA/2020/65

Update memo November 2021

Report due August 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crown Auckland Council Joint Work Programme

Chief Planning Office

Quarterly update on the Crown and Auckland Council Joint Work Programme on Urban Growth and Housing.

Decision required: Generally none. Receive updates by memorandum on JWP and any proposed changes to the workstreams. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Updated Area Plans for parts of Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe

Plans and Places

Area plans are non-statutory documents which provide a framework to support growth and development in the area over the next 30 years. Approval of the area plans by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe local boards will be sought in August 2022.

 

Decision required: consider and adopt the updated area plans

Report due 1 September.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Integrated Area Plan for parts of Albert Eden and Puketāpapa Local Boards

Plans and Places

Area plans are non-statutory documents which provide a framework to support growth and development in the area over the next 30 years. Endorsement of the integrated area plan by the Albert-Eden and Puketāpapa local boards will be sought in July/August 2022.

Decision required: consider and adopt the area plan

Report due 1 September.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unitary Plan Monitoring including Climate response (led by Plans and Places)

Auckland Unitary Plan Monitoring Report

Plans and Places

Statutory requirement under section 35 of the Resource Management Act to provide a comprehensive monitoring report five years from date the Auckland Unitary Plan became ‘operative in part’ (i.e. by November 2021). This work will consist of a series of monitoring reports delivered in a phased way from 2022 onwards. Examples of monitoring topics include urban growth and form, quality built environment, historic heritage, indigenous biodiversity, Māori economic, social and cultural development, natural hazards (including flooding) and climate change. This work may result in plan changes being recommended ahead of the review of the Auckland Unitary Plan in 2026.

Decisions required: Interim reports seeking committee feedback and decisions on possible plan changes ahead of the review of the Auckland Unitary Plan in 2026. 

Reports due in August 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enabling Rainwater Tanks Plan Change

Plans and Places

Mandating the installation of rainwater tanks in certain situations.

Decisions required: committee to consider options and recommendations

 

Progress to date:

Delegated authority to approve notification of the plan change PLA/2020/47

Memo update October 2021.

Report due August 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Plan 2050

Auckland Plan Annual Scorecard (monitoring report) and Annual Update

Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

To report annual progress against the 33 measures of the Auckland Plan 2050

Decision required: Receive annual scorecard and approve updates to measures and the plan

 

Progress to date:

The next annual monitoring report is due 30 June.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Resource Management Act framework reform

Resource Management system reform – Natural and Built Environment Bill

Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

The Natural and Built Environments Act (NBA) to provide for land use and environmental regulation (this would be the primary replacement for the current RMA)

Resource management is a core aspect of Auckland Council’s role. The size and scope of this reform means that these reforms will shape council’s strategic context for at least the next decade.

Decision required: approval of council approach and submission. The bill is expected to be introduced in the second half of 2022.

Progress to date:

authority delegated to approve council’s input on Transforming Aotearoa New Zealand’s resource management system discussion materials PLA/2022/3 February 2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

TBC

TBC

Resource Management system reform – Strategic Planning Bill

Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

The Strategic Planning Act to integrate with other legislation relevant to development (such as the Local Government Act and Land Transport Management Act) and require long-term regional spatial strategies.

Resource management is a core aspect of Auckland Council’s role. The size and scope of this reform means that these reforms will shape council’s strategic context for at least the next decade.

Decision required: approval of council approach and submission. The bill is expected to be introduced in the second half of 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

TBC

TBC

National Policy Statements

National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 – implementation approach

Chief Planning Office

The NPS-FM was adopted by central government in September 2020. A high -level implementation plan has been approved; preceding plan changes required before the end of 2024.

Decision required: to approve key policy responses developed with Mana Whenua to enable next steps, including broader engagement.

Progress to date:

Memo updates August 2021 and June 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposed National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Lands

Chief Planning Office

The finalisation of the proposed NPS-HPL is due to be considered by central government in 2022. If adopted, this will have implications for land use in the Auckland region, and how highly productive lands are recognised and managed.

Decision required: to consider council’s approach to implementation of any finalised NPS-HPL in the Auckland region.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposed National Policy Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity

Chief Planning Office

The finalisation of the proposed NPS-IB is due to be considered by central government after May 2022. If adopted, this will have implications for how biodiversity outcomes are managed in the Auckland region, particularly through planning frameworks.

Decision required: to consider council’s approach to implementation of any finalised NPS-IB in the Auckland region.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Transport Strategy Programme (led by Auckland Plan Strategy & Research, CPO in conjunction with others)

Congestion Question

The Transport and Infrastructure Committee is conducting an inquiry into congestion pricing in Auckland.

Decision required: A Cabinet decision on legislative change is expected in July 2022. Following Cabinet’s decision, a committee paper would be provided asking approval for council staff to begin work with Auckland Transport to develop a scheme proposal by 2024 for consideration by the Government.

Progress to date:

Authority delegated to provide direction and approve submission May 2021 PLA/2021/36 – PLA/2021/37

Memo update on select committee’s recommendations September 2021

Progress update memo planned for late March 2022.

Report due in August (dependent on Cabinet decision).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Light Rail

Cabinet announced its decisions on the next steps for Auckland Light Rail in January 2022.To date Auckland Council has been represented on the Sponsor’s Group and on the Establishment Unit Board.  Council staff are working with central government officers on the next iteration of governance arrangements for councillors to make decisions on these and other matters.

Decision required: to be confirmed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Auckland Transport

Northwest Interim Bus Improvements

Construction at the Te Atatu Road and Lincoln Road interchanges will take place from February 2022 - mid-2023 to allow for the new bus network rolled out in West Auckland. The Westgate Bus Station is in the design phase. Temporary bus stops will be in place by mid-2023 to support the new bus network.

Receive updates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Access for Everyone business case

The A4E Programme Business Case was endorsed by the Auckland Transport Board 24 February 2022. It is now proceeding through the Waka Kotahi/New Zealand Transport Agency approval processes.

Receive updates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Busway enhancements

Auckland Transport has completed the Detailed Business Case and earlier implementation funding is being sought as the funding for the project in the Regional Land Transport Plan is allocated in financial years 2027/28 – 2030/31.

Receive updates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Parking Strategy

 

AT has started work on updating some parts of its 2015 parking strategy.  The indicative completion date is August 2022.

Decision required: strategic direction and delegation to approve discussion document. Endorsement of draft strategy, public consultation on draft strategy and the adoption of the final parking strategy.

Progress to date:

Workshops held June and October 2021 and March 2022.

Endorsement of strategic direction underpinning development of the 2022 Parking Strategy and authority delegated to endorse the Parking Discussion Document November 2021 PLA/2021/125

Endorsement of Draft Parking Strategy for public consultation PLA/2022/24

Workshop planned for August 2022 with decision making reports due in August.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Programme development for Waka Kotahi’s Streets for People fund

The Waka Kotahi Streets for People programme is seeking projects and programmes that will be designed using the learnings from the Innovating Streets programme (2019). This new programme will aim to deliver trials, tactical urbanism interventions and complementary initiatives across the region, to reduce transport emissions through encouraging mode shift to active modes.

Decision required: Endorsement of a proposed programme to be submitted to Waka Kotahi by Auckland Transport

 

Progress to date: Workshop held 25 May. Report due in August.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Transport’s Interim Speed Management Plan

The Auckland Plan envisages a transport network free of death and serious injury by 2050. To meet this goal, Auckland Transport has developed Vision Zero for Tāmaki Makaurau with the council and other partners. The interim speed management plan will play a significant role in delivering Vision Zero.

Direction required: Provide feedback on the next phase of safe speeds.

 

Progress to date: Workshop held 6 April.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Rapid Transit Plan

The Auckland Rapid Transit Plan has significant implications for Auckland’s future growth and urban form, and development of the preferred network will involve significant capital investment over the next three decades.

Decision required: Endorsement of Auckland Rapid Transit Plan.

 

Progress to date: This will be reported to the Planning Committee (or equivalent) in 2023.

 

Auckland Regional Public Transport Plan

The Regional Public Transport Plan is a statutory document that needs to be updated every 3 years to reflect the outcomes of the RLTP. It outlines the current public transport system, the changes planned over the next decade and details policies related to the operation of the transport network. Auckland Transport are seeking council’s endorsement of the strategic direction for public transport in Auckland to help guide the development of the RPTP.

Decision required: Endorse strategic direction for the project.

 

Progress to date: This will be reported to the Planning Committee (or equivalent) in 2023.

 

Infrastructure

National 30-year Infrastructure Strategy

APSR

This will replace the current national 30-year plan. It will consider how infrastructure might support environmental, social, cultural, and economic wellbeing

Decision required: to be confirmed

Progress to date:

Authority delegated to approve council’s submission on the Infrastructure Commission’s National Infrastructure Strategy 3 June 2021 PLA/2021/54

The draft strategy will be presented to the Minister for Infrastructure in September 2021. The final strategy will be tabled in Parliament by early 2022.

Possible briefing from the Infrastructure Commission on ministerial decisions before June 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Acceleration Fund

The results of the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund request for proposal are expected from the Crown by May 2022.

Receive updates.

Memo update on results of request for proposal process May 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Unitary Plan oversight

Making Plan Changes Operative

Plans and Places

Statutory Resource Management Act requirement to make council and private plan changes operative once the decision on the plan change is made and any appeals are resolved.

Decision required: Make plan changes operative.

As and when required

Private Plan Changes

Plans and Places

Private plan change requests not dealt with under staff delegation. These will be brought to committee as and when required.

Decision required: Accept/adopt/reject/deal with the request as a resource consent application.

As and when required


Plan Change – Residential

Plans and Places

Monitoring of the Auckland Unitary Plan has indicated that some improvements can be made to the provisions for residential development.

Decision required: Provide direction on the scope and timing of a potential plan change.

 

Progress to date:

 Endorsed the preparation of a plan change for Integrated Residential Development provisions PLA/2020/115

Update memo received in July.

Workshop held October 2021. Further workshop planned for February 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Māori Heritage Sites of Significance

Plans and Places

Second tranche of plan changes to identify Māori Heritage sites and places of significance

Decision required: To approve the plan change 

 

Progress to date:

Frist tranche approved and made operative PLA/2021/6

Second tranche considered September 2021 PLA/2021/108

Workshops and a report indicated for mid-2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Converting Road Reserve, Unformed Legal Roads & Pedestrian Accessways to
Open Space

Plans and Places

Scoping report identifying opportunities to offer unutilised areas of road reserve and unformed legal roads back to Māori former landowners

Decision required: Consider recommended approach.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plan Change 60 – Open Space and Other Rezoning Matters

Plans and Plans / Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Plan change to rezone land to recognise land recently vested or acquired as open space, correct errors or anomalies, facilitate Eke Panuku’s land rationalisation and disposal process, and facilitate council or Kainga Ora’s redevelopment of some neighbourhoods.

Decision required: Approve plan change in part. Part of the plan change will form part of the intensification plan change required by the National Policy Statement for Urban Development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coastal hazard maps plan change

Plans and Places

Plan change to update the Auckland Unitary Plan definition of “coastal erosion hazard area” with a reference to new coastal erosion maps and to remove the coastal storm inundation map from the plan. Funding for this plan change was approved as part of the targeted rate for climate change in 2021/22.

Decision required: Approve notification of the plan change

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eke Panuku urban regeneration

Wynyard Point Precinct Plan and Plan Change

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Refreshed Wynyard Point Precinct Plan leading to council led plan change to support future regeneration delivery.

Decision required: Endorsement for the Wynyard Point Precinct Plan for public consultation.

Endorsement for the Wynyard Point Plan Change for public notification.

Workshop held February 2022.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Onehunga Wharf Precinct Plan & Plan Change

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Onehunga Wharf masterplan leading to council led plan change to support future regeneration delivery.

Status update pending from Eke Panuku.

Direction required: Support for a revised approach that covers feasibility of mixed-use development, options for wharf renewal and open space plans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eke Panuku Future Programme

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

TBA

Status update pending from Eke Panuku.

Decision required: Approval of the process to develop and engage on recommendations for the Eke Panuku future urban regeneration programme and funding models

Report due 4 August.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City Centre Masterplan Implementation update

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

On 30 Nov 2021 the Planning Committee endorsed Eke Panuku as the lead agency for the implementation of City Centre Masterplan 2020 and the establishment of a council group matrix team.

Decision required: Receive updates on implementing the City Centre Masterplan, engagement, programme business case and priorities.

Updates will be provided through quarterly reporting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Decisions of other committees which are relevant to the Planning Committee

Auckland Transport Alignment Programme (ATAP)

As capacity allows staff from council and ATAP partner agencies will commence work on recommended indicative packages for decades two and three.

Decision required: There is no ATAP work this year which will require decisions from the Planning Committee. The focus this year on transport emission reduction – which is being considered by the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

 


Briefings to be confirmed

Ministry of Education – development programme for Auckland

Chief Planning Office

A briefing is being explored in conjunction with the Future Development Strategy work. The committee has indicated interest in hearing from the Ministry of Education on its plans for schools long term, and the current issues and challenges it faces. Including how legislative change affects schools particularly and the impacts of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development.

No decision or direction required from the committee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Waka Kotahi/New Zealand Transport Agency

Chief Planning Office

The committee has indicated interest in hearing from Waka Kotahi in terms of its Auckland Programme.

No decision or direction required from the committee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kainga Ora

Chief Planning Office

The committee has indicated interest in hearing from Kainga Ora in terms of its Auckland Programme.

No decision or direction required from the committee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kiwirail

Chief Planning Office

The committee has indicated interest in hearing from Kiwirail in terms of its Auckland Programme.

No decision or direction required from the committee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Urban Design

Chief Planning Office

The committee is interested in hearing about the work programme of the Urban Design unit.

No decision or direction required from the committee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Completed

Lead Department

Area of work

Committee role

(decision and/or direction)

Decision

Chief Planning Office

Kāinga Ora - Homes and Communities second Bill

Approval process for council’s submission

Political working group established to develop and approve submission by Planning Committee 5 December 2019

PLA/2019/92

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research, Chief Planning Office

Submission on the Land Transport (Rail) Legislation Bill

Review and approve council’s submission

Council’s submission approved by Planning Committee 4 February 2020

PLA/2020/9

Chief Planning Office

Submission on the Urban Development Bill

Review and approve council’s submission

Council’s submission approved by Planning Committee 4 February 2020

PLA/2020/10

Chief Planning Office

Submission on the draft National Policy Statement Indigenous Biodiversity

Review and approve council’s submission

Council’s submission approved by Planning Committee 5 March 2020

PLA/2020/15

Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Auckland Plan 2050 Implementation and Monitoring

Receive an update on the Auckland Plan 2050 and the first Auckland Plan 2050 Three Yearly Progress report

Updates received by Planning Committee 5 March 2020

PLA/2020/16

Auckland Design Office

City Centre Masterplan Refresh adoption

Consider and adopt refreshed City Centre Masterplan

City Centre Masterplan Refresh adopted by Planning Committee 5 March 2020

PLA/2020/17, PLA/2020/18, PLA/2020/19

Financial Strategy and Planning

Submission on the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill

Review and approve council’s submission

Council’s submission approved by Planning Committee 5 March 2020

PLA/2020/20

Development Programmes Office

Shovel-ready projects for Central Government

Agreement on list for submission to central government

Process agreed at Emergency Committee 9 April 2020

EME/2020/13

Chief Planning Office

Submission on the Accessible Streets Regulatory Package

Review and approve council’s submission

Council’s submission approved by Emergency Committee 16 April 2020

EME/2020/23

Chief Planning Office

Silverdale West Dairy Flat Structure Plan

Consider and approve the final structure plan

Final structure plan approved by Governing Body 30 April 2020

GB/2020/38

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research, Chief Planning Office

NZTA Innovating Streets Fund

Approval of council approach and submission

Endorsed first round of funding and approved process for developing the second round at Emergency Committee 7 May 2020

EME/2020/55

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research, Chief Planning Office

NZTA Innovating Streets Fund

Approval of second round funding bids to NZTA

Approved Council and AT proposed list of projects for further development and refining, and authority delegated to approve the final submission, at Planning Committee 4 June 2020

PLA/2020/30

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research, Chief Planning Office

Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2021-2031, and draft National Rail Plan

Approve council submission on GPS and Draft national rail plan

Council’s submission approved by Emergency Committee 7 May 2020

EME/2020/56

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

National Environmental Standards on Air Quality – council submission

Approve council submission

Council’s draft submission endorsed, and authority delegated to approve final submission, Planning Committee 4 June 2020

PLA/2020/31

Chief Planning Office

Resource Management Act Framework

Fast-track consenting legislative change

Approve council’s submission

Authority delegated to approve council’s submission on the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Bill, at Planning Committee 4 June 2020

PLA/2020/32

Plans and Places

Strategic Land Use Frameworks for Dairy Flat and Kumeu Huapai Future Urban Areas

Approval to prepare strategic land use frameworks for Wainui Silverdale Dairy Flat and Kumeu-Huapai.

Approved preparation of spatial land use frameworks, and established a Political Working Party to approve the draft spatial land use frameworks, at Planning Committee 2 July 2020

PLA/2020/37

Plans and Places

Plan Change - Whenuapai

Approve next steps.

Next steps approved in confidential section of Planning Committee 2 July 2020

PLA/2020/44

Plans and Places

Plan Change – Events on Public Space

Enable events on public space that have obtained an event permit to be undertaken more easily.

Endorsement of proposed plan change for notification.

Notification of plan change approved at Planning Committee 3 September 2020

PLA/2020/68

Plans and Places

Review of Schedule 10 Notable Trees Schedule

Consider the timing of a full review of Schedule 10 – Notable Trees in the context of resourcing constraints and priorities

Options for reviewing the schedule in future considered at 5 November Planning Committee.

PLA/2020/95, PLA/2020/96, PLA/2020/97

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Additional Harbour Crossing

Consideration of finalised business case.  The business case is a joint piece of work between Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, Auckland Transport (AT) and Auckland Council. 

Business case considered, findings noted and support given to continue council’s involvement in the project, at 5 November Planning Committee

PLA/2020/100

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Congestion Question

Consideration of findings in the Congestion Question project final report.

Noted that phase two of the project is completed, received the report findings, considered scope of phase three and requested approvals and updates to return to the committee

PLA/2020/116

Panuku Development Auckland, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council

Downtown Carpark development outcomes

Establish agreement on the Auckland Council group development outcome requirements for the Downtown Carpark to enable site sale through a contestable market process.

Development outcomes confirmed in confidential section of the December 2020 Planning Committee meeting PLA/2020/120 and strategic transport outcomes agreed in June 2021 PLA/2021/52

Auckland Transport

Auckland Cycling Programme Business Case Review

Agree committee members to participate in an Auckland Transport-led political reference group.

Members delegated to the political reference group

PLA/2021/7

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Auckland Transport Alignment Project

Agree funding package.

Approved the recommended ATAP 2021-31 indicative package

PLA/2021/15

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Auckland Plan Environment and Cultural Heritage Outcome Measure confirmation

Confirm new Environment and Cultural Heritage Outcome measures

New measures confirmed

PLA/2021/26

Auckland Transport

Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031

Agreed funding package for consideration of RLTP committee and AT board

Endorsed Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2931 for the Auckland Transport board to adopt.  

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Infrastructure Strategy

Provide strategic insights and direction 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy (for subsequent referral to Finance Committee)

Strategy adopted by Finance and Performance Committee in June 2021 (as part of Long-term Plan)

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Auckland Plan 2050 implementation and monitoring

 

To note progress against the measures in the Auckland Plan 2050

 

2021 monitoring report received

PLA/2021/69

Chief Planning Office

Unit Titles Act

To approve council’s submission

Authority delegated to approve submission

PLA/2021/27

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Auckland Transport Alignment Programme (ATAP)

To approve the recommended Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021-31 indicative package.

Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021-31 indicative package approved

PLA/2021/15

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Regional Fuel Tax

To consider components and changes to current status

Regional Fuel Tax Variation Proposal adopted by the Governing Body in May 2021

GB/2021/55

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Congestion Question

To approve council’s submission to the select committee on the Inquiry into congestion pricing

Authority delegated to approve submission

PLA/2021/36 – PLA/2021/37

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

National 30-year Infrastructure Strategy

To approve council’s submission

Authority delegated to approve council’s submission

PLA/2021/54

Plans and Places

Auckland Unitary Plan and Auckland District Plan (Hauraki Gulf Islands Section) – Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua

To approve the plan change and make it operative

Plan Change 22 and Plan Modification 12 (Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua) made operative

PLA/2021/6

Development Programme Office

Infrastructure Acceleration Fund

To approve council’s submission to the Crown’s Infrastructure Acceleration Fund

Endorsed preliminary list of programmes for the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund and authority delegated for approval of final list for submission

PLA/2021/92

Chief Planning Office

Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply) Amendment Bill

 

To approve council’s submission on the Bill

Group delegated to approve council’s submission on the bill November 2021

PLA/2021/123

Eke Panuku

Wynyard Quarter Tram

To endorse the Eke Panuku Board decision to cease operated of the tram in 2022.

Endorsed the Eke Panuku Board decision to cease operation of the Wynyard Quarter Tram by late 2022

PLA/2021/126

Chief Planning Office

Affordable Housing: advocacy plan, research findings and consider options

To receive updates on Affordable Housing Advocacy Plan and initial engagement, consider affordable housing research, implications and options.

Received memo update on Affordable Housing Advocacy Plan in November 2021, considered options relating to increasing housing for older people PLA/2020/92, and inclusionary zoning PLA/2020/93, PLA/2020/94

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Public Transport Operating Mechanism review

To receive updates on Public Transport Operating Mechanism review.

Received memo related to Ministry of Transport’s discussion paper 22 July 2021.

Auckland Plan Strategy & Research

Government Policy Statement – Housing and Urban Development

To approve council’s submission.

Authority delegated to approve council’s submission PLA/2021/70

Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

Resource Management system reform – Natural and Built Environment Bill (exposure draft)

To approve council’s approach and submission.

Authority delegated to approve council submission on bill exposure draft PLA/2021/75 July 2021. Received memo on select committee report November 2021.

Chief Planning Office

National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 – implementation approach

To receive an updated council implementation approach for the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 and associated instruments.

High-level implementation plan approved, working group formed to provide political oversight PLA/2021/12.

Chief Planning Office

Auckland Light Rail

To provide feedback and receive updates.

Guidance for Light Rail Establishment Unit on network integration provided June 2021 PLA/2021/53

Workshops with Establishment Unit held in June and August 2021

Confidential report considered September 2021 PLA/2021/109

Plans and Places

Regional Historic Heritage Grant

To approve the grant recommendations.

Regional Historic Heritage Grants Programme 2021/2022 funding round allocation approved March 2022 PLA/2022/9

Auckland Plan, Strategy and Research

National Environmental Standards for Sources of Human Drinking Water

To approve council’s submission on the proposed amendments to the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Sources of Human Drinking Water) Regulations 2007 and a package of related technical drinking water standards.

Authority delegated to approve council’s submission March 2022 PLA/2022/10

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Thriving Town Centres - Town Centre Guidelines for Eke Panuku locations

To endorse the guidelines for Eke Panuku locations to support future urban regeneration delivery and engagement with stakeholders and partners.

Endorsed Thriving Town Centres – Guidance for urban regeneration in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland PLA/2022/33

Auckland Transport

 

Increasing mobility options & networks (walking, cycling & micro-mobility, & connecting networks)

To endorse the direction and intent of the Auckland Cycling and Micromobility Programme Business Case as a pathway to achieving 7 percent cycling mode share by 2030.

Endorsed direction and intent of the Auckland Cycling and Micromobility Programme Business Case PLA/2022/41 and PLA/2022/43

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Transit-oriented development opportunities – Eastern Busway

Consider and provide feedback on the Strategic Regeneration Overview for the Eastern Corridor development opportunities

Report considered 5 May Planning Committee PLA/2022/49

 

 

 

 

 



Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Summary of Confidential Decisions and related information released into Open

File No.: CP2022/09359

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note confidential decisions and related information released into the public domain.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This is an information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of confidential decisions made that can now be released into the public domain.

3.       The following decisions/documents are now publicly available:

Date

Subject

2/6/22

CONFIDENTIAL: Auckland Unitary Plan – Drury Private Plan Change Decisions

1.   Decision

2/6/22

CONFIDENTIAL: Auckland Unitary Plan – Proposed Plan Change 5 – Whenuapai

1.   Decision

 

4.       These documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:

http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

at the top left of the page, select meeting/Te hui “Planning Committee” from the drop-down tab and click “View”;

under ‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.

5.       Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary.  Planning Committee members should direct any questions to the authors of the original item.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      note the confidential decision and related information that is now publicly available:

i)        Auckland Unitary Plan – Drury Private Plan Change Decisions decision from 2 June 2022

ii)       Auckland Unitary Plan – Proposed Plan Change 5 – Whenuapai decision from 2 June 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Unitary Plan – Drury Private Plan Change Decisions decision and Auckland Unitary Plan – Proposed Plan Change 5 – Whenuapai decision from 2 June 2022 (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kalinda Iswar - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor

Authoriser

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

National Policy Statement on Urban Development - Policy Directions

File No.: CP2022/08401

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to finalise the policy directions that inform the development of the council’s Intensification Planning Instrument (IPI). The IPI is required to give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 and incorporate medium density residential standards into relevant residential zones within the Auckland Unitary Plan. The IPI must be notified for submissions by 20 August 2022. 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD) identifies Auckland as a tier 1 urban environment and Auckland Council as a tier 1 local authority.  As a tier 1 local authority, the NPS-UD requires the council to make significant changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) by August 2022 to give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD.  The council was making good progress towards giving effect to the NPS-UD within the required timeframe when fundamental changes were made to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) at the end of last year. 

3.       Those changes require the council to notify what is referred to as an Intensification Planning Instrument (IPI) – also by 20 August 2022.  The IPI must apply Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD and incorporate detailed standards (referred to as medium density residential standards or MDRS) into the AUP. The IPI has significant implications for almost every residential and many business-zoned properties in urban Auckland. Preparing the IPI is a very complex and resource-intensive exercise.

4.       The Planning Committee has considered numerous reports on the NPS-UD since August 2020. Committee members and local board chairs (or nominees) have attended multiple workshops and the Planning Committee set preliminary policy directions during 2021 and 2022 to guide how the council will give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD and apply MDRS (see Attachment A).  Since October 2021, local boards and Mana Whenua have also been involved in developing the IPI.

5.       The council made its preliminary response to the NPS-UD and the amended RMA available to the public on the Auckland Have Your Say website in April 2022. The preliminary response contained a series of maps that illustrated a possible zoning pattern to reflect the changes to the RMA and the committee’s direction-setting resolutions in July and August 2021 and March 2022.  The maps also illustrated locations where various qualifying matters (QMs) under NPS-UD Policy 4 may limit the height and/or density requirements under NPS-UD Policy 3.  A total of 7,860 items of feedback were received.

6.       As a result of the feedback and further analysis undertaken, this report seeks to finalise the council’s policy directions by:

·    confirming previous policy directions

·    amending previous policy directions

·    agreeing to some new policy directions.

This will enable staff to complete the IPI for the Planning Committee to consider at its meeting on 4 August 2022.

7.       Due to the highly compressed timeframe set for the IPI, council staff have been unable to review all of the very recent input from local boards (by way of resolutions passed in June 2022 and included as Attachment D) and Mana Whenua by the time this report was completed. However, staff will review that input and advise the committee at the meeting whether the input changes any of the recommendations in this report.

 

Ngā tūtdohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

City Centre zone

a)      confirm the principles for the application of Policy 3(a) of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 set out in resolution PLA/2022/29 (see Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to:

i)        applying special height controls that reduce the general unlimited height controls in the City Centre zone; and

ii)       elsewhere in the City Centre zone applying a 72.5 metre height control (other than in the Special Height Control areas and Precincts).

Walkable catchments of the City Centre zone, Metropolitan Centre zones and stops on Auckland’s Rapid Transit Network

b)      confirm the walkable catchments referred to in Policy 3(c) of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development as defined in resolution PLA/2021/80 (see Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to clarifying that the walkable catchment is from the edge of the City Centre zone and the edge of the Metropolitan Centre zone.

Intensification within and adjacent to Town Centre zones, Local Centre zones and Neighbourhood Centre zones

c)      confirm the principles for the application of Policy 3(d) of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development set out in resolution PLA/2022/11 (see Attachment A to the agenda report).

d)      agree to the application of a Height Variation Control to increase the heights of the following Local Centres to six storeys (21 metres) where they are surrounded by the Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone (five storeys) following the application of Policy 3(d):

i)        Albany Village

ii)       Balmoral

iii)      Botany Junction

iv)      Dawsons Road

v)      Eden Valley

vi)      Greenlane West

vii)     Greville

viii)    Grey Lynn

ix)      Kepa Road / Eastridge

x)      Lynfield

xi)      Mangere East

xii)     Meadowbank

xiii)    Meadowlands

xiv)    Ranui.

e)      agree to the application of a Height Variation Control to enable heights in Neighbourhood Centres of 16m (five storeys) where they are within the area of Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone (five storeys) following the application of Policy 3(d).

f)       note that the Height Variation Control height for Local and Neighbourhood Centres may be amended in some places by the application of qualifying matters.

Qualifying Matters

g)      confirm the qualifying matters under sections 77I and 77O of the Resource Management Act 1991 (including council-identified matters under section 77I(j) and section 77O(j)) as set out in Attachment A to the agenda report.

h)      note that staff are reviewing whether changes are required to the provisions relating to the council-identified local public views qualifying matter and that any proposed changes will be presented to the Planning Committee for endorsement on 4 August 2022.

i)        note that additional qualifying matters relating to locations with significant water supply and wastewater capacity constraints, and areas with significant stormwater disposal constraints, will be presented to the Planning Committee for endorsement on 4 August 2022.

j)        note that ongoing discussions with Mana Whenua may result in additional qualifying matters relating to sites of cultural significance being presented to the Planning Committee for endorsement on 4 August 2022.

k)      confirm the approach for the Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Business as a qualifying matter as follows:

i)        that the qualifying matter be described as the Special Character Areas Overlay

ii)       that outside walkable catchments, Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Special Character Areas Overlay – General is identified as a qualifying matter where special character values are present, being where 66% or more of individual properties score a 5 or 6

iii)      that within walkable catchments under Policy 3(c) of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020, Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Special Character Areas Overlay – General is identified as a qualifying matter where special character values are of high quality, being where 75% or more of individual properties score a 5 or 6

iv)      that Special Character Areas Overlay – Business is a qualifying matter where it was identified in the council’s preliminary response for the Intensification Planning Instrument.

l)        amend the extent of the Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Special Character Areas Overlay – General by increasing or decreasing the application of the Overlays (while not adding new areas) to respond to:

i)        feedback on council’s preliminary response for the Intensification Planning Instrument

ii)       walkable catchments where Special Character Areas – Residential and General have a significant effect on development capacity.

m)     agree to retain the height variation control within the business zones underlying the Special Character Areas Overlay – Business areas

n)      agree to amend the provisions of the Special Character Areas Overlay to accommodate greater levels of development while retaining the special character values:

i)        enable up to three dwellings per site (via the conversion of a principal dwelling into a maximum of two dwellings and one minor dwelling), and add new objectives, policies and standards to support this;

ii)       amend the provisions to provide for a limited range of non-residential activities (such as home occupations, boarding houses, dairies and restaurants), and add a new objective and policy and assessment criteria to support this;

iii)      retain existing standards to maintain and enhance special character values, but amend standards for yards and fences to be more enabling, while maintaining and enhancing special character values;

iv)      amend the application of the demolition, removal and relocation rule to individual properties based on the contribution they make to the special character values of an area as identified in the site-specific survey of the Special Character Areas Overlay.

Other matters

o)      agree to delay the implementation of the National Policy Statement Urban Development and the Medium Density Residential Standards in the Auckland Light Rail Corridor until the route and stations are announced by Government on the basis that more intensive development in the Auckland Light Rail Corridor is anticipated than is envisaged currently under the National Policy Statement Urban Development and the Medium Density Residential Standards.

p)      note that the council is required to notify variations to the following plan changes to incorporate the Medium Density Residential Standards: Private Plan Changes 49 (Drury East Precinct), 50 (Waihoehoe Precinct), 51 (Drury 2 Precinct), 59 (Albany 10 Precinct), 66 (Schnapper Rock Road), 67 (Hingaia Precinct) and the council’s Plan Change 60 (Open Space), and that the variations must be notified at the same time the council’s Intensification Planning Instrument is notified.

q)      note that finalising the text and maps for the Intensification Plan Instrument required under the Resource Management Act 1991 and completing the required section 32 analysis is a complex, resource-intensive exercise and that work on capacity modelling, economic and planning analysis is continuing and will be reported to the Planning Committee on 4 August 2022.

r)       note that companion plan changes relating to the Regional Policy Statement chapter of the Auckland Unitary Plan, various transport matters and historic heritage places and will also be reported to the Planning Committee on 4 August 2022.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

8.       The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD) identifies Auckland as a tier 1 urban environment and Auckland Council as a tier 1 local authority.  As a tier 1 local authority, the NPS-UD requires the council to make significant changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) by August 2022 to give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD.  The council was making good progress towards giving effect to the NPS-UD within the required timeframe when fundamental changes were made to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) at the end of last year.  Those changes require the council to notify what is referred to as an Intensification Planning Instrument (IPI) by 20 August 2022.  The IPI must apply Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD and incorporate detailed standards (referred to as medium density residential standards or MDRS) into the AUP. The IPI has significant implications for almost every residential and many business-zoned properties in urban Auckland. Preparing the IPI is a very complex and resource-intensive exercise.

9.       The Planning Committee has considered numerous reports from August 2020 onwards on the NPS-UD. Committee members and local board chairs (or nominees) have attended multiple workshops and the Planning Committee has set preliminary policy directions during 2021 and 2022 to guide how the council will give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD and apply the MDRS (see Attachment A).  Since October 2021, local boards and Mana Whenua have been involved in developing the IPI.


 

10.     The council made its preliminary response to the NPS-UD and the amended RMA available to the public on the Auckland Have Your Say website in April 2022. The preliminary response contained a series of maps that illustrated a possible zoning pattern to reflect changes to the RMA. The zoning pattern also reflected the committee’s direction-setting resolutions from July and August 2021 and March 2022 relating to the intensification required under Policy 3 of the NPS-UD.  Additionally, the maps illustrated locations where various qualifying matters (QMs) under Policy 4 of the NPS-UD may limit the height and/or density requirements.

11.     Feedback was received from the public from 19 April to 9 May 2022, via the AKHaveYourSay website and via an independent survey.  The council sought feedback on those matters where it has discretion to make decisions.  The council did not seek feedback on the aspects of the IPI that have been decided by the government.  The council received 7,860 items of feedback, and 2,041 people participated in the independent survey. The matters where feedback was sought fell into three main areas: 

a)      The preliminary approach to identifying walkable catchments from the edge of the city centre, from the edge of metropolitan centres and from planned and existing rapid transit stops (as required under NPS-UD Policy 3(c))

b)      The preliminary approach to identifying areas of intensification adjacent to town, local and neighbourhood centres (as required under NPS-UD Policy 3(d))

c)      The selection of, and preliminary approach to “any other matter” QMs under section 77I(i) or section 77O(j) of the RMA that would be accommodated to make the MDRS and the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 of the NPS-UD less enabling of development.

12.     This feedback, along with the ongoing involvement of local boards and Mana Whenua, has greatly assisted the council in preparing the IPI for notification by 20 August 2022.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13.     There are a number of matters that require decisions to be made by the Planning Committee so that staff can complete the IPI for notification by 20 August 2022.  As set out in the recommendations, these decisions are identified in three ways: confirmation of existing committee resolutions, amendments to existing committee resolutions, and new policy decisions.  The matters relate to the following:

a)   City Centre zone

b)   Walkable Catchments

c)   Intensification within and adjacent to Town, Local and Neighbourhood Centres

d)   Qualifying Matters

City Centre zone

Background

14.     On 31 March 2022 the Planning Committee approved a policy direction for the city centre, including the principle of removing the general building height and floor area ratio standards in the City Centre zone, and the application of alternative built form standards (resolution PLA/2022/29 – see Attachment A). Having carried out further analysis and received feedback from the Auckland Design Panel, staff now seek that the committee modifies its previous direction by retaining an unlimited height control (which is partly reduced in some places by the Special Height Area provisions) only where it currently applies in the AUP.  The proposed height controls are set out in Attachment B.


 

15.     Elsewhere sites with various building height standards are recommended to be increased up to 72.5 metres.  The 72.5 metre height aligns with the heights provided for in the Metropolitan Centre zone.  That height has been working well since the AUP was made operative in part.  The floor area ratio standards are still proposed to be removed.  QMs in the City Centre zone will continue to include sunlight and daylight access to open space, building scale amenity values, views within the zone, the relationship of the zone to the Waitematā Harbour, climate change resilience and protection of character buildings.

16.     The removal of the general height area control provisions everywhere in the City Centre zone was extensively modelled. The modelling indicates that the heights enabled would result in a potential built form that is inappropriate, when considered in the context of the anticipated city centre landscape. Inappropriate in this context means groups of disproportionate tall enclaves between the volcanic viewshafts, and walls of very high towers along Stanley Street and Symonds Street.  These have the potential to reduce legibility, create distorted transitions and cause shading and dominance on neighbouring spaces.

Recommended approach

17.     It is therefore recommended that the committee confirms the previously approved policy direction for the City Centre zone (as set out in resolution PLA/2022/29 – see Attachment A), subject to ensuring that unlimited heights for buildings are retained only where this currently applies (unless they are reduced by the Special Height Area provisions or Precincts).  Elsewhere height is recommended to be increased to a maximum building height of 72.5m. This will ensure that new buildings (not otherwise controlled by Special Height Area and Precinct height controls) would sit more comfortably in the landscape while still providing additional development capacity to maximise the benefits of intensification as required by the NPS-UD.

18.     The 72.5 metre height control will not be applied to the Special Height Area provisions.  These areas currently allow additional height up to the limits set by individual standards (such as the daylight controls to Albert Park and Aotea Square).  This will create a built form outcome which emphasises the City Centre zone as the top of the AUP centres hierarchy, retains the primacy of the core city centre area, allows for transitions to a uniform lower height further away from the city centre, but retains a cohesive City Centre zone identity and legibility.

Walkable Catchments

Background

19.     The Planning Committee approved a policy direction for walkable catchments at its July 2021 meeting as required by Policy 3(c) of the NPS-UD (resolution PLA/2021/80 - see Attachment A). The direction was to define walkable catchments as being around 1,200 metres from the edge of the City Centre zone and around 800 metres from the edge of the Metropolitan Centre zones and from Rapid Transit Stations (subject to modifying factors such as topography, severance by motorways, etc). Following this direction, walkable catchments were mapped for all of the relevant locations and the catchments were shown as part of the council’s preliminary response in April 2022.

20.     Feedback supported the walkable catchment distance of 1,200 metres from the edge of the City Centre zone with 59% of individual respondents supporting a distance of 1,200 metres or greater. 30% of respondents wanted the walkable catchments to be smaller than 1,200 metres. This sentiment was echoed by the residents’ associations of some city centre fringe suburbs such as St Marys Bay, Freemans Bay, Parnell and Grey Lynn.

21.     Feedback for walkable catchments from the edge of Metropolitan Centres also generally supported the 800 metre walkable catchment distance, with 61% of individual respondents supporting a catchment of 800 metres or greater. 23% of respondents wanted the catchment to be smaller than 800 metres.

22.     The feedback also generally supported the 800 metre walkable catchment distance from Rapid Transit Stations with 56% of individual respondents supporting a catchment of 800 metres or greater. 30% of respondents wanted the catchment to be smaller than 800 metres.

Recommended approach

23.     Based on the public feedback and the research into walkable catchments, it is recommended that the council confirm the policy direction on the extent of the walkable catchments (as set out in resolution PLA/2021/80 – see Attachment A). There was general support for the distances from public feedback and there is also evidence to show that these distances are approximately what an average person would be willing to walk to these destinations.  There needs to be a minor amendment to ensure it is clear that the walkable catchment is measured from the edge of the City Centre zone and the edge of the Metropolitan Centre zone.

24.     Council staff are reviewing feedback on specific walkable catchments (e.g. modifying factors that might affect the distance in a particular location) as well as carrying out a consistency check on the mapped catchments across the different walkable catchments in Auckland. Any changes to the edges of the walkable catchments from this work will be reported to the committee on 4 August 2022.

25.     The NPS-UD direction to enable building heights of at least six storeys within the walkable catchments will be implemented through the application of the Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone[1] for residential areas.  There will also be an increase in the height standards that apply within walkable catchments for other zones (e.g. Mixed Use zone, Town Centre zone, Local Centre zone and Neighbourhood Centre zone) and amendments to existing precinct provisions where applicable. It should be noted that building heights of at least six storeys may be reduced to accommodate QMs where present.

Intensification within and adjacent to Neighbourhood, Local and Town Centres

Background

26.     Policy 3(d) of the NPS-UD requires the council to enable building heights and densities within and ‘adjacent’ to neighbourhood, local and town centres that are ‘commensurate’ with the centre’s level of commercial activities and community services. On 3 March 2022 the Planning Committee approved a policy direction for the intensification required by Policy 3(d) (Resolution number PLA/2022/11 – see Attachment A).

27.     The committee’s direction was in two parts. The first part classified which local and town centres would be deemed to have activities and services that warrant intensification beyond that which the current AUP enables. This classification relied on three factors: the centre’s zoning hierarchy, size and catchment.

28.     The use of these three factors to determine which local and town centres merit further intensification has also resulted in a largely coherent pattern of intensification around Auckland’s local and town centres. The intensification is focussed on local and town centres in the central isthmus area, and to a lesser extent the centres in the north, south, east and west of urban Auckland. The use of these three factors results in no intensification around local and town centres near the edge of Auckland’s urban area, no intensification around centres in rural towns and settlements, and no intensification around centres on the Hauraki Gulf islands.


 

29.     The NPS-UD direction to enable building heights and densities of urban form ‘commensurate’ with the level of activities and services in the local or town centre will be implemented through the application of the Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone (five storeys) for ‘adjacent’ residential areas. The exception to this is Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zoning around the following neighbourhood centres.

a)   12 Growers Lane (near Mangere East Local Centre)153 East Tamaki Road (near Otara Town Centre)

b)   224 Kepa Road (near Kepa Road / Eastridge Local Centre)

c)   343 Onehunga Mall, 370 Onehunga Mall, 162 Trafalgar St (near Onehunga Town Centre)

d)   98 Trafalgar St, 655 Manukau Rd (near Royal Oak Town Centre)

e)   125-127 Mokoia Rd (near Birkenhead Town Centre).

This is a consequence of the close proximity of these neighbourhood centres to local and town centres that warrant some further intensification than currently enabled in the AUP.

30.     To maintain the AUP principle of intensification being concentrated most in the centres, where a local centre (four storeys) has the Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone (five storeys) applied around it, the local centre should have a Height Variation Control of 21m (six storeys) placed over it. This approach will affect the following local centres:

a)   Albany Village

b)   Balmoral

c)   Botany Junction

d)   Dawsons Road

e)   Eden Valley

f)    Greenlane West

g)   Greville

h)   Grey Lynn

i)    Kepa Road / Eastridge

j)    Lynfield

k)   Mangere East

l)    Meadowbank

m)  Meadowlands

n)   Ranui.

31.     In addition, any other Neighbourhood Centre zones within the area of Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone following the application of Policy 3(d) should have a Height Variation Control applied to increase the heights to five storeys (16m). Again, these heights may be reduced to accommodate QMs where present.

Recommended approach

32.     It is recommended that the council confirm its previously agreed policy direction on the characteristics of centres that warrant intensification on adjacent land. This is because the combination of these three factors is a good proxy for the level of activities and services in a centre. Applying these factors in conjunction with the centres in the top half of the size and catchment, results in additional intensification being enabled around Auckland’s town centres and the larger local centres (both with large catchments). No intensification (other than the application of MDRS) was proposed around smaller local centres and neighbourhood centres.

33.     It is also recommended that the council agrees to the height increases proposed for the neighbourhood and local centres listed above.

Background

34.     The second part of the council direction on 3 March 2022 was to set the parameters of what land is ‘adjacent’ to neighbourhood, local and town centres. The parameters used were a walking distance of around 200 metres for Auckland’s smaller town centres and larger local centres (with large catchments) and 400 metres for larger town centres (with large catchments). These distances were also subject to modifying factors such as topography and severance by motorways. The meaning of ‘adjacent’ states that it includes adjoining properties but goes further to include land that is ‘close by or near’. A five-minute walk is generally considered to be ‘close by or near’ and the 400 metre distance is a widely recognised threshold for a ‘five-minute walk’. The 200 metre distance is a shorter walk and is used for the smaller centres (where the level of commercial activities and community services will not be as high).

35.     Public feedback on the 400 metre extent of the intensification adjacent to Auckland’s larger town centres showed general support (55%) for a distance of around 400m or higher. 25% wanted a shorter distance applied.  Public feedback on the 200 metre extent of the intensification adjacent to Auckland’s smaller town centres and larger local centres was generally supported with 59% wanting a distance of 200m or higher. 18% of individual respondents wanted a shorter distance applied. 

Recommended approach

36.     Based on the public feedback and the background research, it is recommended that the council confirm the previously-agreed policy direction on the parameters for land that is ‘adjacent’ to these centres (around 200 metres or around 400 metres).

37.     Council staff are reviewing feedback on the proposed intensification around local and town centres (e.g. modifying factors that might affect the 200/400 metre distance in a particular location) as well as carrying out a consistency check across the various suburban centres. Any changes to the areas considered to be ‘adjacent’ to the local and town centres will be reported to the committee on 4 August 2022.

Qualifying Matters – General (excluding Special Character Areas)

Background

38.     When the NPS-UD came into force on 20 August 2020 the QMs were set out in Clause 3.32(1).  The changes that were introduced to the RMA through the Resource Management (Enabling Housing and Other Matters) Amendment Act amended the QMs set out in this clause of the NPS-UD.  The Amendment Act amended the RMA to include the qualifying matters that apply in relevant residential zones in section 77I and the qualifying matters that apply in urban non-residential zones in section 77O.

39.     Section 77I of the RMA allows the council to make the MDRS and the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 of the NPS-UD less enabling of development in relation to an area within a relevant residential zone to the extent necessary to accommodate one or more QM.

40.     Section 77O of the RMA allows the council to modify the requirements of Policy 3 in an urban non-residential zone to be less enabling of development than provided in Policy 3 to the extent necessary to accommodate one or more QM.

41.     There are specific QMs identified in these sections of the RMA.  In a similar way to the original QMs in the NPS-UD, the RMA allows the council to include “any other matter that makes higher density, as provided for by the MDRS or Policy 3, inappropriate in an area”.

42.     The AUP has been reviewed to identify QMs for Auckland that fit into section 77I or 77O of the RMA. The proposed QMs for Auckland include matters such as significant ecological areas, volcanic viewshafts, significant natural hazards, open space, gas and oil pipelines, local viewshafts and residential special character.

Extent of qualifying matters

43.     The proposed QMs have been mapped and cover many parts of urban Auckland. Some QMs are not within areas that are likely to be subject to significant levels of intensification (e.g. outstanding natural landscapes) whereas others are in places that Policy 3 of the NPS-UD seeks to enable the most intensification (e.g. volcanic viewshafts and special character areas). Many proposed QMs overlap with each other (e.g. public open space and public access to the coast, designations and provision for nationally significant infrastructure).

Effect of qualifying matters on intensification

44.     The council is required to complete a detailed evaluation under section 32 of the RMA where it determines there is one or more QM to be accommodated, and where the presence of that QM requires the council to make the MDRS or the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 less enabling of development for relevant residential zones under s77I, or to make the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 less enabling of development for urban non-residential zones under s77O.

45.     The evaluation must demonstrate why the council considers the area is subject to a QM and why it considers the QM is incompatible with:

a)   the level of development permitted by the MDRS or as provided for by Policy 3 for that area for relevant residential zones; or

b)   the level of development is incompatible with the level of development provided for by Policy 3 for that area for urban non-residential zones; and

c)   assess the impact that limiting development capacity, building height or density (as relevant) will have on the provision of development capacity; and

d)   assess the costs and broader impacts of imposing those limits.

46.     In addition, for council-identified QMs, the council must:

a)   identify the specific characteristic that makes the level of development provided by the MDRS or Policy 3 inappropriate in the area; and

b)   justify why that characteristic makes that level of development inappropriate in light of the national significance of urban development and the objectives of the NPS-UD; and

c)   include a site-specific analysis that:

(i)   identifies the site to which the matter relates; and

(ii)  evaluates the specific characteristic on a site-specific basis to determine the geographic area where intensification needs to be compatible with the specific matter; and

(iii) evaluates an appropriate range of options to achieve the greatest heights and densities permitted by the MDRS or as provided for by Policy 3 while managing the specific characteristics.

Significant long-term infrastructure constraints

47.     In July 2021, the Planning Committee resolved that areas with significant long-term infrastructure constraints should be considered for investigation as a ‘council identified’ QM. Feedback on the council’s preliminary response indicates considerable support for the identification of significant infrastructure constraints as a QM, with 70% of individual responses and 43% of organisational responses indicating support. 17% of individual responses and 19% of organisational responses did not support the identification of significant infrastructure constraints as a QM.

48.     Investigation has been carried out by Auckland Transport, Healthy Waters and Watercare in relation to areas where there are identified transport, water supply, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure constraints and how these could be incorporated into the AUP as QMs. As discussed at the Planning Committee workshop on 8 June 2022, Healthy Waters and Watercare have identified qualifying matters that relate to stormwater, water supply, wastewater.

49.     Due to the nature of the statutory requirements for council-identified QMs, Auckland Transport has recommended that the council pursue alternative mechanisms rather than applying a QM, by amending the provisions within the AUP to address the potential effects of larger-scale residential developments on the transport network. This includes additional assessment criteria within the residential zones, amending the transport chapter of the AUP and retaining transport-related provisions for specific precincts.

50.     The details of the stormwater, water supply and wastewater QMs and the new transport provisions are still being worked through and will be reported to the Planning Committee at the meeting on 4 August 2022.

Recommended approach

51.     Feedback on the council-identified Special Character Areas QM is discussed in the following section of the report. With respect to the other council-identified QMs such as local viewshafts, Stockade Hill viewshaft, Auckland War Memorial Museum viewshaft, notable trees and urban design controls in the city centre, these all received high levels of support in the feedback on the preliminary response and are recommended to continue as QMs. With respect to the local public views council-identified qualifying matter, as discussed at the Planning Committee workshop on 22 June 2022, staff are investigating some changes to the provisions. Any changes will be reported to the Planning Committee at the meeting on 4 August 2022.

52.     The committee’s previous resolutions relating to QMs were passed in the context of the NPS-UD as originally drafted, and before the changes were made to the RMA requiring the preparation of an IPI. It is therefore recommended that the council confirms those QMs for the purpose of inclusion in the IPI.

Qualifying Matters – Special Character Areas

Background - Special Character Areas: Residential and Business

53.     In July 2021 the committee resolved that Special Character Areas that are of ‘high quality’ should be a QM under the NPS-UD (resolution PLA/2021/80(i)).

54.     A site-specific analysis of the Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Business (Special Character Overlay) has been undertaken to determine where special character should be identified as a QM. Identification is based on the following thresholds:

a)   Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Special Character Areas Overlay – General (SCA Residential) – outside walkable catchments – where special character values are present

Being where 66% or more individual properties score a 5 or 6.

b)   SCA Residential – within walkable catchments – where special character values are of a high quality

Being where 75% or more of individual properties score a 5 or 6

c)   Special Character Areas – Business – areas that continue to exhibit the special character values identified in Schedule 15 of the Unitary Plan.

55.     This approach to the Special Character Overlay was endorsed by the committee as part of the council’s preliminary response resolution PLA/2022/31 at Attachment A.

56.     There are two lenses required to determine Special Character as a qualifying matter – a technical assessment to determine the extent to which special character values have been retained; and then a planning lens to determine the final extent of special character, taking into account the impact on development capacity and the intent of the legislation.

57.     Feedback on the council’s preliminary response supports the identification of special character areas as a QM, with 72% of individual responses offering support[2]. Feedback variously supported more special character areas, less areas, and/or different areas being identified as a QM. Some feedback did not support the identification of special character areas as a QM.

Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential

Spatial extent - general

58.     Feedback on the spatial extent in the preliminary response showed 65% support for SCA Residential to be identified as a QM from individual responses. Of the responses, 23% supported the areas as identified, 42% wanted more areas, 7% wanted less areas, and 14% wanted no areas of SCA Residential to be identified as a QM.

59.     Response to the feedback resulted in further analysis of the spatial extent of the SCA Residential identified as a QM.  In particular, field survey work has been undertaken in some areas where the initial survey was desktop-based. While there was some change to the scores (and contribution) of those individual properties resurveyed, there was minimal change in overall scores for areas and, importantly, no areas moved above the 66% or 75% QM threshold.

60.     Further analysis of the spatial extent of the overlay is ongoing in response to feedback, including from specific residents’ associations, area-based organisations and other interest groups. This work may give rise to further amendments to the spatial extent of the SCA Residential by either increasing or decreasing the extent that was identified in the maps accompanying Council’s Preliminary Draft Response. No new areas will be identified as part of the QM for the purposes of the IPI.

61.     Some of the feedback from Aucklanders and elected members requested inclusion of properties scoring 4 out of 6.  Staff advice is as follows:

·   From a technical perspective, properties scoring 4 contribute or support the overall character of an area and could reduce the fragmentation of the overlay in some areas;

·   The addition of 4s will reduce the cohesiveness of the technical assessment and it will therefore be more open to challenge through the hearings process;

·   There is significant variability in the quality of the 4s across the region and therefore a blanket approach is not appropriate.  Therefore, an area-by-area assessment is required to determine whether or not they should be retained;

·   If all 4s outside walkable catchments were retained, that would mean an additional ~1400 sites.

62.     Overall, taking into account both a technical and planning assessment, it is recommended that 4s are not included for retention as a Special Character Area Qualifying Matter. 

Recommended approach

63.     Overall, it is therefore recommended that the thresholds for SCA Residential presented to Planning Committee on 31 March 2022 be confirmed, being areas where special character values are present (66%) outside walkable catchments and areas where special character values are high quality (75%) within walkable catchments. These thresholds will be the basis for the overlay as a QM in the IPI.

Spatial extent – walkable catchments

64.     Within Policy 3(c) of the NPS-UD, walkable catchments, the identification of the SCA Residential as a QM will affect development capacity enabled by Policy 3 of the NPS UD. For some walkable catchments, this is significant, with some SCA Residential areas covering at least ten hectares of land within a walkable catchment.

65.     In July 2021 the committee resolved to use a combination of planning assessment and special character values assessment to rezone some properties within the overlay to enable building heights of up to six storeys or more where a significant effects on development capacity occurred. Further analysis of the extent of the SCA Residential as a QM within walkable catchments is being undertaken.

66.     The boundaries of the walkable catchments are also being reviewed following feedback on council’s preliminary response. Changes to the walkable catchments may require consequential changes to the spatial extent of the SCA Residential, where an area or sub-area changes from being within a walkable catchment or outside a walkable catchment.

Recommended approach

67.     It is recommended that the council amend the extent of Special Character Areas Overlay in walkable catchments where it will have a significant effect on development capacity.

Light Rail Corridor

68.     Planning is underway for the City Centre to Māngere light rail, following the Government announcing its commitment to progress the project. The light rail project will see new rapid transit stations introduced in the Auckland isthmus, Māngere and airport areas.  The specific route and stations for light rail will not be confirmed until 2023.  It is clear that these factors have a significant bearing on the intensification of the area and will affect the land use expectations and community outcomes in the corridor for decades to come.

69.     Council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD and the MDRS identified the area known as the Light Rail Corridor, (which covers indicative route options for Auckland Light Rail from the city centre to Māngere) as ‘under investigation’ because the specific route and stations for light rail have not been confirmed and more work is required along the corridor.

70.     Significant intensification is envisaged including taller buildings and higher housing densities, along a specific route and around specific stations along the route, compared with the provisions under the NPS-UD and MDRS.

71.     A specific plan change to enable the expected intensification will be required once the route and stations are confirmed.  If council implemented the NPS-UD and MDRS now, this would require council and communities to spend millions of dollars and duplication of effort responding to two different land use scenarios within a couple of years of each other.

72.     It is recommended that council delay the implementation of the NPS-UD and MDRS in the Auckland Light Rail corridor until Government announces the route and station locations, in order to reduce duplication and cost, ensure the right land use outcomes will be enabled in the right places and to minimise confusion, cost and disruption for communities.

Recommended approach

73.     It is recommended that within the identified Auckland Light Rail corridor, council agree to delay implementation of the NPS-UD and MDRS until the route and stations are confirmed.

Special Character Areas Overlay – Business

Spatial extent

74.     The site-specific analysis identified 17 SCA Business areas as a QM. These areas were endorsed by the committee on 31 March 2022 for the purposes of the council’s preliminary response.  Feedback on the preliminary response showed 51% support for SCA Business to be identified as a QM from individual responses. Of the responses, 28% supported the areas as identified, 23% wanted more areas, 5% wanted less areas, and 13% wanted none.  Analysis of the feedback has not resulted in any proposed change to the extent of the SCA Business areas.

Recommended approach

75.     It is recommended that these areas be confirmed as a QM in the IPI.

Height

76.     Following analysis of the values of SCA Business, the outcome of enabling the heights set out by Policy 3 of the NPS UD was found to result in a potential built form which will adversely affect the special character values of some of these areas.  There are 17 SCA Business areas identified as a QM. Eleven are within AUP centre zones (neighbourhood centre, local centre and town centre zones) and six areas are within Policy 3(c) of the NPS-UD walkable catchments.

77.     The predominant built form of the SCA Business is one- to two-storey development. This consistency of height is an important architectural feature within these areas, evidencing original development patterns, and is a key contributor to the special character values of the areas.

78.     For the areas within centre zones[3], Policy 3(d) of the NPS-UD enables building heights and density of urban form commensurate with the level of commercial activity and community services. The height variation control (HVC)[4] within these areas is currently up to 13m (three storeys) and this height is proposed to be retained, as it is commensurate.

79.     Of the six SCA Business areas within walkable catchments, one, Newmarket, does not restrict height. There is no HVC applied to the Newmarket SCA Business - it is subject to the height of the underlying Metropolitan Centre zone, being 72.5m. The Newmarket SCA Business area enables Policy 3 of the NPS UD, although it is noted that other QMs limit height in this location[5].  The Upper Symonds Street SCA Business area has a HVC of 18m, allowing for up to five storeys. The Eden Valley, Kingsland, Ponsonby Road and Parnell SCA Business areas have a HVC of 13m, enabling development of up to three storeys.

80.     The HVC applying to SCA Business areas have been working well since the AUP was made operative. Some development within SCA Business areas has occurred above the HVC through a resource consent process.  This allows consideration of height and design elements, with reference to the particular values of the special character area where the development is occurring. 

Recommended approach

81.     It is recommended that the council agree to retain the current AUP HVC in SCA Business. Therefore this is an amendment to its previous position which was to remove any HVCs.. This would ensure that new buildings and additions to buildings within SCA Business areas that breach the HVC are subject to an appropriate level of assessment under the AUP and the special character values will be maintained and enhanced.

Amendments to Special Character Areas Overlay provisions – Residential and Business

82.     The provisions of the Special Character Areas Overlay are being amended to give effect to Policy 3 of the NPS-UD and the incorporation of MDRS into relevant residential zones while accommodating the Special Character Areas Overlay as a QM. Proposed amendments will:

a)      enable up to three dwellings per site (via the conversion of a principal dwelling into a maximum of two dwellings and one minor dwelling), and add new objectives, policies and standards to support this

b)      amend the provisions to provide for a limited range of non-residential activities (such as home occupations, boarding houses, dairies and restaurants), and add a new objective and policy and assessment criteria to support this

c)      retain existing standards to maintain and enhance special character values, but amend standards for yards and fences to be more enabling, while maintaining and enhancing special character values

d)      amend the application of the demolition, removal and relocation rule[6] to individual properties based on the contribution they make to the special character values of an area as identified in the site-specific survey of the Special Character Areas Overlay.

83.     It is recommended that the council agree to amend the provisions of the Special Character Areas Overlay to accommodate greater levels of development while retaining the special character values.

Residential and Business Zones

Background

84. To give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD and incorporate MDRS, significant changes are required to the residential and business chapters of the AUP (along with consequential changes to the definitions and subdivision chapter). The changes involve:

a)   incorporating the MDRS into the relevant residential zones

b)   giving effect to Policy 3(c) of the NPS-UD by enabling at least six storey development in specified locations identified as being in walkable catchments

c)   giving effect to Policy 3(d) by enabling densities and heights commensurate to the level of commercial activities and community services in areas within and adjacent to neighbourhood, local and town centre zones

d)   making consequential changes as necessary to support the implementation of the changes to the RMA

Incorporation of Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS)

85.     The RMA now requires the council to notify an IPI that incorporates MDRS into relevant residential zones as defined in section 2 of the RMA. This includes the objectives, policies and density standards set out in Schedule 3A of the RMA. In incorporating MDRS the council is also required to consider any related provisions and QMs that may exempt or make MDRS less enabling of development in certain locations.

86.     The MDRS requirements enable three houses (of up to three storeys) to be built as a permitted activity if they are in accordance with MDRS. This includes alterations to existing buildings.

87.     In giving effect to Policy 3(c) and 3(d) of the NPS-UD and incorporating MDRS into relevant residential zones, the council’s IPI:

·   must include a number of mandatory objectives and policies; and

·   may make the MDRS and the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 less enabling of development in relation to an area within a relevant residential zone only to the extent necessary to accommodate one or more of the QMs set out in the RMA and the NPS-UD.

88.     Staff are finalising the complex task of incorporating MDRS into the relevant residential zones in the AUP. A summary of how this is proposed to be achieved is set out in Attachment C.


 

Introduction of the Low Density Residential Zone

89.     The RMA now requires every relevant residential zone in the AUP to incorporate MDRS. This makes it impossible to retain the Single House zone and Mixed Housing Suburban zones in anything like their current form, other than where these zones apply in rural settlements with a population of less than 5,000 at the 2018 census[7]. However, section 77I of the RMA provides that the council may make the MDRS and the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 less enabling of development in relation to an area within a relevant residential zone to accommodate one or more QMs.

90.     A new Low Density Residential zone has been developed to ensure a lower intensity of development than MDRS and limit levels of redevelopment in reliance on one or more QMs.  This zoning is proposed to be applied to residential sites where a lower density of residential development is required to provide for the QM that applies to the site.

91.     The new zone has been developed to apply to the following:

a)   neighbourhoods where special character is a QM

b)   coastal sites where there is the risk of coastal erosion 

c)   sites that are subject to significant risks from natural hazards (such as flooding or coastal inundation)

d)   sites containing substantial significant ecological areas

e)   sites subject to outstanding natural features, outstanding natural landscapes and area of high natural character areas

f)    natural stream management areas (but only where the Natural Stream Management Overlay coincides with a stream requiring a riparian yard).

92.     Further information on the application of this zone will be discussed at the Planning Committee workshop on 6 July 2022.

Precincts in the Auckland Unitary Plan

93.     There are 190 precincts in the AUP. Precincts enable local differences to be recognised by providing detailed place-based provisions that can vary the use and built form outcomes enabled by the underlying zone or Auckland-wide provisions. Precincts can be more restrictive or more enabling than the zone (or zones) to which they apply. Many of the AUP precincts have been the subject of extensive community involvement over many years, plan changes to the AUP or the legacy district plans and in a number of cases, Environment Court and High Court hearings and decisions.

94.     Council staff have analysed all precincts that are located in the urban environment. There are 161 of these precincts. The analysis has identified whether or not they are affected by the requirement to give effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD and to incorporate MDRS into the relevant residential zones, and specifically whether they have provisions that protect government or council identified QMs.

95.     What this means is that where a precinct includes provisions that are restrictive with regard to building height or density requirements, and the council has identified an applicable QM that is to be accommodated to make the MDRS and/or the relevant building height or density requirements under Policy 3 less enabling of development, the more restrictive provisions will be retained or amended to retain the precinct values. Where a precinct manages height and/or density but does not contain applicable QMs that need to be accommodated, the restrictive provisions will be removed, in whole or in part.

96.     It is an almost impossible task to complete this work with a high degree of accuracy by 20 August 2022. This is a significant risk that was highlighted in the council’s submission on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.

Variations to Plan Changes

97.     There are six privately initiated plan changes and one council-initiated plan change that are required to have variations publicly notified at the same time as the IPI.  These variations are required to incorporate the MDRS into the original plan changes.  This will ensure that the provisions applicable to the land correctly incorporate the MDRS and accommodate any QMs that are located within the plan change area.  

98.     The private plan changes that are required to be varied are Plan Changes 49 (Drury East Precinct), 50 (Waihoehoe Precinct), 51 (Drury 2 Precinct), 59 (Albany 10 Precinct), 66 (Schnapper Rock Road), 67 (Hingaia Precinct).  The council plan change that is required to be varied is Plan Change 60 (Open Space).  Approval to notify these variations will be sought on 4 August 2022. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

99.     Objective 8 and Policy 1 of the NPS-UD set out a policy framework that signals the need for decisions under the RMA to reduce emissions and improve climate resilience.

100.   This framework is in line with the 'built environment' priority of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan, which has a goal of achieving "A low carbon, resilient built environment that promotes healthy, low impact lifestyles". The plan recognises that:

"To move to a low carbon and resilient region, climate change and hazard risks need to be integral to the planning system that shapes Auckland. Integrating land-use and transport planning is vital to reduce the need for private vehicle travel and to ensure housing and employment growth areas are connected to efficient, low carbon transport systems."

101.   Giving effect to Policies 3 and 4 of the NPS-UD in the IPI will enable additional residential intensification to occur in areas where jobs, services and amenities can be easily accessed by active modes and public transport. This will contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the more efficient use of land will reduce growth pressures in areas more susceptible to the effects of climate change.

102.   In some places, incorporating the MDRS into relevant residential zones will also achieve this outcome. However, a key aspect of the council’s submission on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill was that enabling three-storey medium density housing across all of Auckland’s urban environment is likely to result in a greater number of people living in areas where it is extremely difficult to provide a high level of public transport service.

103.   With respect to avoiding risks from natural hazards associated with climate change, QMs relating to flooding, coastal erosion and coastal inundation have been identified to ensure intensification does not occur in hazardous areas (as set out in Attachment A).

104.   Overall, while the Government’s policy framework seeks to reduce emissions and improve climate resilience, council’s view is that the current policy settings will not obviously enable a compact, quality land use pattern or the desired climate outcomes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

105.   All relevant council departments and Council Controlled Organisations have been actively involved in preparing the IPI. Among other things, this has resulted in the identification of various qualifying matters (e.g. those relating to significant infrastructure constraints) and the development of transport-related provisions to include in a companion plan change to the IPI.

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

Local impacts and local board views

106.   Local boards were briefed in October and November 2021 on the implications of the NPS-UD and local board chairs were invited to the series of Planning Committee workshops run in 2021 and 2022. Local boards also received briefings on the council’s preliminary response and the feedback received in March and May 2022.

107.   Due to the highly compressed timeframe set for the IPI, council staff have been unable to review the very recent input from local boards (by way of resolutions passed in June 2022 and included as Attachment D) and Mana Whenua by the time this report was completed. However, staff  will review that input and advise the committee at the meeting whether the input changes any of the recommendations in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

108.   Auckland Council has legal obligations to consult with Māori on matters that may affect them. This is a specific requirement under the RMA, and also more broadly in accordance with the council’s Māori Outcomes Framework, Significance and Engagement Policy and Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations. The council must also comply with Clause 3(1)(d) and 3B (of Schedule 1) of the RMA consultation and the clause 4A (of Schedule 1) pre-notification requirements concerning iwi authorities.

109.   The widespread intensification enabled by the NPS-UD has the potential to affect Māori both negatively and positively. This includes with respect to culturally significant sites and landscapes, Treaty Settlement redress land, the urban form as it reflects mātauranga Māori, and Māori facilities where customs and traditions are observed (such as marae).

110.   The relevant QMs set out in sections 77I and 77O of the RMA include matters of national importance that decision-makers are required to recognise and provide for under section 6 of the RMA, and matters necessary to implement, or to ensure consistency with, iwi participation legislation.  The provisions of the NPS-UD have wide-reaching implications for how the urban environment could develop in the future. As a result of the breadth of these implications, considerable engagement has been undertaken with both Mana Whenua and mataawaka to inform this work.

111.   The advice of Mana Whenua representatives has been extensive and is summarised in Attachment E. This attachment also includes the responses being recommended and further developed by the staff at this time.

112.   Mataawaka feedback has been more focussed on the extent to which intensification adjacent to existing marae and other cultural facilities would impact on their taonga. The feedback received is that intensification would have limited effects on the use of these sites for cultural activities. In one instance where boundary issues with existing residences have historically arisen, this has been successfully managed through a resource consenting process.      

113.   The removal of on-site carparking, in combination with proposed changes to parking strategy, has been raised as a particular concern for those whānau members living with limited mobility or with large households. While the removal of the on-site carparking provisions is beyond the council’s control, other concerns of Mana Whenua are being addressed through the proposed transport plan change discussed in this report.

114.   The widespread application of MDRS brings with it particular effects for Māori. Scheduled Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua are a government-identified qualifying matter under section 6(e) of the RMA.

115.   An evaluation of all existing scheduled sites in the urban environment has identified limited effects due to a combination of their current zoning and overlay controls, the presence of existing infrastructure and development, or by potential effects on these sites being managed by other QMs. Sites scheduled as urupā have been raised as a particular concern given their cultural incompatibility with residential activities.

116.   Unscheduled cultural heritage sites are a common concern. Where these are known and a sufficient level of evidence exists, they are being responded to as identified in Attachment E. Information continues to be provided by Mana Whenua representatives to support this assessment.

117.   The protection of Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas has been of particular importance to Mana Whenua as an important part of the cultural landscape. Retaining protections for significant ecological areas, outstanding natural landscapes, coastal areas of high and outstanding natural character and ridgeline protection areas have also been identified as being culturally important. These matters are proposed to be protected as QMs.

118.   The ability for infrastructure to appropriately manage ancestral water is a central issue for iwi and hapū, as is ensuring that development does not exacerbate flooding within the region. QMs are proposed to address these matters and these are strongly supported by Mana Whenua representatives.

119.   A full range of the matters raised by Mana Whenua and how they are currently being responded to is included as Attachment E. This table is currently with Mana Whenua for feedback/endorsement and further comment from iwi and hapū continues to be received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

120.   Work on the NPS-UD since August 2020, and on the IPI since December 2021, has been progressing within existing budgets. However, the passing of the Resource Management (Enabling Housing and Supply) Amendment Act 2021 has resulted in a significant increase in the scale and complexity of the work to be undertaken, without any changes to the NPS-UD implementation timeframes (with the deadline remaining at 20 August 2022). This has required a greater than anticipated level of change to the AUP.

121.   The financial implications of the IPI will be significant and will affect the current 2021-2022 and the 2022-2023 financial year, and potentially the following year. While additional costs in the current financial year have been met through a re-prioritisation of work programmes within the Chief Planning Office, further costs (primarily relating to the appointment and operation of an independent hearings panel to hear the submissions on the IPI and make recommendations to Council, and engagement of specialists to support the Council at the IPI hearings throughout 2023) may require re-prioritisation of other work programmes from across the organisation. Planning for the 2022-2023 financial year is currently underway, however any implications will be of a scale that will not affect the council’s overall financial position.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

122.   Central government has set a deadline of 20 August 2022. As a result of the scale and complexity of the remaining work required to be completed over the coming weeks, there is a very real risk to the quality of the IPI at notification.  An example of this is the work required around precincts as identified above. This risk is being mitigated by maximising the resources allocated to the project, staff working greater than normal working hours and a strong approach to project management and integration between the multiple workstreams involved in preparing the IPI.

123.   There is also a risk that when the IPI is notified, Aucklanders are confused about what is within scope and out of scope for change through submissions. Many areas of concerns are likely to be out of scope as they have already been decided by central government. This risk will be mitigated by a clear communications campaign in the lead-up to and during the submission period.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

124.   Staff are working to complete the IPI, companion plan changes dealing with the Regional Policy Statement chapter of the AUP, transport, historic heritage, variations to existing plan changes, and the required evaluation reports under section 32 of the RMA in time for the Planning Committee to make final decisions on 4 August 2022. This will ensure the council is able to notify the IPI for submissions by 20 August 2022. A workshop is scheduled for 6 July 2022 to update the Planning Committee on changes to the preliminary response maps as a result of the policy directions recommended in this report (if supported) and ongoing technical analysis and review. 

125.   Public notification is the beginning of formal submissions and hearings of those submissions by the Independent Hearings Panel appointed by the Regulatory Committee. The Independent Hearings Panel will hear the submissions and make recommendations to the council next year.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

National Policy Statement on Urban Development Planning Committee Resolutions

203

b

City Centre Height Control Maps

211

c

Summary of Proposed Changes to the Residential and Business Zones and Subdivision Chapter of the Auckland Unitary Plan

213

d

Local Board Feedback on NPS-UD June 2022

217

e

Whakarāpopoto for Mana Whenua Engagement

287

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Eryn Shields - Team Leader  Regional, North West and Islands

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Authoriser

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Text

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

A screenshot of a computer

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Diagram, engineering drawing

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Graphical user interface, text, application

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, text, Word

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

A picture containing text

Description automatically generated

Background pattern

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text, table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

A picture containing shape

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

A picture containing table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

A picture containing calendar

Description automatically generated

 


 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

A picture containing logo

Description automatically generated

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

That the Planning Committee

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

C1       Make a decision on Auckland Unitary Plan provisions for land in Albany (Covering report)

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(g) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.

In particular, the report contains legal advice.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Item 6.1      Attachment a    Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on National Policy Statement on Urban Development     Page 305

Item 6.7      Attachment a    Ōrākei Local Board feedback on the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 and RMA amendments 2021 - Council’s preliminary response Page 309

Item 6.9      Attachment a    Waitemata Local Board feedback on National Policy Statement on Urban Development                Page 339


Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 





Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator



Planning Committee

30 June 2022

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator



[1] The height standard in the Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone is generally five storeys. This standard will need to be amended to six storeys for sites within walkable catchments.

[2] Of individual feedback responses, 42% supported special character areas being a qualifying matter as identified in the preliminary response, while 30% supported all special character areas identified in the Unitary Plan being a qualifying matter.

[3] Balmoral Shopping Centre, Howick, Helensville, Sandringham, Devonport, Grey Lynn, West Lynn, Lower Hinemoa Street, Mount Eden Village, Onehunga, Otahuhu

[4] The HVC is a tool used in the Unitary Plan to amend height above or below the standard zone height where appropriate. For SCA Business, the HVC may reduce building height below the standard zone height, where the standard height would have significant adverse effects on identified special character values.

[5] Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Areas Overlay (Mount Eden)

[6] Unitary Plan, Table D18.4.1 Activity table, Rule A3

[7] The council is note required to apply MDRS to residential zones that apply in locations with a population of less than 5,000 at the 2018 census.