Auckland Development Committee Agenda December 14

8/10/2019 Auckland Development Committee Agenda December 14

1/74

Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policyunless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contactthe relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson.

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Auckland Development Committee will be heldon:

Date:Time:Meeting Room:Venue:

Wednesday, 3 December 20141.30pmReception LoungeAuckland Town Hall301-305 Queen StreetAuckland

Auckland Development Committee

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson Penny HulseDeputy Chairperson Chris Darby

Members Cr Anae Arthur Anae Cr Calum PenroseCr Cameron Brewer Cr Dick QuaxMayor Len Brown, JP Cr Sharon Stewart, QSMCr Dr Cathy Casey Member David TaipariCr Bill Cashmore Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBECr Ross Clow Cr Wayne WalkerCr Linda Cooper, JP Cr John WatsonCr Alf Filipaina Cr Penny WebsterCr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO Cr George Wood, CNZMCr Denise KrumCr Mike LeeMember Liane Ngamane

(Quorum 11 members)

Rita Bento-AllpressDemocracy Advisor

27 November 2014

Contact Telephone: 09 307 7541Email: [email protected]: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz


2/74


3/74

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Those powers which cannot legally be delegated:

(a) the power to make a rate; or

(b) the power to make a bylaw; or

(c) the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance withthe long term council community plan; or

(d) the power to adopt a long term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

(e) the power to appoint a Chief Executive; or

(f) the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the LocalGovernment Act 2002 in association with the long term plan or developed for the purpose ofthe local governance statement; or

(g) the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

Additional responsibilities retained by the Governing Body:

(a) Approval of a draft long term plan or draft annual plan prior to community consultation

(b) Approval of a draft bylaw prior to community consultation

(c) Resolutions required to be made by a local authority under the Local Electoral Act 2001,including the appointment of electoral officer

(d) Adoption of, and amendment to, the Committee Terms of Reference, Standing Orders andCode of Conduct

(e) Relationships with the Independent Maori Statutory Board, including the funding agreementand appointments to committees.

(f) Approval of the Unitary Plan

(g) Overview of the implementation of the Auckland Plan through setting direction on key strategicprojects (e.g. the City Rail Link and the alternative funding mechanisms for transport) andreceiving regular reporting on the overall achievement of Auckland Plan priorities andperformance measures.


4/74

EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLICWHO 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 resolutionis 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 tothe 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 isnecessary 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 andmust 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 aGoverning Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committeemeeting).

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

All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who arenot members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

Staff

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

Only 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 theirrole may remain. This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular LocalBoard area.

IMSB

Members of the IMSB who are appointed members of the meeting remain.

Other IMSB members and IMSB staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to performtheir role.

CCOs

Representatives of a CCO can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevantto the CCO.


5/74


03 December 2014

Page 5

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Apologies 7

2 Declaration of Interest 7

3 Confirmation of Minutes 7

4 Petitions 7

5 Public Input 7

5.1 Public Input - Mr David Price, Chairman of Redoubt Road

Environmental Action Group 7

5.2 Public Input - Alistair White and Duncan Ecob - Special Housing

Areas Tranche 4 8

5.3 Public Input - Robert Reese and John Dare - Special Housing Areas

Tranche 4 8

6 Local Board Input 96.1 Local Board Input - Howick Local Board Chair - Special Housing

Areas Tranche 4 9

7 Extraordinary Business 9

8 Notices of Motion 10

9 Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus Section) - Notification of

Proposed Private Plan Change 375- Rezoning of 231 and 261 Morrin

Road, St Johns. 11

10 Final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan 19

11 Takapuna Centre Plan 25

12 Endorsement of the draft Otara-Papatoetoe Area Plan for final release 33

13 Auckland Housing Accord 4th Quarter Monitoring (Year-End) Report

This report was not available when the agenda was compiled and will be distributed in anaddendum agenda.

14 Cost of Servicing Residential Growth Study


15 Proposed Auckland Housing Bond Guarantee


16 Productivity Commission Inquiry - Using Land for Housing


17 Draft Auckland 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy 2015-2025 LTP 37

18 Auckland Council Feedback on the LGNZ 3 Waters Issues Paper &National Survey Results 63

19 Consideration of Extraordinary Items


6/74


03 December 2014

Page 6

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

20 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 73

C1 Special Housing Areas on Mori Land, Treaty Settlement Land and Mori

Special Purpose Zoned Land 73

C2 Special Housing Areas Tranche 4 deferrals and new proposals 74


7/74


03 December 2014

Page 7

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 makingwhen a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other externalinterest they might have.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Auckland Development Committee:

confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 13 November 2014, as atrue and correct record.

4 Petitions

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

5 Public Input

Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to theCommittee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2)working days prior to the meetingand must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion todecline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. Amaximum of thirty (30) minutesis allocated to the period for public input with five (5)minutes speaking time for each speaker.

5.1 Public Input - Mr David Price, Chairman of Redoubt Road EnvironmentalAction Group

Purpose

1. To provide an opportunity for Mr David Price, Chairman of Redoubt RoadEnvironmental Action Group, to speak to the Auckland Development Committeeregarding the Mill Road corridor development.

Executive Summary

2. The Chairperson of the Auckland Development Committee has approved the requestfrom Mr David Price, Chairman of Redoubt Road Environmental Action Group, tospeak to the Auckland Development Committee regarding the Mill Road corridordevelopment.

Recommendation/s


a) thank Mr David Price, Chairman of Redoubt Road Environmental Action Group, forhis presentation to the Auckland Development Committee regarding the Mill Roadcorridor development.


8/74


03 December 2014

Page 8

5.2 Public Input - Alistair White and Duncan Ecob - Special Housing AreasTranche 4

Purpose

1. To provide Alistair White and Duncan Ecob with an opportunity to speak to theAuckland Development Committee regarding the Special Housing Areas Tranche 4.

Executive Summary

2. The Chairperson of the Auckland Development Committee has approved the requestto speak from Mr White and Mr Ecob.

3. This item of public input will be heard at the beginning of the confidential section ofthe meeting.

Recommendation/s


a) thank Alistair White and Duncan Ecob for their presentation to the AucklandDevelopment Committee regarding the Special Housing Areas Tranche 4.

5.3 Public Input - Robert Reese and John Dare - Special Housing Areas Tranche4

Purpose

1. To provide Robert Reese and John Dare with an opportunity to speak to the

Auckland Development Committee regarding the Special Housing Areas Tranche 4.

Executive Summary

2. The Chairperson of the Auckland Development Committee has approved the requestto speak from Mr Reese and Mr Dare.

3. This item of public input will be heard at the beginning of the confidential section ofthe meeting.

Recommendation/s


a) thank Robert Reese and John Dare for their presentation to the AucklandDevelopment Committee regarding the Special Housing Areas Tranche 4.


9/74


03 December 2014

Page 9

6 Local Board Input

Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of thatChairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5)minutes during this time. TheChairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical,give two (2)days notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the

discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of StandingOrders.

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on theagenda.

6.1 Local Board Input - Howick Local Board Chair - Special Housing AreasTranche 4

Purpose

1. To provide David Collings, Howick Local Board Chair, with an opportunity to speak to

the Auckland Development Committee regarding the Special Housing Areas Tranche4.

Executive Summary

2. The Chairperson of the Auckland Development Committee has approved the requestto speak from the Howick Local Board Chair.

3. This item of Local Board input will be heard at the beginning of the confidentialsection of the meeting.

Recommendation/s

That the Auckland Development Committee:a) thank David Collings, Howick Local Board Chair, for his presentation to the Auckland

Development Committee regarding the Special Housing Areas Tranche 4.

7 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (asamended) 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 thepublic,-

(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 asubsequent meeting.


10/74


03 December 2014

Page 10

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (asamended) 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 localauthority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a timewhen 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 itemexcept to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for furtherdiscussion.

8 Notices of Motion

At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.


11/74

Item9


03 December 2014

Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus Section) - Notification of Proposed Private Plan Change375- Rezoning of 231 and 261 Morrin Road, St Johns.

Page 11

Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus Section) - Notification ofProposed Private Plan Change 375- Rezoning of 231 and 261 MorrinRoad, St Johns.

File No.:CP2014/26221

Purpose1. To seek a decision to accept and proceed to publicly notify a request for a private plan

change to the Auckland Council District Plan (Operative Auckland City Isthmus Section1999) (the District Plan) submitted by the University of Auckland (the University) underClause 25 of the Resource Management 1991 (the RMA).

Executive summary2. Clause 21 of the First Schedule to the RMA provides for private requests to change a

District Plan or Regional Plan. 3. The University has requested a private plan change to the District Plan. The purpose of the

request is to rezone the site at 231 - 261 Morrin Road (the subject site, Tmaki Campus)from Special Purpose to Mixed Use to allow a diversity of land uses to enable futureredevelopment.

4. This request is referenced as PA375 and proposes to change the District Plan as follows:

Amend Sheets E14 and E15 in relation to the subject site as follows:

o Planning Map 1 - remove the Special Purpose zone and replace it with the

Mixed Use zone;

o Planning Map 2 - remove the label 02 and replace it with 10.

Amend Appendix B Additional Limitations, Controls and Diagrams to delete the subjectsite from E14-02 Concept Plan- University of Auckland Tmaki Campus and delete thenorthern Major Access/Egress.

Add a new E14-10 to Appendix B Additional Limitations, Controls and Diagrams, whichset out site-specific development controls, additional activities, information requirementsand assessment criteria to apply in addition to, or in place of, the standard Mixed Usezone provisions.

5. Under Clause 25 of the RMA, the council is now required to determine whether to:

i) accept or reject the plan change request; or

ii) adopt the proposed private plan change and promote it as a council plan change; or

iii) process the request as a resource consent application.

6. A private plan change request can only be rejected on the limited grounds specified inthe RMA and this request is not considered to fall into any of these categories.

7. The proposed plan change is not considered appropriate for adoption as a public planchange or for processing as a resource consent application.

8. The information supporting the request is adequate for public notification. It includesan assessment of optionsand alternatives available, an assessment of effects on theenvironment, an assessment against relevant Regional and District Plan policies, andan evaluation under section 32 of the RMA on the appropriateness, costs and benefitsof the proposed private plan change.

9. A decision to notify the plan change request has nothing to do with the merits of therequest nor does it bind the council to any decision on the plan change request.


12/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 12

Subsequent to the notification and submission process, a hearing will be held,and atthis time, the council can decide on the merits of the private plan change.

10. It is therefore recommended that the private plan change request be accepted fornotification and be publicly notified.

Recommendation/sThat the Auckland Development Committee:

a) resolve, pursuant to Clause 25(2)(b) of the First Schedule to the ResourceManagement Act 1991, to accept the private plan change request by the Universityof Auckland to amend the Auckland Council District Plan (Operative Auckland CityIsthmus Section 1999) to rezone approximately 12.5 hectares of land at 231-261Morrin Road, St Johns from the Special Purpose 2 zone (Education) to Mixed Usealong with site specific provisions (PA375) and that the request proceed to publicnotification in accordance with Clause 26 of the First Schedule of the RMA for thefollowing reasons:

i) the proposal does not meet the statutory tests 25(4)(a) to (e) for rejectinga private plan change request in that it is not frivolous or vexatious, thematter has not been dealt with within the previous two years, is notcontrary to sound resource management practice and will not make theDistrict Plan inconsistent with Part 5 ofthe RMA

ii) the applicant has not requested the council adopt the plan change requestand theprimary beneficiary is the applicant

iii) the level of detail contained in the request and unknown time frame fordevelopment is such that the request is not able to be treated as aresourceconsent

iv) the council, in its capacity as regulatory authority, is able to consider allthedetails of the proposed private plan change request and submissionsprior tomaking a decision on the merits of the rezoning.

b) authorise the Manager, Planning: Central and Islands to notify PA375 inaccordance with Clause 26 of the First Schedule of the ResourceManagement Act 1991.

Comments

Background

11. The University is proposing to divest the Tmaki Campus from its current property portfoliodue to the recent acquisition of other sites including the Newmarket campus at the formerLion Nathan Breweries site at Grafton.

12. The current zoning and concept plan for the Tmaki Campus site under the District Planlimits the permitted activities and scale of development to those associated with tertiaryeducational use.

13. The University proposes to rezone the site from Special Purpose 2 (Education) to MixedUse. The Mixed Use zone is proposed as it will allow a diversity of land uses and recognisethe sites strategic proximity to the Glen Innes rail station, the proposed Auckland ManukauEastern Transport Initiative (AMETI) network improvements and the Glen Innes towncentre.


13/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 13

14. The Tmaki Campus site currently has a concept plan in the District Plan (reference E14-02)which outlines permitted activities and development controls. The University seeks toremove the site from the concept plan. The concept plan will remain in the District Plan andapplies to Colin Maiden Park, previously owned by the University. The private plan changeonly relates to the Universitys landholdings.

15. The University is also proposing new site-specific activities, development controls,

information requirements and assessment criteria. These would be contained within a newset of provisions (proposed reference E14-10) and would each apply to the site in addition toor instead of the standard Mixed Use provisions.

The site and surrounds

16. The land affected by the plan change request is 231-261 Morrin Road, St Johns (being Lots1 and 2 DP 328428). This site is located on the corner of Morrin and Merton Roads.

17. The site is strategically located within walking distance of the Glen Innes train station andtown centre. It is also in close proximity to the AMETI road network, with a future extensionof AMETI located along the sites eastern boundary.

18. It is comprised of two properties, being 231 and 261 Morrin Road, as shown in Attachment

A. The properties are both irregularly shaped and are 0.66ha and 11.9ha respectively.

19. There are a number of existing buildings on the site and large amount of at-grade carparking. The buildings are currently used as classrooms, health and science laboratories,lecture theatres, offices and the Ray Meyer Research Centre.

20. The site is bordered by open space and industrial land uses. To the west is Colin MaidenPark, which was recently purchased by Auckland Council and there is also a small area ofopen space borders the site immediately south of 231 Morrin Road. To the north acrossMerton Road are recent retail developments while to the east are light industrial activities.

Plan change request

21. The plan change request seeks the following amendments to the District Plan:

Amend Sheets E14 and E15 in relation to the subject site as follows:

o Planning Map 1 - remove the Special Purpose zone and replace it with the

Mixed Use zone;

o Planning Map 2remove the label 02 and replace it with 10.

Amend Appendix B Additional Limitations, Controls and Diagrams to delete thesubject site from E14 02 Concept Plan- University of Auckland Tmaki Campus anddelete the northern Major Access/Egress.

Add a new E14-10 to Appendix B Additional Limitations, Controls and Diagrams,

which set out site-specific development controls, additional activities, informationrequirements and assessment criteria to apply in addition to, or in place of, thestandard Mixed Use provisions.

22. The current District Plan maps and the proposed District Plan maps and provisions areincluded at Attachment B and C.

23. The University considers the request for a private plan change to be the most appropriatemeans of providing for future use and development of this strategic site. They propose thatit will provide the form and density of development to give effect to the Auckland Plan andthe growth strategies contained within the District Plan.


14/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 14

Statutory considerations

24. Clause 22 of the First Schedule of the RMA sets out the requirements and processes to befollowed in making a request under Clause 21 of that schedule.

25. Provided that all relevant information is provided with the request, the council is required toconsider the request and make a decision as to whether to accept the request or reject it.Alternatively, it may instead adopt the proposed private plan change as its own or decide totreat the request as if it is a resource consent application.

26. The information that the University has provided to support the request has been assessedby council staff and expert consultants and is considered sufficient for the purposes ofnotification. The council may, however, request further information or commission reportsprior to making a decision on any of the submissions received and the merits of theproposal.

27. The process for considering a private plan change request is set out in Part 2 of the FirstScheduleto the RMA. Clause 25 (2), (3) and (4) of the First Schedule state that:

(2) The local authority may either:

(a) Adopt the request, or part of the request, as if it were a proposed policystatement or plan made by the local authority itself;or

(b) Accept the request in whole or in part.

(3) Deal with the request as if it were an application for a resource consent;

(4) Reject the request in whole or in part, but only on the grounds that:

(a) The request or part of the request is frivolous or vexatious; or

(b) The substance of the request or part of the request has been considered andgiven effect to or rejected by the local authority or Environment Court withinthe last 2 years; or

(c) The request or part of the request is not in accordance with sound resourcemanagement practice; or

(d) The request or part of the request would make the policy statement or planinconsistent with Part 5; or

(e) The policy statement or plan has been operative for less than 2 years.

28. It is important to note that the tests in Clause 25(4) (a) to (e) are threshold tests and do notrequire that the council undertake a substantive assessment of the proposal or reach anyview on the merits of the request at this point in the process.

29. This report and the information presented in it does not form the basis of any of the required

consideration of the effects, impact on objectives and policies by the RMA. Therefore,acceptance of the plan change request does not preclude the council from making anydecision on the merits of the plan change.

30. The statutory matters listed above are considered in the following section.

Determination as to whether the private plan change request should be accepted orrejected

a) Is the request frivolous or vexatious?

31. The site pr oposed to be rezoned is owned by the University.

32. The purpose of theproposed plan change is to facilitate the future redevelopment of

the Tmaki Campus site after it is no longer required by the University.


15/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 15

33. Comprehensive analysis reports are included with the plan change request from expertconsultants recognised in theirfield of expertise. While the content and conclusions areopen for dispute as part of the submissionsand evaluation process, the opinions held,which support the plan change, are notconsidered to be frivolousor vexatious.

b) Has the substance of the request been considered and given effect to or rejectedbythe council or the Environment Court within the last two years?

34. The zoning relating to the site under the operative District Plan has not beenconsidered by the council or the Environment Court within the last two years.Therefore, thecouncil cannot reject the request under this clause.

35. The proposed Auckland Unitary Plan zones the site as Tertiary Education. TheUniversity has made a submission on the PAUP, requesting Mixed Use and for the siteto be a sub-precinct of the Tmaki Precinct. The determination of this submission willbe made through the Unitary Plan process.

c) Is the request in accordance with sound resource management practice?

36. The phrase sound resource management practiceis not definedby statute but is oftenused as a broad principle or concluding consideration following a more specific

assessment. The High Court in Malory Corporation Limited v Rodney District Council(CIV-2009-404-005572) has considered this term in the light of Clause 25(4)(c) tothe FirstSchedule of the RMA and states:

the words sound resource management practice should, if theyare to begiven any coherent meaning, be tied to the RMAs purposeand principles. I agreetoo with the Courts observation that the wordsshould be limited to only a coarsescale merits assessment, and that aprivate plan change which does not accordwith the RMAspurposesand principles will not cross the threshold for acceptanceor adoption.

37. In this case, the request represents an increase in the land zoned for Mixed Use andsome site specific changes to the Mixed Use provisions. A robust evaluation of therelevant planning considerations, including environmental effects and against therelevant objectives and policies has been included with the plan change request. Acomplete review and assessment of these still needs to be carried out by the counciland this will occur following its notification.

38. Accordingly, it is concluded that the scope and extent of the changes sought do not, inthemselves, threaten the purpose and principles of the RMA when considered at thispreliminary stage. The plan change request therefore satisfies this statutory criterion.

d) Would the request or part of the request make the policy statement or planinconsistent with Part 5 of the RMA?

39. Given the scale of the request and the stage of the private plan change process, there is

nothing to indicate that it would make the District Plan inconsistent with Part 5 of the RMA(standards, policy statements and plans).

e) Has the District Plan to which the request relates been operative for less than 2 years?

40. The request relate to sections of the District Plan that have been operative for more than 2years. The request therefore cannot be rejected under this clause.

41. Based on the above discussion, it is considered that the proposed private plan changerequest should not be rejected on the grounds set out in Clause 25(4) (a) to (e) of the FirstSchedule to the RMA.

42. On the basis of the conclusion that the proposed private plan change request be acceptedfor notification, Clause 25(2) and (3) gives the council the option of:

1) Adopting the request, or part of the request, as if it was a proposed change made by thelocal authority itself; or


16/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 16

2) Accepting the request in whole or part; or

3) Dealing with the request as if it was an application for a resource consent.

Option 1:

43. If the council adopts the private plan change request, it is promoting the proposedchanges. The proposed private plan change request is a private initiative of the

applicant. Given the size and nature of the request, it is consideredappropriate that theapplicant promote this as a private plan change request and pursue the requestedchanges so that the council in its regulatory capacity can assess the request on anindependent basis.

Option 2:

44. Acceptance of the request and notifying as a private plan change request has thefollowing advantages:

The council remains in a neutral position until it has had the opportunity to consider thedetails of the proposed private plan change and all submissions on it from the widercommunity and can then proceed to make its decision to approve, approve withmodifications, or reject the request following a hearing;

The proposed private plan change has no legal effect unless approved by the council andany appeals are resolved; and

The costs of processing the proposed private plan change would generally fall on theapplicant.

Option 3:

45. Given that the request relates to rezoning of the land, it is not considered appropriate toprocess the request as a resource consent.

Conclusion

46. It is therefore recommended that council accepts the application for notification as aprivate plan change request (Option 2).

Notification

47. If the council accepts the proposed private plan change request, it has four months inwhich to notify the request for submissions.

48. At this stage it is proposed that the notification will begin in mid-January 2015.

Significance of decision

49. The proposal does not trigger the councils significance policy.

50. The impact on the community can be fully explored during the submission and hearingprocess.

51. Acceptance of the plan change request does not indicate support or opposition for theproposals and is not an assessment of its merits or effects.

Consultation

52. The application includes full details of the consultation that the University has undertaken todate. This includes consultation with several iwi, the Meadowbank and St Johns ResidentsAssociation, Tmaki Redevelopment Company and the Glen Innes and Panmure BusinessAssociations.


17/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 17

Consideration

Local board views and implications

53. The Orkei Local Board has been briefed on the details of the request and the planchange process. They agree with the advice from Council officers to recommend to acceptand proceed to notify the application. The Local Board also recognise key issues to beconsidered for any future development on the site include: appropriate height, quality urbandesign, master-planning and traffic impacts. The Local Board also requested that the publicnotification period either commence in February 2015 and run for 4 weeks (20 working days)or that the notification period run for 6 weeks (30 days) from mid-January 2015 to enableresidents a chance to have their say.

54. While the site falls within the Orkei Local Board area, it is in close proximity to theMaungakiekie-Tmaki Board area. Given this, and in particular the proximity of the siteto the Glen Innes town centre, the Maungakiekie-Tmaki Local Board has also been

briefed on the details of the request and the plan change process.

Mori impact statement

55. The applicant has consulted with a number of iwi, including Ngi Tai ki Tmaki, NgtiWhtua o rkei and Ngti Paoa. This has been documented in the application.

56. All of the iwi groups known to have an interest in the Orkei and Maungakiekie-TmakiLocal Board areas will also be directly notified of the private plan change request.

ImplementationFinancial and resourcing implications

57. All reasonable costs associated with processing a private plan change are borne by theapplicant and there are therefore no significant financial or resourcing implications.

Legal and legislative implications

58. The recommendations of this report are in accordance with to the processes set out inthe RMA and arewithin the committees delegated powers. There are no significantlegal implications arising from the acceptance of the request for notification.

Implementation issues

59. If the request is accepted, the proposed private plan change will proceed tonotification underClause 26 of the First Schedule to the RMA. The proposed privateplan change will then be considered under Clause 29 of the First Schedule to theRMA and the council in its regulatorycapacity may decline, approve or approve withmodifications the proposed private plan change.

60. The council will be required to monitor the effectiveness of the new plan provisions asrequired by the RMA.

Attachments

No. Title Page

A Location Plan(Under Separate Cover)

B Relevant Current District Plan Maps (Under Separate Cover)

C Proposed District Plan Maps and Provisions(Under Separate Cover)


18/74

Item9


03 December 2014


Page 18

Signatories

Authors Lisa Roberts - Planner

Authorisers Penny PirritGM Plans & Places

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer


19/74

Item1

0


03 December 2014

Final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan Page 19

Final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan

File No.:CP2014/26671

Purpose1. To adopt the final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan (the plan provided in this report as a

document and maps at Attachment A and B).

Executive summary2. Area plans are 30-year local spatial plans for a local board area, applying the Auckland Plan

at a local community level. Since January 2014 the Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan workingparty has overseen the development of a draft and final area plan with input from across thecouncil and relevant Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs).

3. The development of the area plan has included two community engagement phases - initialengagement in February-March 2014 and consultation on a draft plan in July-August 2014.These have been combined with engagement on the new Devonport-Takapuna Local BoardPlan and were notable by the extensive support and assistance of key communitystakeholder representatives.

4. Feedback from engagement on the draft plan contained majority support for the draft planskey componentssix key moves, three theme outcomes and actions, and outcomes for keyplaces.

5. All feedback was assessed in terms of whether a change or addition would be advisable forthe final plan. These items were discussed with the working party and at a local boardbriefing in September 2014. There has also been a review of the key moves, outcomes and

actions by various parts of the council and relevant CCOs to confirm their deliverability,particularly those in the first five years. A number of requests and suggestions for changesarising from engagement have been included in the final plan, along with changes requestedby the working party directly.

6. In addition to these amendments, changes and additions have been made to the structure ofthe draft plan to complete the final plan and achieve more consistency with other area plans.This includes the addition of a description of the Devonport-Takapuna area, how the areaplan was developed, and the strategic context of the plan. Actions under theme outcomeshave been separated into those for delivery in the next five years, and aspirational actionsfor the future beyond five years and up to 30 years.

7. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board endorsed the final plan at its meeting on 18

November 2014, subject to some amendments that have been incorporated and approvedby the Chair and Deputy Chair. Following consideration by the Auckland DevelopmentCommittee the final plan will be produced and published.


a) adopt the final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan (Attachment A and B of the agendareport).


20/74

Item10


03 December 2014


Comments

Background

8. Area plans are 30-year local spatial plans for a local board area, applying the Auckland Planat a local level. The Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan process commenced in November 2013

and included two community engagement phases (initial and draft) being combined with thenew Local Board Plan 2014-17.

9. Since January 2014 staff have been meeting with the Devonport-Takapuna Area Planworking party consisting of the local board chairperson, deputy chairperson and the two localward councillors. The purpose of the working party has been to agree the programme ofwork, approaches to engaging the community, and emerging content of a draft and final planwith input from across the council and Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs). All localboard members were invited to attend working party meetings.

10. Comprehensive initial community engagement occurred in February-March 2014, whichinvited feedback on what people valued about the area and their aspirations. Hui were alsoheld with mana whenua and mataawaka groups. Extensive assistance of key stakeholder

representatives helped shape the draft plan, which was endorsed by the local board in Juneand then adopted by the Auckland Development Committee in July for communityengagement.

11. Decision-making on engagement approaches, the draft plan and final plan rests with thelocal board and ultimately the Auckland Development Committee. This reflects the dualgovernance nature of area plans and their part in the councils planning framework.

12. The area plan is not an opportunity to amend the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP),which has commenced its statutory process of public submissions and hearings. The areaplan does however set out actions to implement the land use outcomes envisaged in thePAUP.

Community engagement on the draft area plan

13. Engagement on the draft plan was again combined with the draft local board plan. Theseparate draft plan documents and feedback forms asked different questions, arising out ofthe specific content of each plan. Being a non-statutory plan the draft area plan did notrequire a Special Consultative Procedure approach, unlike the draft Local Board Plan.Feedback received on the draft area plan was not therefore considered as formalsubmissions and subject to hearings.

14. Following Committee approval the draft plan, a summary flyer and feedback form were puton the council engagement website. Copies of the same material were placed in localcouncil venues such as libraries and service centres. The material was available for a threeweek period until 6 August 2014 when draft local board plan engagement also concluded.

15. Meetings and events were again organised with the assistance of key stakeholders. Theseincluded local community meetings advertised through local channels, and meetings withkey representatives of relevant sector groups operating in the local board area.

16. In total the following feedback on the draft plan was recorded or received:

Notes of comments made at local community and sector meetings

120 completed feedback forms

33 items of detailed feedback, in the form of letters or submissions mostly from localgroups and organisations

A petition with 80 signatories, accompanied by 49 letters, from residents of ByronAvenue, Takapuna, sent to the mayor and also received by the local board


21/74

Item1

0


03 December 2014


17. Also received or recorded were notes taken at a workshop of the Kaipatiki Local Board,comments from Auckland Transport, Watercare Services Ltd, and the Independent MaoriStatutory Board, and from meetings with representatives from Te Rnanga o Ngti Whtuaand Ngti Maru.

Feedback on the draft area plan

18. The content of the draft plan was generally supported through feedback received. Therewere no major areas or sections of the draft plan that feedback sought to be removed orsubstantially changed. There were also no reasons arising from the feedback to consideradding new sections or topics, as a result of matters having been missed or not included.There were however a range of amendments and detailed additions to the draft plan andrequests for some outcomes or actions to be emphasised or prioritised, and for others to bemodified.

19. In terms of the draft plans proposed key moves there was a high level of support, with over80% of feedback form responses considering them to be important or somewhat important.Key move 4 relating to recognising the kaitiaki role of mana whenua was consideredimportant or somewhat important by 52% of respondents.

20. In terms of the area framework it was generally understood that the PAUP represents thecurrent land use framework that guides future development of the area. However, somefeedback suggested that the potential level of redevelopment or intensification, particularlyon the Devonport peninsula, be contained until key infrastructure (namely transport and roadcapacity) has been addressed.

21. The proposed outcomes for key locations (metropolitan, town and local centres) weregenerally supported, with 64% of feedback form responses being in the supportive end of a5-point spectrum and 19% in the unsupportive end. Some feedback suggested somematters of detail be included in these statements to reflect local aspirations or concerns.

22. The proposed theme outcomes and actions had general overall support, with 71% offeedback form responses being in the supportive end of the spectrum and 13% in the

unsupportive end. There were a range of suggestions and requests for including moredetail in outcomes or actions, and for them to apply to particular places or groups.

23. A feedback summary report and a compilation of all feedback received were discussed withthe working party in September. Guidance was received from the members relating to keyaspects recurring or emerging from the feedback. Following this, a schedule of all feedbackkey points and recommendations for addressing them in a revised final area plan wasdiscussed at a local board briefing on 23 September.

24. A meeting was held on 2 October with residents of Byron Avenue, Takapuna, who hadprovided feedback in opposition to the proposed Upper Shoal Bay Link project in the draftplan. Staff from Auckland Transport (AT) clarified the proposal as being only one long-termoption in a recent study into Takapuna transport futures undertaken on behalf of AT. It was

noted that the study had yet to be adopted and there would be full consultation on anyproposals in the future should AT progress work on improving the connection betweenAkoranga busway station/Barrys Point area and Takapuna centre for buses, cycling andwalking. It was agreed that amendments would be made to the plan to reflect this position.

Changes to the draft area plan for the final version

25. The process for reviewing and revising the draft area plan to take account of feedback hasalso included a review of the document to achieve more consistency with the Otara-Papatoetoe Area Plan (also being prepared to a similar timetable). This has seen the actionslisted under each theme outcome separated into two timescales, first being over the nextfive years and second from six to 30 years. The allocation of actions to these two periods,and their deliverability within the scope of the Mayors LTP 2015-25 proposal, has beenassessed by the responsible council departments and relevant CCOs.

26. Key changes, additions and amendments to the structure of the draft area plan have beenmade in preparing the final area plan, as follows:


22/74

Item10


03 December 2014


Updating of the Foreword by the Chair of the Local Board

Addition of sections providing a description of the Devonport-Takapuna area, how thearea plan was developed, and the strategic context including the Auckland Plan

Shortening of key move descriptions and relocation of key actions to theme sectionsto collect all actions together in one place

Relocation of outcomes for key places to after the theme sections to reflect their roleas place-based application of the theme outcomes and to give the themes moreprominence in the document after the key moves

Creating two separate schedules for expected timescale of delivery of actions

27. In addition to these changes numerous amendments have been made to the draft plan toincorporate recommendations discussed with the working party and local board arising fromfeedback. Amendments have also arisen from further review by parts of the council andCCOs responsible for delivery of actions. The more significant amendments have beensummarised in the final plan in the developing the area plan section.

28. The proposed final area plan was reviewed by the working party at its meetings on 4 and 5

November. The area plan maps (the key plan and three theme maps) have also beenreviewed and updated from the draft area plan to reflect amendments made to the content.

29. The final area plan was considered by the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board at its 18November meeting. Resolution DT/2014/300 was carried as follows:

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) ask officers to remove the public transport link across Upper Shoal Bay from themap on p.69 to conform with the statement in paragraph 24 of the main report.

b) ask officers to include a reference for carparking provisions in Belmont and HaurakiCorner.

c) ask officers to check that the upgrade to Clarence Street is in the local board planand to include it in the area plan if it is missing.

d) delegate approval of any other minor edits to the final Area Plan arising from themeeting to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson before being reported to theAuckland Development Committee.

e) subject to the above changes, endorse the final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan(Attachment A) and recommend to the Auckland Development Committee that it beadopted.

30. The amendments requested at points a to c in the resolution have been made and the finalarea plan document has been approved by the Chair and Deputy Chair of the local board.

Consideration


31. The development of the area plan has been overseen by the area plan working party. Allmembers of the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board have been invited to working partymeetings and received relevant material for meetings including agendas and minutes.Working sessions were held with the working party in September to review draft planengagement feedback and identify areas to review or amend. Briefings of the full local boardhave occurred through the process, the most recent being on 23 September to review allfeedback on the draft plan and associated recommendations for amendments. The localboard resolved to endorse the final plan at its meeting of 18 November, as detailed above.


23/74

Item1

0


03 December 2014


Mori impact statement

32. Following initial discussions with Te Waka Angamua, the Independent Maori Statutory Boardwas notified in December 2013 of the upcoming Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan processand advised the proposed engagement approach for mana whenua and mataawaka.

33. Early in 2014 contact was made with the following 13 iwi that have association withDevonport-Takapuna regarding their involvement in the development of the area plan:

Ngti Maru

Ngi Tai Ki Tmaki

Ngti Tamaoho

Ngti Tmater

Ngti Te Ata

Ngti Paoa

Ngaati Whanaunga

NgtiWhtua o Kaipara

NgtiWhtua o rkei Tekitai Waiohua

Te Kawerau a Maki

Te Patukirikiri

Te Rnunga o NgtiWhtua

34. Hui were held in February 2014 with nine of the mana whenua groups and also withmatawaaka representatives to seek guidance on the Maori outcomes and aspirations for thedraft plan. As a result, and reflecting the directions of the Auckland Plan, Maori outcomesand aspirations were integrated throughout the theme sections of the draft plan.

35. The draft plan was distributed to mana whenua groups and feedback was invited in July

2014. Meetings were held with representatives from Te Rnanga o Ngti Whtua and NgtiMaru in August, involving the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the local board, wherefeedback was given and other matters relevant to the local board plan and ongoingrelationship were discussed. In September 2014 staff of the Independent Maori StatutoryBoard noted there had been no issues or concerns raised by iwi about the process ofengagement and the plan, and that the process had been robust.

Implementation36. Implementation of area plan key moves and actions can occur through a range of methods.

These include through commitments in the long-term plan, local board plan and subsequentlocal board agreements, advocacy of council or local board on other agencies (including

CCOs and central government), through the Unitary Plan once operative, and through localplace planning and improvements. Budgets will be considered through the long-term planprocess for delivery of initiatives in the first ten years. The delivery of the outcomes later inthe 30-year planning period will rely on the continuing identification and commitment offunding. Progress on implementing the area plan actions will be reported to the local boardannually.

Attachments

No. Title Page

A Final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan document(Under Separate Cover)

B Final Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan maps(Under Separate Cover)


24/74

Item10


03 December 2014


Signatories

Authors Ross Moffatt - Principal Planner - North West Planning




25/74

Item1

1


03 December 2014

Takapuna Centre Plan Page 25

Takapuna Centre Plan

File No.:CP2014/26811

Purpose1. To decide on the approval of the publication of the Takapuna Centre Plan.

Executive summary2. The Takapuna centre can play a significant role in the Auckland Plans strategic directives of

focusing growth within a network of high quality centres. It is a metropolitan centre where thecouncil has the opportunity to lead any transformation projects through its majorlandholdings. The Takapuna Centre Plan focuses on these strategic opportunities.

3. The Takapuna Centre Plan: Implementing the Takapuna Strategic Framework (the centreplan) highlights and provides greater visibility for the transformational projects in Takapunascommercial heart. It is a continuation of the Takapuna Strategic Framework (TSF), providing

further detail on the transformational projects proposed by the TSF as well as an update onhow council is implementing previous planning work. Features of the centre plan are:

principles to guide future development within Takapuna;

place-shaping factors that are integral to Takapunas unique character;

three headline projects designed to showcase Takapunas potential for improvement;and

other actions that council and Auckland Transport can undertake.

4. The centre plan has been prepared in collaboration with key internal stakeholders involvedin the headline projects and other actions. Public engagement was not carried out becausethe plans content is largely an update of previous work identified through extensive publicengagement and community feedback. The plan is intended, through its clear andaccessible format, to make community and private interests aware of the headline projectsthat will help to transform the heart of Takapuna over the next 30 years. However, anyproject will need to go through the appropriate approval process which may include publicnotification.

5. The current version of the centre plan contains amendments that resulted from local boardworkshops held on 23 June and 26 August 2014. Selected external stakeholders were giventhe opportunity to provide feedback at a workshop on 7 October 2014.

6. Based on the feedback received, changes were made to the Anzac Quarter section of theplan. They include:

a larger plaza fronting Lake Road;

new artists impressions of the changed plaza and possible new developmentactivating Potters Park; and

changes to the text to strengthen the quality open space and development outcomes,as well as new reference to a design brief and master planning process.

7. On 18 November 2014, the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolved to endorse thecentre plan subject to minor amendments. They include clarification on the quality and useof public open space, and how building form and scale relate to open space. Theamendments are explained at paragraph 24 of this report.


26/74

Item11


03 December 2014



a) approve the Takapuna Centre Plan: Implementing the Takapuna StrategicFramework for publication.

Comments

Background

8. The Takapuna centre can play a significant role in the Auckland Plans strategic directives offocusing growth within a network of high quality centres. It is a metropolitan centre where thecouncil has the opportunity to lead any transformation projects through its majorlandholdings. The Takapuna Centre Plan focuses on these strategic opportunities.

9. The Takapuna Centre Plan: Implementing the Takapuna Strategic Framework (the centreplan) highlights and provides greater visibility for the transformational projects in Takapunascommercial heart. It is a non-statutory document that reinforces Auckland Councils visionfor Takapunas future as a metropolitan centre.

10. The centre plan brings together ongoing planning initiatives (Takapuna StrategicFramework; the Auckland Plan, Devonport-Takapuna Area Plan, and various transformationprojects) as they relate to Takapuna centre. Features of the centre plan are:

principles to guide future development within Takapuna;

place-shaping factors which are integral to Takapunas unique character;

three headline projects designed to showcase Takapunas potential for improvement;

and other actions that council and Auckland Transport can undertake.

11. The centre plan was drafted in collaboration with key internal stakeholders involved in thethree headline projects and other actions. Public engagement has not been carried out aspart of the centre plan development. This is because the plans content is largely an updateof how council is implementing previous planning work identified through extensive publicengagement and community feedback. However, any project will need to go through theappropriate approval process which may include public notification.

12. The plan is intended, through its clear and accessible format, to make the community andprivate interests aware of the headline projects that will help to transform the heart ofTakapuna over the next 30 years.

The Takapuna Strategic Framework (TSF)

13. The centre plan was prepared as a continuation of the Takapuna Strategic Framework(TSF). North Shore City Council prepared the TSF in 2010 to guide the strategic growth andchange of Takapuna centre and its surrounding area over the next 30 years. Much of theresearch, analysis and community feedbackcaptured through stakeholder meetings,public displays and a discussion documentare directly reflected in the content of thecentre plan.

14. Since the adoption of the TSF, Auckland Council and the private sector have undertakenprojects to improve Takapuna Centre. Examples include councils upgrades in HurstmereGreen, and private projects such as McKenzies and the Commons.


27/74

Item1

1


03 December 2014


15. Current council projects including the funded Hurstmere Street upgrade, and privatedevelopments (such as a new dining precinct fronting The Strand) build on the strengths ofthe local economy and the lifestyle attraction of the centre. The completion of the centre planis timely for councils consideration of projects in the TSF as part of the Long-term Plan(LTP) process.

The Auckland Plan, the Draft Devonport-Takapuna Area and Local Board plans

16. In mid-2014 the local board endorsed the draft Devonport-Takapuna Area and Local BoardPlans. The area plan is a 30-year local spatial plan to achieve the directions of the AucklandPlan at a local board level. The local board plan sets out the priorities and preferences of thelocal community over a three year period and provides the context for local board decisionmaking.

17. Responding to what the community has said, these documents identified the need for theTakapuna Metropolitan Centre to be an area for prioritised investment by council and theprivate sector. The centre plan gives effect to this priority though its headline projects andidentified actions.

Key content of the Centre Plan

18. The proposed Takapuna Centre Plan is attached as Appendix Afor approval. Followingexplanatory and context sections, the centre plan sets out principles and place-shapingfactors identified by the TSF and more recent work. The place-shaping factors, which willanchor any future development within the sense of place unique to Takapunas beach-sidesetting, are:

character and landscape

urban form

public open space

activities

access and movement.

19. The centre plan focuses on providing more detail on the headline projects proposed by theTSF. They are catalyst projects identified as having the most effect on the long term successof Takapunas commercial heart. Through the use of strong images and graphics, the planseeks to capture the private sector and the communitys imagination and enthusiasm for thepossibilities of the projects. The headline projects are:

redevelopment of council-owned Anzac St carpark into a quality open space andmixed-use development in the heart of Takapuna;

upgrading the open space link between Hurstmere Green, The Strand, and TakapunaBeach to open the centre to its stunning coastal setting; and

progressive streetscape upgrades beginning with Hurstmere Road to transform thecentres public spaces.

20. Other actions are identified to be delivered over the next 30 years. These focus on projectsthat, in collaboration with Auckland Transport, council can work on to achieve qualitydevelopments on its own properties, streets, and public open space.

Consultation to date

21. Apart from targeted stakeholder and local board workshops, there has been no further publicengagement in developing the centre plan. However, community engagement for theDevonport-Takapuna Area Plan and the Local Board Plan, which took place from 14 July to7 August, provided the following views relevant to Takapuna centre:

general support for development of Takapunas commercial heart;

support for strengthening linkages between the centre and Takapuna Beach; and

support for improvements to Hurstmere Road.


28/74

Item11


03 December 2014


Consideration


22. A working draft of the centre plan was initially work-shopped with the local board on 23 June2014. The discussion around the content of the plan is summarised below.

Local board feedback Staff responseWhile local board members generallysupported the purpose and initiative of thecentre plan, there was no consensus on thebalance of open space to developmentdepicted in the concept image for AnzacQuarter.

Worked with councils urban design team tocome up with an alternative configurationthat better aligns with the concept firstendorsed by the local board at the workshopon development options for the Anzac Streetcarpark site in December 2012.

Public Open Space preferred over the termPublic Realm.

Changed terminology.

23. The subsequent amended version of the centre plan was work-shopped with the local boardon 25 August 2014. Key stakeholders were also invited to discuss the plan at a workshop on7 October 2014. They included representatives from:

Takapuna Business Association;

Environment Takapuna;

Auckland 2040; and

Milford Residents Association.

24. Their comments are summarised below.

25. On 18 November 2014, the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolved to recommend to theAuckland Development Committee that the plan be approved for publication withamendments.

Workshop feedback Staff response

Concern that any development on the AnzacSt carpark site will not match the idealpresented by the plan.

Changed the Anzac Quarter section of theplan to explain how the council will managethe divestment/briefing process to ensure theintegrity of the outcomes.

Concern that there is not enough openspace provision in Anzac Quarter.

Changed the illustrative concepts to show anenlarged possible public plaza fronting LakeRoad.

Concern that the graphics used signalledthat the design is final.

Commissioned artist impressions to expressthe design in a more conceptual manner.


29/74

Item1

1


03 December 2014


26. The proposed changes are summarised below.

Local board resolution Staff response

[DT/2014/296] That more weight is given tothe words in the Takapuna Centre Plan,rather than the pictures, especially relating

to the Anzac Quarter and the provision ofgood quality public space thereby enablingcivic events like Anzac Day, catering for upto 10,000 people and markets like thecurrent Sunday market to occur.

The fourth outcome listed on page 24 of thedocument has been amended to refer to theAnzac Day commemorations as a specific

example of a civic ceremony that theproposed open spaces could accommodate.

The foreword has been amended to add thefollowing: The projects have a focus on howwe can improve and add to our public spacesand design our streets to be more peoplefriendly through opportunities such as sharedspaced or pedestrianisation.

The third paragraph on page 23 now

includes It is important that these activitiescontinue.

[DT/2014/297] Encourage undergroundcarparking and other carparking options(aiming for 400 rather than the current 270+)to support Hurstmere Road becoming ashared and/or pedestrian only open spaceand the possibility of a portion of The Strandbecoming a pedestrian only open space.

The final outcome on page 24 refers toprovision for at least 270 short term parkingspaces. This has been amended to add andpossibly up to 400. In terms of HurstmereRoad and The Strand, page 26 is amendedto include reference to an extended openspace and pedestrianized link betweenHurstmere Green, The Strand and the BeachReserve. Reference is already made to adesign option for Hurstmere Road being aflush surface, which would enable a sharedspace and increasing pedestrian emphasisas the centres population and activity grows.

[DT/2014/298] Ensure the built scale,especially in the Anzac Quarter, does notundermine the quality of usable public openspace with particular note given to reducingshadowing, but enhancing sunshine, shadeand shelter throughout the year.

Outcome 5 on page 24 amended to read:

Building scale and form that relate to andframe the public open spaces while enablingthose spaces to provide a choice ofsunshine, shade and shelter throughout theyear.

[DT/2014/299] ask officers to come back to

the board in future to enable that board tohave input into the design brief for the whatis currently the Anzac Street carpark andconsult with the community before the AnzacStreet carpark or any part thereof is sold intothe private sector.

The design brief is intended to be put to the

board for input, including key stakeholderviews if the board wishes.


30/74

Item11


03 December 2014


Maori impact statement

27. Consultation with mana whenua was undertaken on the Takapuna Strategic Framework

Discussion Document. More recently, in February and July 2014, hui were held with 9 manawhenua groups and matawaaka representatives on Maori aspirations for the DraftDevonport-Takapuna Area Plan. As a result of the hui, Maori outcomes were developed andintegrated throughout the draft plan.

28. No specific engagement with Maori was undertaken as part of the Takapuna Centre Plan.Maori aspiration for Takapuna centre is given effect by the centre plan through its strategiclinks with previous planning initiatives, the draft area plan, and the local board plan.

29. An opportunity identified in the draft area plan includes partnering with mana whenua onlocal environment projects and exploring opportunities to develop and use open space toactively highlight their role as kaitiaki. The public space projects highlighted in the centreplan provide such opportunities.

30. Specifically, page 6 of the centre plan sets out the principles that will underpin the projects totake Takapuna forward, the first of which is to Create an environment that tells the story ofmana whenua cultural landscapes through Te Aranga Maori Design Principles (refer to theAuckland Design Manual).

Implementation31. Implementation of the Takapuna Centre Plan can occur through a range of methods

including the Long-term Plan (including Local Board Agreements), local board plans, andadvocacy for the delivery of projects through other agencies (including CCOs). The deliveryof the identified projects will be dependent on continued commitment of funding and councilworking together with the private sector.

Local board resolution Staff response

[DT/2014/299] request that funds raised byany sales of land or airspace andDevelopment Contributions are used toprogress the Takapuna Strategic Frameworkand developing Takapuna as a desirable,people friendly Metro Centre, including theprovision of open space.

The issue of funds raised by any sales isalready addressed in the final paragraph onpage 23 of the plan. It notes that the site isan opportunity through a private sectoragreement to build a high quality mixed usedevelopment which could enable the councilto achieve public open space and car parkingbenefits while offsetting or minimising thecost to ratepayers.

Funds from the divestment of council assetare automatically placed in a general ledger.The ring-fencing of any funds requirecommittee approval.

Development contributions are collected foractivities in funding areas. The money can

be used anywhere in the funding area. Forthe existing policy the smallest catchmentsare North, Central, South, West, Hauraki GulfIslands and Rural. As developmentcontributions fund both historic and plannedworks they are not restricted to a specificdevelopment site.


31/74

Item1

1


03 December 2014


Attachments

No. Title Page

A Takapuna Centre Plan(Under Separate Cover)

SignatoriesAuthors Wayne Siu - Policy Analyst




32/74


33/74


34/74

Item12


03 December 2014

Endorsement of the draft Otara-Papatoetoe Area Plan for final release Page 34

Two youth engagement events held at the Tupu (Dawson Road) and Papatoetoe

Libraries

Presentation of the draft Area Plan to the Southern Mana Whenua Information Hui in

Manukau. Ten mana whenua representatives from southern iwi and hapu were inattendance.

Feedback received8. A total of 75 responses (54 from individuals and 21 from organisations) were received. The

key moves, and supporting projects and initiatives generally received a high level of support.Transport matters attracted the largest amount of feedback, closely followed by issuesrelating to the built environment.

9. As a result of the feedback, the working party made a number of amendments to the areaplan document. The majority of amendments made were to further clarify the scope ofprojects and initiatives listed or to include additional organisations as support partners.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

10. A working party comprising all seven members of the tara-Papatoetoe Local Board, andtwo ward councillors have worked collaboratively to develop the area plan. A number of thecommunity engagement events e.g. youth events, were attended by members of the Board.

11. A series of workshops were held with the working party to establish and agree the vision,key moves, and supporting projects and initiatives together with the way the Area Plan canhelp deliver on the outcomes and directions in the Auckland Plan. Key projects andinitiatives within the Area Plan align with those in the draft Local Board Plan.

Maori Impact Statement

12. The process of engagement on area plans with mana whenua and mataawaka groups in thewider tara-Papatoetoe area has been developed in collaboration with the councils MaoriStrategy and Relations Department.

13. Individual hui were hosted with the representatives of nine Mana Whenua groups to seektheir views and aspirations for the area, and how this knowledge could be recognised andreflected in the draft Area Plan. These groups were:

Te Akitai Waiohua

Ngti Whanaunga Ngti Paoa Ngti Maru Ngti Te Ata Ngti Tamaoho Waikato Tainui

Te Kawerau a Maki

Ngi Tai ki Tmaki

14. Of the 11 mana whenua groups with an interest in the area, only two chose not toparticipate.

15. Mataawaka groups were invited to attend key stakeholder workshops to understand theiraspirations for the area. Unfortunately none of the groups were able to attend. Copies of thedraft Area Plan were subsequently sent to mataawaka groups to encourage feedback. Nofeedback was received from these groups.


35/74

Item1

2


03 December 2014

Endorsement of the draft Otara-Papatoetoe Area Plan for final release Page 35

Implementation Issues16. Area plans are a key mechanism to implement the Auckland Plan and enable greater level

of detail in terms of outcomes and aspirations expected across the region. The area planaligns with the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and will inform future long term plans wherefacilities and items for capital investment may be required. The implementation andprioritisation of projects and initiatives in the Area Plan will inform and help to shape the

forward work programmes for the Council, Council Controlled Organisations and other keydelivery partners.

17. The recommendation to agree the content of the final draft of the tara-Papatoetoe AreaPlan is consistent with the councils policies and strategies and does not trigger thesignificance policy.

18. The delivery of the key moves will be supported by a separate implementation plan that willidentify:

likely timeframe for delivery of the short-term projects and initiatives that are funded,and can be implemented over the next five years

desired timeframes and potential funding requirements for the longer-termaspirational projects and initiatives that are not yet funded and/or planned for

lead agency and/or delivery partners responsible for each project and initiative.

19. The implementation plan will sit alongside the area plan, and is used as a tool to advocatefor, and secure funding through future Long-term and Annual Plan budget processes. Theimplementation plan will be prepared following adoption of the tara-Papatoetoe Area Plan.

Attachments

No. Title Page

A Otara-Papatoetoe Area Plan(Under Separate Cover)

B Theme Maps(Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors Marc Dendale - Team Leader Planning South

Authorisers Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager



36/74


37/74

Item1

7


03 December 2014

Draft Auckland 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy 2015-2025 LTP Page 37

Draft Auckland 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy 2015-2025 LTP

File No.:CP2014/27497

Purpose1. To receive the material that forms the basis of the draft Auckland 30 Year Infrastructure

Strategy (the Strategy) and provide feedback.

Executive Summary2. Infrastructure provides the foundation upon which our city is based. Significant projects

have the ability to be transformational in helping council to reach the Auckland Plan vision ofbeing the worlds most liveable city.

3. As part of the recent Local Government Act (LGA) amendments, the council is now requiredto develop a 30 year Infrastructure Strategy as part of its Long-term Plan (LTP). Council is

required to meet the purposes of the Act, which are to: identify the significant infrastructure issues for the council over the 30 years

identify the principal options for managing those issues; and

identify the implications of those options.

4. The Strategy will also outline how the council intends to manage our infrastructure assets,taking into account increased demand, combined with funding constraints. The Strategy hasto outline a 30 year summary of council infrastructure investment.

5. The cost of major projects together with their long life spans means it is vital to make theright decisions. The LTP process enables council to make decisions about trade-offsbetween infrastructure types in the short term period. The Strategy has a role in aligninginfrastructure provision across the range of infrastructure types in the longer term.

6. The draft Strategy has been developed through a collaborative process involvingdepartments and stakeholders from across council including: Finance, the Chief PlanningOffice, the Housing Project Office, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Watercareand Auckland Transport. The New Zealand Transport Agency has also been included as akey partner.

7. In March 2014 the draft material for the Strategy was reported to the InfrastructureCommittee and a workshop was held with members of the Regional DevelopmentCommittee in October 2014. Local Boards were consulted during their SeptemberOctober 2014 cluster meetings.

8. The draft material contains a section that sets out a commitment to Mori, including astatement that acknowledges that Mori have a special relationship with Aucklands physicaland cultural environment.

9. Through the LTP process, the council will:

a. highlight the matters of public interest arising in the draft Strategy in the LTP consultationdocument; and will

b. generally consult on the material that will form the basis of the final Strategy as part ofthe supporting information this is the material attached to this report.

10. On the 18 December 2014 the Governing Body will be asked to adopt this consultationmaterial. Feedback from the Committee meeting will be incorporated into that consultation

material.


38/74

Item17


03 December 2014



a) note that the material provided will form the basis of the Auckland 30 YearInfrastructure Strategy 2015-2015.

b) provide feedback to staff on the material to be incorporated into a draft infrastructurestrategy for Governing Body approval on 18 December 2014.

Discussion

Background11. Infrastructure provides the foundation upon which our city is based. Significant projects

have the ability to be transformational in helping council to reach the Auckland Plan vision ofbeing the worlds most liveable city.

12. The development of the Strategy is a statutory requirement as part of the Local GovernmentAct (LGA) 2002 amendments. The Strategy will outline a 30 year summary of councilinfrastructure investment; identify significant infrastructure issues, the principal options formanaging those issues and how the council intends to manage its infrastructure assetsunder a most likely scenario.

13. The Strategy must be developed as part of a councils 2015-2025 LTP and is beingdeveloped as part of Auckland Councils Finance LTP workstream. The cost of majorprojects together with their long life spans means it is vital to make the right decisions. TheLTP process enables council to make decisions about trade-offs between infrastructuretypes in the short term period, while the Strategy provides the longer term context.

14. The Strategy is prepared under section 101B of the LGA which identifies infrastructureassets as including existing or proposed assets to be used to provide services by or onbehalf of the council in relation to the following groups: water supply, sewage (wastewater),the treatment and disposal of sewage, stormwater drainage, flood protection and controlworks and the provision of roads and footpaths. Discretion in the Act allows council toinclude any other assets. We propose to also include assets relating to community facilities,public open space and public transport.

15. The strategy provides the context in which Council infrastructure operates including thecurrent asset base, its roles in infrastructure provision, as well as physical and demographicfactors. It also acknowledges the Housing Accord as an initiative to address Aucklandshousing challenge.

The material16. The material (Attachment 1) outlines the key content that will form the basis of the draft

Strategy. It includes a comprehensive package of mechanisms for managing infrastructureissues facing council over the longer term. Council is required to meet the purposes of theAct, which are to:

identify the significant infrastructure issues for the council over the 30 years

identify the principal options for managing those issues; and

identify the implications of those options.

17. The Strategy will also outline how the council intends to manage our infrastructure assets,taking into account increased demand, combined with funding constraints.


39/74

Item1

7


03 December 2014


18. The Strategy will identify the significant pressures on infrastructure demand led by;Aucklands growth, demographic change, service level expectations, environmentalsustainability, resilience and the condition of existing assets. The Strategy will build on theAuckland Plan 30 year vision for Auckland to be the worlds most liveable city. It will providea package of mechanisms that will respond to the challenges that Auckland faces whichcomprises:

The Auckland Plan Development Strategy Implementation and Spatial Prioritisation

Management of the demand for infrastructure

Smart investment / transformative infrastructure investment

Infrastructure provision aligned across the networks

Efficient and innovative asset management

Additional funding tools

A monitoring programme for growth.

19. The Strategy content has been developed within the context of a constrained funding

environment, with growth being a key driver of demand for infrastructure. It will complementthe Financial Strategy which is also being developed as part of the LTP.

20. Further information that will form the basis of the Strategy, including the InvestmentSummary and a list of major projects over the 30 year period was still being drafted at thetime of writing this report. This information will provide a picture of where, over the next 30years there will be pressure on infrastructure provision and budget. A copy of this will beprovided before the meeting.

21. Feedback from the Committee will be added to the material for the Governing Body to adoptfor consultation on the 18thof December 2014.

Process

22. The material has been developed through a collaborative process involving departments andstakeholders from across council including: Finance, the Chief Planning Office, the HousingProject Office, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Watercare and AucklandTransport. The New Zealand Transport Agency has also been included as a key partner.

23. An update on the material was reported to the Infrastructure Committee in March 2014(Resolution number INF/2014/21).The resolution was that the Committee:

a) Receive the report and request regular quarterly reports and updates on possibleissues as they arise.

24. Subsequently, further information has been presented to a workshop of the AucklandDevelopment Committee (16 October 2014).

25. This is the first time Auckland Council will have an infrastructure strategy. It is anticipatedthat this will enable dialogue with others involved in infrastructure provision and skills andlabour market development on an on-going basis. The Strategy will provide an opportunityto signal councils longer term view anddirection to the wider community, including otherinfrastructure providers, which will inform and support their long term planning. The planalso provides an opportunity to integrate infrastructure and environmental sustainabilityissues as it is further developed.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

26. Presentations on the Infrastructure Strategy were made to the local board cluster meetingsduring September

Auckland Development Committee Agenda December 14

Documents

Transcript of Auckland Development Committee Agenda December 14