|
Resolution
number FR/2023/23
MOVED by Member M Bell, seconded by Member A Kay:
That
the Franklin Local Board:
a) notes
the Urgent Decision of 2 February 2023, which provided the following feedback to the Auckland Council Governing Body on the
Government’s Resource Management system reform amendment proposal:
Purpose and
related provisions
i) support in
principle the purpose and related provisions
ii) note that the
interpretation of wellbeing is best made at the local level, which is
anticipated by the exposure draft as being informed regionally.
iii) suggest that this may
be problematic in the Auckland context as urban wellbeing priorities may not
align with and be prioritised over the well-being of those in rural Auckland.
Environmental
limits
iv) support a precautionary
approach to environmental limits (minimum state or the maximum allowable harm
of stress permitted) are required for air; biodiversity, habitats, and
ecosystems; coastal waters; estuaries; freshwater; and soil.
v) note that these
limits could be different for different locations or circumstances and
suggest that localised naturally occurring variances must be considered and
accommodated through the National Policy Framework or through Natural and
Built Environment Plans.
Key clauses
for the National Planning Framework
vi) support
in principle replacing existing forms of national direction with a National
Planning Framework, including combining existing functions and powers on the
basis that this will provide integrated direction on matters of national
significance or where consistency nationally or across parts of New Zealand
would be desirable
vii) suggest the National Policy
Framework should anticipate conflicts relating to the environmental
aspirations versus community well-being priorities and values and that the
National Planning Framework should have sufficient flexibility to support
local well-being priorities and variation
viii) agree that the National Planning
Framework should provide opportunities for early engagement with
decision-makers, including local government (including local boards in the
Auckland context) and that any engagement timeframes and processes for
engagement should accommodate the Auckland Council shared governance
structure.
Key clauses
for the Natural and Built Environments Plans
ix) note that the exposure
draft proposes a Panel’s approach to plan preparation i.e. permanent
bodies made up of one member from each local authority of the region, a
number of mana whenua representatives, and one representative of the Minister
of Conservation reflecting their interests in relation to the Coastal Marine
Area. The board suggests that in the Auckland context this Panel should
include accommodate representation from local boards to reflect the varying
needs of the Auckland region, including a rural balance with urban interests.
x) The
natural and built environment plan proposes to expand the permitted activity
class so that plan makers may draft permitted activity rules in a way that
requires affected party approval and/or cultural values assessments. There
are a range of everyday farming activities that depend on the certainty
created by permitted activities. The requirement for a person or party to
have to obtain affected party approval or a cultural values assessment for
any permitted activity will create significant uncertainty, inefficiency and
cost. The current permitted activity class should be retained as currently
defined in the RMA
xi) That
Regional Spatial strategies map ‘Productive rural land use’ and
should not specify individual types of land use e.g. vegetable cropping and
pasture as these swap at times with the growers.
System
efficiencies
xii) support the principle of
improved efficiency and complexity. The select committee is invited to add to
this list and council could provide suggestions as part of its submission.
CARRIED
|
