|
Policy and Planning Committee
22 May 2025
|
|
Auckland
Unitary Plan – Proposed Plan Change 78 – Decisions on Independent
Hearing Panel recommendations for City Centre
File No.: CP2025/09592
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
seek Auckland Council (council) decisions on the Independent Hearings Panel
(IHP) recommendations on the City Centre provisions in proposed Plan Change 78:
Intensification, and a direction to staff to undertake the necessary steps to
make the provisions operative for the IHP recommendations that are accepted by
the council.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
Legislative context
2. On
18 August 2022, Auckland Council publicly notified Plan Change 78:
Intensification (PC78), its Intensification Planning Instrument (IPI). PC78
gives effect to Policy 3 of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development
(NPS-UD) by enabling greater levels of intensification than already enabled in
the Auckland Unitary Plan, and incorporating medium density residential
standards (MDRS) into most residential zones. The IPI also gives effect to
policy 4 of the NPS-UD. Policy 4 allows councils to restrict the level of
intensification that would otherwise be required by applying “qualifying
matters” (QMs).
3. The
City Centre provisions are an important element of PC78. The provisions give
effect to Policy 3(a) of the NPS-UD, which requires the council to enable
“building heights and density of urban form to realise as much
development capacity as possible, to maximise benefits of
intensification”. The City Centre provisions do this in
a number of ways, the most significant of which being through the proposed
deletion of long-standing “floor area ratio” controls (that limit
the total amount of floor area permitted on a site) and significantly
increasing the height controls that apply across the different parts of the
City Centre.
4. In
March 2023, the council appointed an Independent Hearings Panel (IHP) to hear the submissions on PC78 and to make recommendations
to the council. The members of the IHP have expertise in resource management
law, planning, urban design, heritage and Te Ao Māori.
5. The
hearings before the IHP on the PC78 City Centre provisions occurred during 2024
(20 February – 7 March 2024 for most City Centre matters, and 21-29
August 2024 for City Centre Outstanding Matters).
6. On
17 March 2025, a new Ministerial direction came into force from the Minister
Responsible for RMA Reform (the Minister): the Resource
Management (Direction for the Intensification Streamlined Planning Process to
Auckland Council) Amendment Direction 2025. The council was directed to
publicly notify its decisions on the IHP's recommendations on the parts of PC78
that are subject to Policy 3(a) of the National Policy Statement on Urban
Development 2020 (the City Centre provisions) no later than 30 May 2025.
IHP recommendations process
7. The
IHP provided its recommendations to the council on PC78 for the City Centre
provisions on 8 May 2025.
8. The
IHP Recommendation Report and appendices are available at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=140.
9. A
summary of the IHP recommendations, excerpted from the IHP Recommendation
Report, is attached as Attachment A.
10. The council
is required to make decisions on the IHP recommendations. The council must
decide whether to accept or reject each recommendation of the IHP. For any
recommendation of the IHP that the council rejects, the council must give
reasons for the rejection and the council can provide an
alternative recommendation.
11. For
any IHP recommendations that the council rejects, the council will need to
refer those rejected recommendations, together with the reasons for rejection
and any alternative recommendation to the Minister. The Minister will then
consider the IHP recommendation and the council’s alternative
recommendation and make a decision.
12. For any IHP
recommendations that the council accepts, when the council notifies its
decisions, the council will also advise the date on which the City Centre
provisions will be made operative in accordance with clause 20 and clause 102
of Schedule 1 of the RMA.
IHP recommendations content
13. The
IHP Recommendation Report supported most of the council’s proposed City
Centre provisions, in particular the proposed deletion of long-standing
“floor area ratio” controls (that limit the total amount of floor
area permitted on a site) and the proposed significant increases the height
controls that apply across the different parts of the City Centre (see
Attachment B).
14. Where
the IHP recommended provisions which differed from the council’s position
at the hearings, these have been carefully assessed by staff. Staff consider
that they do not raise any fundamental concerns and should be accepted.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Policy and Planning
Committee:
a) whiwhi
/ receive the report “Auckland Unitary Plan – Proposed Plan Change
78 – Decisions on Independent Hearing Panel recommendations for City Centre”.
b) whakaae / accept all recommendations of the Independent Hearings
Panel on the City Centre provisions in proposed Plan Change 78: Intensification
and adopt the reasons in the Independent Hearings Panel Recommendation Report.
c) whakaae
/ approve the notification by 30 May 2025 of the council’s
decisions on the Independent Hearings Panel
recommendations on the City Centre provisions in Plan Change78:
Intensification, in accordance with the Resource Management
(Direction for the Intensification Streamlined Planning Process to Auckland
Council) Amendment Direction 2025.
d) whakaae
/ note that on public notification under:
i) clause
103(2) (if all Independent Hearings Panel recommendations are accepted); or
ii) clause
104(2) (if some Independent Hearings Panel recommendations are accepted)
of Schedule 1 of the RMA, the
recommendations of the IHP that are accepted by the council are incorporated
into the Auckland Unitary Plan and are deemed approved under clause 17(1),
Schedule 1 and become operative (as per the date stated in the notification) in
accordance with clause 20, Schedule 1 of the RMA.
e) tono / request staff to undertake the necessary steps to make the
City Centre provisions operative, for all accepted Independent Hearings Panel
recommendations, by setting out the date that these provisions will be made
operative when publicly notifying the council’s decisions on the
Independent Hearings Panel recommendations on the City Centre provisions.
Horopaki
Context
Legislative and policy context
15. The National
Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD), amended May 2022, sets out
the requirements for territorial authorities to provide development capacity
and well-functioning urban environments that enable all people and communities
to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing, and for their
health and safety, now and into the future.
16. The Resource
Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021 set
out the process that councils must follow to give effect to the NPS-UD and
incorporate medium density residential standards (MDRS) into relevant
residential zones in their district plans through the use of an Intensification
Planning Instrument (IPI).
17. NPS-UD Policy
3(a) and Policy 4 are relevant to the City Centre. There are no relevant
residential zones in the City Centre into which MDRS must be incorporated.
18. Policy 3(a)
of the NPS-UD requires that:
Policy 3: In relation to tier 1 urban environments, regional
policy statements and district plans enable:
(a) in City Centre zones, building heights and density of
urban form to realise as much development capacity as possible, to maximise
benefits of intensification.
19. The council
notified its IPI, Plan Change 78: Intensification (PC78) to the Auckland
Unitary Plan (AUP), on 18 August 2022.
20. The Resource Management (Direction for the Intensification
Streamlined Planning Process to Auckland Council) Amendment Direction 2025 came
into force on 17 March 2025 and directed that the council must notify
its decisions on the IHP recommendations on the parts of PC78 that are subject
to Policy 3(a) of the NPS-UD (the City Centre provisions), in accordance with
clause 102 of Schedule 1 of the RMA, no later than 30 May 2025.
City Centre context
21. The City
Centre includes the Business – City Centre Zone, 15 precincts (with 11 of these precincts including provisions relevant to
giving effect to the NPS-UD), and those parts of overlays, controls and
designations which apply within the spatial extent of the City Centre.
22. For PC78, the
parts of the City Centre which are located in the Coastal Marine Area (CMA) are
not included, as the NPS-UD does not apply to the CMA.
Figure 1: City
Centre Zone and boundary
Figure 2: City
Centre precincts
PC78 City Centre hearings
23. In
March 2023, the council appointed an IHP to hear the submissions on PC78 and to
make recommendations to the council. The members of the IHP have expertise in
resource management law, planning, urban design, heritage and Te Ao Māori.
24. The hearings
before the IHP on the PC78 City Centre provisions occurred during 2024 (20
February – 7 March 2024 for most City Centre matters, and 21-29 August
2024 for City Centre Outstanding Matters).
Recommendations and decisions process
25. The process
that council must follow in making decisions on the IHP’s recommendations
on the provisions of the IPI is set out in clause 101 of Schedule 1 of the RMA.
26. The council
is required to make decisions on the IHP recommendations.
27. The council
must decide whether to accept or reject each recommendation of the IHP.
28. If the
council rejects an IHP recommendation, the council must provide a reason for
the rejection and may provide an alternative recommendation. Rejected
recommendations go to the Minister for a decision.
29. When the
council is making decisions on the IHP recommendations, clause 101(4) of
Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out that the council:
(a) is not
required to consult any person or consider submissions or other evidence from
any person;
(b) must not
consider any submission or other evidence unless it was made available to the
IHP before the IHP made the recommendation that is the subject of the
council’s decision;
(c) may seek
clarification from the IHP on a recommendation in order to assist the council
to make a decision on the IHP recommendation;
30. Clause 101(5)
provides that the council may accept recommendations of the IHP that are beyond
the scope of the submissions made on PC78 (the IPI).
Accepting IHP recommendations
31. For
any IHP recommendations that the council accepts, when the council notifies its
decisions, the council will also advise the date that the City Centre
provisions will be made operative. This process is provided for in clauses 103
and 104 of Schedule 1 of the RMA.
32. This is
different to the usual approach for making a plan change operative, where plan
change decisions are made by Independent Hearing Commissioners and it is only
once the Environment Court appeal period expires and there are no appeals that
the council can approve the plan change and direct staff to make it
operative.
33. This
difference is because for the IPI process there are no rights of appeal in
relation to the council’s decision (or the Minister’s decision) on
PC78.
34. The date that
the provisions will be made operative must be at least five working days after
the public notice, in accordance with clause 20(2) of Schedule 1 of the RMA.
Changes to IHP recommendations with
minor effect
35. Clause 102 of Schedule 1 of the RMA provides for councils to
accept a recommendation but alter the recommendation in a way that has a minor
effect or to correct a minor error.
Rejecting IHP recommendations
36. For any IHP
recommendations that the council rejects, the council will need to refer those
rejected recommendations, together with the council’s reasons for
rejection and any alternative recommendation, to the Minister. The Minister
will then consider the IHP recommendation and the council’s alternative
recommendation and make a decision.
37. The Minister
must decide to accept or reject any or all of the IHP recommendations referred
to the Minister (where the council has made a decision to reject the IHP
recommendation). For any IHP recommendation that the Minister rejects, the
Minister must decide whether to accept the council’s alternative
recommendation.
38. There is no
timeframe set in the RMA for the Minister’s decision.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
39. The IHP for
PC78 provided their recommendations on the parts of Plan Change 78 that are
subject to Policy 3(a) of the NPS-UD on 8 May 2025.
40. The IHP
Recommendation Report and appendices are available at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=140.
41. A summary of
the IHP recommendations, excerpted from the IHP Recommendation Report, is
attached as Attachment A.
42. Staff have
considered the IHP recommendations in light of the council’s expert
witness evidence for the PC78 City Centre hearings and its position in legal
submissions.
Overall outcomes
43. The IHP
agreed with council’s strategic approach to intensification of the City
Centre.
44. The IHP
preferred council’s planning and other expert evidence in most cases, and
supported most of council’s proposed provisions.
45. There
was no significant variance from the council position as per the PC78 City
Centre hearings. Recommendations which are not aligned with council’s
position are listed below.
46. One
minor error which needs correction has been identified by staff. Clause 102(2),
Schedule 1 of the RMA, enables the council to accept a recommendation but alter
the recommendation in a way that has a minor effect or to correct a minor
error. If the council wishes to use the power in clause 102(2) it must, when
publicly notifying its decisions, set out the alterations that it has made to
the IHP’s recommendation. The minor error is the reference to “532
and 528” Karangahape Road in paragraph 144 of the IHP Recommendation
Report. It is clear from the rest of the Recommendation Report that the correct
addresses are 538 and 582 Karangahape Road, as set out in section 3.35 of the
Report (referenced in paragraph 144).
IHP recommendations which differ from council’s position
47. None of the
instances where the IHP recommendations differ from the council's position are
considered to impact the council's overall approach to NPS-UD implementation,
provisions that are of strategic importance to the City Centre, or matters of
significance that extend beyond the City Centre.
48. The specific
recommendations which vary from/are not aligned with the council’s
position are listed below.
49. Minor changes
to some City Centre Zone standards:
· Tower
dimension (H8.6.24, H8.6.25A)
· Setbacks
above podium level (H8.6.24, H8.6.25A)
· Outlook
space (H8.6.32)
· East-west
tower dimension (H8.6.24A)
50. Site specific
changes in some precincts:
· Extent
of Karangahape Road Precinct
· Height
on some sites in Viaduct Harbour Precinct
51. New
qualifying matter for land adjacent to the rail corridor relating to the safe
or efficient operation of the rail network, and supporting provisions.
Staff recommendations
52. Staff
recommend that all the IHP recommendations are accepted as set out in the IHP
Recommendation Report, subject to and incorporating the correction to a minor
error set out above.
53. An advantage
of accepting all IHP recommendations is that the council would be able to make
the City Centre provisions operative in full as early as possible. This would
avoid any delay or uncertainty that could come from referring any rejected
recommendations to the Minister.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
54. The
council’s climate plan, Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri:
Auckland’s Climate Plan, has called for a 64 per cent reduction in
transport emissions by 2030. The council’s Transport Emissions Reduction
Plan (TERP) August 2022 outlines concrete actions to dramatically reduce
transport emissions by 2030.
55. The City
Centre provisions of PC78 contribute to emissions reductions through enabling
building heights and density of urban form to realise as much development
capacity as possible, to maximise benefits of intensification. The capacity for
development that exists under the City Centre provisions has been assessed as
being able to provide for significant growth in education, employment and
housing well beyond the likely demand over the next 30 years.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
56. The council
group including Auckland Transport and Watercare Services Ltd contributed to
the development of the PC78 City Centre provisions and hearings process.
57. Eke Panuku
Development Auckland was a submitter on PC78. The IHP's recommendations did not
support the relief sought in Eke Panuku's submission (including seeking a range
of increased heights and realignment of public open space in the Wynyard
Precinct), except in relation to an increase in the height limit for the site
at 37-55 Madden Street (south-western corner) from 31m-52m to 62m. The IHP
expressed a concern that the proposed changes (and changes sought for Wynyard
Precinct by other submitters) are not “consequential on”
intensification but seek to fundamentally alter the status quo Precinct which
is not the role of an IPI.
58. Accepting the
IHP’s recommendations in respect of Eke Panuku’s submission may
have an impact on the timing of Eke Panuku’s development plans for the
Wynyard Point area. It is not recommended that the council rejects the
IHP’s recommendations in respect of Eke Panuku’s submission. A
potential remedy to the timing issue could be the initiation of a standalone
plan change for the area.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local
impacts and local board views
59. The
local board’s views have been considered in the preparation of PC78 and
following the close of submissions.
60. Local
boards contributed to the development of proposed Plan Change 78:
Intensification. Workshops have been held with local boards throughout the
process.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
61. Consultation
with Mana Whenua / iwi authorities was undertaken under clause 3(1)(d) of
Schedule 1 of the RMA during the preparation phase of PC78 and council staff
sought the views of Mana Whenua / iwi authorities at that time. In addition,
the council provided a copy of the proposed draft PC78 to the iwi authorities
consulted under clause 3(1)(d) of Schedule 1 and had particular regard to any
advice received on proposed PC78 from those iwi authorities, as required by
clause 4A of Schedule 1 of the RMA.
62. Five Mana
Whenua groups submitted on City Centre matters and/or City Centre Outstanding
Matters: Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Ngāti Whātua
o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Te Ᾱkitai Waiohua.
63. These
submissions covered matters including: Sites and Places of Significance to Mana
Whenua, volcanic viewshafts, notable trees, City Centre zone provisions,
stormwater management, and the Quay Park Precinct. The IHP supported most of
the requests, except for some due to scope (new provisions to manage
development around sites of significance), and a request to remove notable
trees as a qualifying matter. The submissions relating to City Centre Zone
provisions and Quay Park Precinct provisions were supported in part. Expert
conferencing was also undertaken in relation to the Quay Park Precinct.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
64. PC78 is
budgeted for as part of the Planning and Resource Consents Department work
programme.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
65. For the
council to comply with the Minister’s direction made under sections 80L
and 80M of the RMA, the council’s decisions on the IHP recommendations
for the City Centre PC78 provisions must be publicly notified by 30 May 2025.
If the council was not able to publicly notify its decisions on the IHP
recommendations by 30 May 2025, there is the potential for legal challenge. The
council’s decisions are to be publicly notified on 29 May 2025.
66. As there is
no timeframe set in the RMA for the Minister’s decision on any rejected
IHP recommendation referred to them. Rejecting IHP recommendations carries a
risk of uncertainty around when a decision would be made on those matters and
therefore when those matters would become operative. IHP recommendations which
are accepted by the council are deemed on notification to have been approved by
the council and will become operative in accordance with clause 103 (if all IHP
recommendations are accepted) or clause 104 (if some IHP recommendations are
accepted) and clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. Also, the
Minister may elect to not take the alternative recommendation referred by the
council and may instead choose the IHP recommendation.
67. There is no right of appeal under the RMA against the
council’s decisions on the IHP recommendations. However, the
council’s decisions could be challenged by way of judicial review
proceedings in the High Court. To mitigate this risk, it is important that the
council ensures that it follows the process set out in clauses 101 to 104 of
Schedule 1 of the RMA for making its decisions on the IHP recommendations.
Under clause 101(4) of Schedule 1 the council is not permitted to consider any
submissions or other evidence that was not made available to the IHP before
they made their recommendations. The council must consider all relevant
matters, not consider irrelevant matters, and it must act reasonably.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
68. Once the
council has made its decisions on the IHP recommendations, the council is
required to publicly notify its decisions in accordance with clause 102,
Schedule 1 of the RMA. The next steps the council will take following the
council making its decisions on the IHP recommendations will be as follows:
(a) The council will
publicly notify its decisions on the IHP recommendations on the City Centre
provisions in PC78 by 30 May 2025, and include in the public notice the date
that the City Centre provisions will become operative for all IHP
recommendations that are accepted by the council.
(b) The council will refer
any rejected IHP recommendation(s), together with the council’s reasons
for rejecting the IHP recommendation(s) and provide any alternative
recommendation(s) to the Minister to make a decision.
(c) The council will serve
a copy of the public notice of the council’s decisions on the IHP
recommendations on the City Centre provisions in PC78 on every person who made
a submission on the City Centre provisions of PC78 not later than five working
days after the council’s decisions are publicly notified.
(d) The council will make
a copy of the public notice and the council’s decisions on the IHP
recommendations on the City Centre provisions in PC78 publicly available on the
council’s website.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Summary of the Panel’s recommended changes to
the Auckland Unitary Plan (Extract from Independent Hearing Panel
Recommendation Report)
|
17
|
|
b⇩
|
Recommended changes to City Centre Zone general
building height
|
23
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Celia Davison - Manager Planning - Central/South
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Duguid - General Manager Planning and Resource
Consents
Megan Tyler - Director Policy, Planning and Governance
|
