Auckland Development Committee Agenda - October 14

8/11/2019 Auckland Development Committee Agenda - October 14

1/92

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:

Thursday, 16 October 20149.30amReception LoungeAuckland Town Hall301-305 Queen StreetAuckland

Auckland Development Committee

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson Deputy Mayor Penny HulseDeputy Chairperson Cr Chris Darby

Members Cr Anae Arthur Anae Cr Calum PenroseCr Cameron Brewer Cr Dick QuaxMayor Len Brown, JP Member Josie SmithCr Dr Cathy Casey Cr Sharon Stewart, QSMCr 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)

Tam WhiteDemocracy Advisor

9 October 2014

Contact Telephone: 09 307 7253Email: [email protected]: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz


2/92

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Responsibilities

This committee will lead the implementation of the Auckland Plan, including the integration ofeconomic, social, environmental and cultural objectives for Auckland for the next 30 years. It willguide the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on land use planning,housing and the appropriate provision of infrastructure and strategic projects associated with theseactivities. Key responsibilities include:

Unitary Plan

Plan changes to operative plans

Designation of Special Housing Areas

Housing policy and projects including Papakainga housing

Spatial Plans including Area Plans

City centre development (incl reporting of CBD advisory board) and city transformation projects

Tamaki regeneration projects

Built Heritage

Urban design

Powers

(i) All powers necessary to perform the committees responsibilities.

Except:

(a) powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (seeGoverning Body responsibilities)

(b) where the committees responsibility is explicitly limited to making a recommendationonly

(ii) Approval of a submission to an external body

(iii) Powers belonging to another committee, where it is necessary to make a decision prior to thenext meeting of that other committee.

(iv) Power to establish subcommittees.


3/92


16 October 2014

Page 3

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Apologies 5

2 Declaration of Interest 5

3 Confirmation of Minutes 5

4 Petitions 5

5 Public Input 5

5.1 Ben Ross 5

5.2 Ms Marjia Batistich, Bell Gully, representing the Southern Gateway

Consortium : Proposed Plan Change 35 (Puhinui 6

5.3 Milford Residents Association : Plan Change 34Milford IntensiveResidential Development OverlayAuckland Council District Plan,North Shore 6

5.4 Avondale Committee Action group 66 Local Board Input 7

7 Extraordinary Business 7

8 Notices of Motion 7

9 Update on the Puhinui Structure Plan 9

10 Mangere Gateway - Rennie Homestead Future Use 33

11 Adoption of the Pukekohe Area Plan 73

12 Approval of Private Plan Change 34 - Milford Intensive Residential

Development Overlay - Auckland Council District Plan, North ShoreSection 77

13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items


4/92


5/92


16 October 2014

Page 5

1 Apologies

An apology from Member Josie Smith has 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:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 11 September 2014and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 9 October 2014,including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Petitions

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

5 Public Input

Standing Order 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 meeting

and 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 Ben Ross

Purpose

1. Mr Ben Ross wishes to address the committee on the following topics:

i) where to with Auckland's City Building Post Election

ii) the City Rail Link and a funding mechanism not being explored in Aucklandthat would fund both the CRL and kick start development in the City Centrearea (this also ties in with points one and three)

iii) reaction to the Finance and Performance Committee's decision to sell land inManukau City Centre and what alternative could have been taken forManukau's development with the Land (as it will have consequences to otherAuckland Development projects on Council land across the City).

Recommendation


a) receive and thank Mr Ben Ross for his presentation.


6/92


16 October 2014

Page 6

5.2 Ms Marjia Batistich, Bell Gully, representing the Southern GatewayConsortium : Proposed Plan Change 35 (Puhinui)

Purpose

1. Ms Marjia Batistich, Bell Gully, representing the Southern Gateway Consortium willaddress the Committee regarding the Proposed Plan Change 35 (Puhinui).

Recommendation


a) receive the presentation from Ms Marjia Batistich, representing the SouthernGateway Consortium.

5.3 Milford Residents Association : Plan Change 34Milford IntensiveResidential Development OverlayAuckland Council District Plan, NorthShore

Purpose1. Ms Marry Bott and Ms Debbbie Dunsford, representatives of Milford Residents

Association wish to address the committee regarding the approval of Plan Change34Milford Intensive Residential Development OverlayAuckland Council DistrictPlan, North Shore.

2. The Milford Residents Association (MRA) worked very closely with council on thePC34 Appeal and they wish to express their thanks to the staff for the way theysupported MRA. The Milford community also benefited from Local Board funding fora community-led visioning project for Milford which led to a more informed outcomeon PC34. MRA also want to advise the committee about the substantial costs borneby the community, some of which are still outstanding.

Recommendation


a) receive and thank the representatives of Milford Residents Association for theirpresentation.

5.4 Avondale Committee Action group

Purpose

1. Silvia Spieksma, Avondale Community Action group, will address the committee inrelation to lots of public land that is currently being sold off in Avondale to meet theincrease in demand for housing. As a community, Avondale Community Action areconcerned that the current and future needs of their community, with an increasingpopulation, are not being met.

Recommendation/s


a) thank Silvia Spieksma, representing the Avondale Community Action group, for herpresentation.


7/92


16 October 2014

Page 7

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 thediscretion 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.

Ms Lydia Sosene, Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board chair will speak at item 10: MangereGateway - Rennie Homestead Future Use.

7 Extraordinary Business

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

An itemthat 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.

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.


8/92


9/92

Item9


16 October 2014

Update on the Puhinui Structure Plan Page 9

Update on the Puhinui Structure Plan

File No.:CP2014/23657

Purpose

1. To provide an update on the Puhinui structure plan as per resolution no. AUC/2014/28 ofthis committee.

2. To seek confirmation that council will not initiate a change to the Metropolitan Urban Limits(MUL) as identified in the Operative Auckland Regional Policy Statement (ARPS) inresponse to Private Plan Change 35 (Puhinui Gateway) to the Auckland Council District Plan(Manukau Section) and that the matter of urban expansion is to be addressed as part of thehearings on the submissions to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP).

Executive summary3. The Puhinui structure plan area consists of approximately 1100 hectares of land, located

east of the Auckland International Airport (see Attachments A). It is located outside thecurrent Metropolitan Urban Limits (MUL) and the proposed Rural Urban Boundary (RUB) asidentified in the PAUP. The area has significant natural and cultural values and is subject toa range of environmental and infrastructure constraints. A private district plan changerequest from the Southern Gateway Consortium to rezone part (150ha) of the Structure Planarea for urban activities (business) is at the pre-hearing stage. The plan change applicantalso requested the Council to promulgate an extension to the MUL to include the privateplan change area.

4. The Auckland Development Committee (ADC) at its meeting in February 2014 approved thepreparation of a structure plan for the Puhinui area to inform the council position on thefuture land use and development framework for the whole of the structure plan area. TheADC also agreed that any decision regarding a change to the MUL in response to PPC35

will not occur until the structure planning process is completed. The Committee requested anupdate on the Puhinui structure plan before the end of 2014.

5. This report provides an update on the findings of the latest technical investigations whichfocussed on infrastructure services and highlights the following:

Watercare has confirmed that there is some, though limited, capacity to service thePuhinui structure plan area through the South-western Interceptor.

The stormwater management strategy for the Puhinui structure plan is based on theprinciples of retention of all permanent and intermittent streams and their riparianmargins, using water sensitive design and targeted approach to contaminantmanagement.

Traffic modelling of the preliminary strategic roading network shows that thedevelopment of the core structure plan area (south of Waokauri Creek) will result insignificant increases in traffic and delays over the wide area of the transport network.

The estimated cost of strategic roading infrastructure upgrade is estimated around $120million for which there is currently no funding. Even with such investment, significantdelays in travel times (congestion) across the network is still predicted.

Further investigations are required to confirm a feasible staged transport network andinfrastructure funding agreement to enable staged development of the structure planarea.

6. Based on all the investigations to date, this report recommends that certain areas within the

structure plan should be included within the RUB (see Attachment D).


10/92


11/92

Item9


16 October 2014


9. In accordance with the resolution of the ADC, the preparation of the Puhinui structure planwas initiated in February 2014. A structure plan establishes the spatial development patternof land use and the transport and services network within a defined area. It provides fordetailed examination of the opportunities and constraints relating to the land to ensure thatthe effects of development are addressed in advance of the development occurring. Thisreport provides an update on the findings of the latest technical investigations which focus

on infrastructure services.Wastewater Servicing

10. Wastewater in the southern area is serviced by the Southern Interceptor and the South-western Interceptor. At present, the southern wastewater servicing strategy is based on theAuckland Councils RUB in the PAUP. The Puhinui structure plan area is outside the servicearea given the current rural zoning and position outside of the RUB. In November 2013Watercare advised council that the South-western Interceptor, which runs within the Puhinuistructure plan area, is at capacity and is unable to accommodate additional growth.Watercare also advised that the Southern Interceptor has very limited capacity. The South-western interceptor was not able to receive increased flows as any additional capacity wasallocated to other southern growth areas and Special Housing Areas.

11. Watercare has undertaken further modelling work in 2014 to help inform the wastewaterservicing strategy for the wider southern area, including the Puhinui structure plan area. Thiswork involved examining the whole of the southern wastewater area (incorporating all thenew southern RUB areas identified in the PAUP).

12. As a result of this modelling work, and confirmation of likely flows from the PPC35 area,Watercare has confirmed that there is some capacity (though limited) to service the Puhinuistructure plan area through the South-western Interceptor. As the Puhinui structure planarea sits outside the MUL and the RUB, there is no funding allocated in Watercares 2012-2022 Asset Management Plan. The developers would need to fund the cost of new waterand wastewater transmission pipes along Puhinui Road, all Infrastructure Growth Chargesand the cost of local reticulation.

Transport Network

13. The only road access to the southern half of the Puhinui structure plan (south of WaokauriCreek), is via State Highway 20B (Puhinui Road), which serves as a key strategic access tothe Auckland International Airport from the east. Auckland Transport (AT), New ZealandTransport Agency (NZTA) and Auckland International Airport Limited have indicated thatthere are significant capacity issues associated with Puhinui Road given the lack of othertransport links.

14. One of the core components of the Puhinui structure plan is the integration of land use andlocal and strategic transport network. This involves the identification of the proposed roadingnetwork and hierarchy, to support multi modal transport and accessibility that is

interconnected and ensures a number of access points to and from the structure plan area.15. Engagement with the key stakeholders has highlighted the following as the key transport

issues for the Puhinui structure plan:

SH20B (Puhinui Road) is a key strategic route to the airport and the efficiency of thiscorridor must be protected. Access will therefore be limited to a few key points.

An appropriate local roading network needs to be developed to allow access to thepeninsula without relying solely on the State Highway network.

Any network developed needs to provide opportunities for walking, cycling and publictransport.

The proposed SMART rail corridor alignment should be protected.


12/92

Item9


16 October 2014


Any network must integrate with planning in the surrounding areanotably the AirportMasterplan and East West study.

Any network must give consideration to cultural and environment constraints.

16. In partnership with AT, a conceptual roading network has been developed for the Puhinuistructure plan area (see attachment B). These possible transport links into the structure plan

area are identified for modelling purposes to provide for network resilience and takepressure off the State Highway network in the area. It is noted that these options arecurrently at investigation phase only, and preliminary traffic modelling has been undertakento determine which links are necessary. The possible transport links are:

Creation of a new road link connecting McLaughlins Road with Kiwi Tamaki Road.

Construction of a new bridge across State Highway 20, connecting to Noel BurnsideRoad.

17. Each of the links identified above have their own challenges, and has not been assessedfrom a feasibility point of view (other than from an engineering perspective). For example,the Wilco Road extension traverses land that is designated by the Ministry of Justice, whomay or may not support such a proposal. Their impact on the Southern Consortiumdevelopment proposals is yet to be investigated. Further discussions with the affectedparties are necessary prior to the finalisation of the transport strategy.

18. NZTA has raised concerns regarding the predicted significant travel time delays, many ofwhich will directly affect SH20 and SH20A/B. NZTA is also concerned about the impact ofsuch traffic generation on the interchanges to the State Highway Network. It is noted thatfurther consultation is also required with the representatives of Auckland International Airportto understand their concerns.

19. The increased traffic generation would require, at a minimum, the construction of the twonew roading links into the structure plan area, four lane arterial roads, a new interchange onSH20B and likely further upgrades to SH20 and SH20A/B with respect to further lane

capacity. The estimated cost of this infrastructure upgrading is estimated around $120million. This does not include additional costs to NZTA for State Highway improvements, forexample the cost of the new interchange close to Campana Road is estimated to be inexcess of $120 million.

20. The initial costings information shows that significant investment in roading infrastructure willbe needed to enable the development of the Puhinui structure plan area to occur. Thefinancial investment required would need to be funded by multiple parties, including AT andNZTA. None of the required funding is currently budgeted for by either AT or NZTA.Discussions regarding developing a funding agreement are yet to commence.

21. The strategy of the structure plan is to determine the overarching conceptual roadingnetwork to ensure that the future development of the area is not compromised. Having

established this, it is possible to enable staged development which feeds into this network.AT will continue to work with the key stakeholders to develop a staging plan for the transportnetwork which is linked to staged development within the structure plan area, and inparticular, for the Southern Gateway Consortium development area.

Stormwater Management Strategy

22. The Puhinui structure plan area adjoins the Manukau Harbour with Pukaki, Waokauri andPuhinui Creeks flowing into it. Manukau Harbour and these creeks are identified asSignificant Ecological Areas (SEA) in the PAUP in recognition of its high habitat values. Thepart of the Manukau Harbour adjoining Puhinui Reserve and Puhinui Creek supportthousands of international migratory birds and New Zealand endemic wading birds. Part ofthe area is a wildlife refuge. Pukaki-Waokauri Creek is a Tangata Whenua Management

Area.


13/92

Item9


16 October 2014


23. Given the presence of SEA and a Tangata Whenua Management Area, it is important thatthere is a high level of certainty that the future development of the Puhinui structure planarea will not adversely affect water quality, and ecological and cultural values associated thestream network and the sensitive receiving environment.

24. A stormwater management plan is being considered as part of the Puhinui structure planprocess to identify comprehensive stormwater solutions, recognising that stormwater runoff

is a major factor in the quality and health of urban coastal and freshwater systems. Acomprehensive stream survey has been undertaken to identify the different classifications ofstreams present within the Puhinui structure plan area. The draft Streams AssessmentSurvey maps the location of streams and natural wetland and classifies streams or riversinto three categories: permanent, intermittent or ephemeral outreaches.

25. In line with the PAUP guidance, the stormwater management strategy for the Puhinuistructure plan incorporates the following principles:

Retention of all permanent and intermittent streams to retain natural water systems.

Protect and enhance riparian margins.

Set aside adequate flood plains from development.

Incorporation of water sensitive design

Hydrology (for stream health)retain the first 10mm of runoff (on site) and detain theremainder of the 95thpercentile event.

Targeted approach to contaminant management (e.g. control of high contaminantgenerating roofing materials) and treatment of high contaminant sources (e.g. roads andcarparks).

Hybrid of an on-site and off-site flow and quality controls using treatment train approach.This provides certainty of contaminant management, minimise size of wetlands (ideallylocate these within the 100 year flood plains) and accommodate on-site retention within

landscaped area requirement.26. Based on the above high level principles, Attachment C illustrates the location of permanent

and intermittent streams, natural wetland and the extent of riparian margin areas. It alsoshows the indicative locations and sizes of the catchment scale wetland swale systems.Catchment-scale wetland-swale systems will exist downstream of the piped network, prior todischarge to the stream. These assets will provide the residual detention required by theUnitary Plan (approximately 25 mm of additional rainfall), as well as additional water qualitypolishing and spill containment.

27. The finalisation of the stormwater management strategy is dependent on the confirmation ofthe proposed roading pattern. There is also on-going work to discuss and seek agreementregarding the Southern Gateway Consortiums stormwater management proposal and

network discharge consent application.

RUB Movement Investigations

28. One of the core objectives of the Puhinui structure plan is to inform the council position onwhether the subject area should be urbanised or not. If it is to be urbanised, thenconsideration needs to be given to whether or not a live zone chosen from the PAUP suiteof zones can be applied to the subject area, or whether the area should be zoned FutureUrban. Areas given a live zone are regarded as stage 1 development areas.

29. The analysis to date shows that the Puhinui structure plan area can be divided into threedistinct portions as shown in Attachment D. Area A consists of the northern portion of thestructure plan area, generally east and west of the Pukaki Crater. The area along Pukaki

Road is dominated by market gardening. It also contains the Pukaki Marae and papakaingahousing.


14/92

Item9


16 October 2014


30. It is considered that Area A should remain outside the RUB and retain its current ruralzoning for the following reasons:

It contains Class 1 soils, being the most versatile and productive of all soil classes.

Parts of the area are within the High and Moderate Aircraft Noise Contours, in closeproximity of the Auckland International Airport, both under the operative provisions and

the new contours detailed in the submission by the Auckland International Airport to thePAUP.

A significant portion of this area is within the 57dBA noise area, which is affected byaircraft engine testing, hence creating a noisy environment. It would not be appropriateto introduce more people to this noisy environment, as it has the potential to generatereverse sensitivity issues for the operational requirements for the Auckland InternationalAirport.

The rural zoning enables the retention of an open character between Pukaki Crater andCrater Hill area.

31. Area B consists of the middle portion of the Puhinui structure plan area, with WaokauriCreek forming its southern and western boundaries. This area generally contains the CraterHill geological feature and its margins. Crater Hill is listed as being of national significance inthe New Zealand Geopreservation Inventory. It contains the Self Crater and UndergroundPress lava caves, which are also of national significance. A significant portion of this area isidentified as an Outstanding Natural Feature (ONF) in the PAUP (see Map 1 in AttachmentE). The Te Akitai Waiohua Cultural Heritage Assessment identifies the whole of area B asbeing a site of cultural significance. The archaeological survey report for the Puhinuistructure plan area identifies a significant portion of Crater Hill area as an archaeologicallandscape of exceptional significance, containing 56 individual archaeological sites (seeMap 2 in Attachment E). Archaeologicallandscapes are areas where there is a highprobability of further archaeological sites being present, given the past known occupation.

32. While it is acknowledged that Area B is special given the cultural, geological and

archaeological values present within this area, it is recommended that this area be includedwithin the RUB on the basis that the precinct provisions to be applied to this area will ensurethat these important values are not compromised. Any partial movements of the RUB in thislocation will not ensure the defensibility of the RUB line, which is only able to be secured bymoving the line to the coast.

33. Area B includes two sub-areas. The first is the most northern block, located immediatelyeast of Tidal Road (identified as Tams sitein Map 3 in Attachment E). This area is excludedfrom the ONF area and archaeological landscape area identified for Crater Hill. However, itis within the cultural site of significance to Te Akitai Waiohua. The majority of this site iswithin the Moderate Aircraft Noise Contours as submitted by the Auckland InternationalAirport in its submission to the PAUP, and therefore, new residential development is not

considered appropriate in this location. Recognising that this block is contiguous with theadjoining business uses, and given the need to increase the supply of business land in theregion, it is recommended that this area be included within the RUB, and given a live zoneas part of stage 1 of the release of land. It is important that precinct provisions be developedfor this site to address appropriate interface treatment issues between this site and theadjoining Crater Hill area.

34. The challenge for the Crater Hill area is to determine the most appropriate land use for thisarea recognising that the important geological, cultural, archaeological and natural valuesassociated with this area are not compromised. The matter of the detailed precinct plan andthe appropriate zoning to be applied to this site is to be further discussed with the keystakeholders and the landowner in the future.

35. One of the key issues for consideration for Crater Hill area is how to balance the aspirationsof the landowner seeking residential development versus the long term protection of thesignificant values associated with the Crater for the wider public benefit. As part of thestructure plan exercise, Crater Hill site was assessed to determine whether any portion of


15/92

Item9


16 October 2014


the site is able to be developed in light of the constraints present on the site. Thisinvestigation has identified that the area proposed to be zoned to Quarry under the PAUPshould be further investigated to enable some form of residential development. Thelandowner has commissioned a land contamination report and a geotechnical report toassist council in understanding the feasibility of this option. It is noted that while this may bean option for consideration, this is not supported by Te Akitai Waiohua, nor councils own

landscape expert (Mr Stephen Brown - see Attachment F for his comments). In summary, MrBrown is of the view that development on the quarry portion would disrupt the integrity of thecrater as a landform and geological feature, obstruct views into the crater from SH20 andadversely affect the Manukau Memorial Gardens.

36. Area C consists of all of the land south of Waokauri Creek. A significant portion of this areais located within the High and Moderate Airport Noise Contours, and is not an appropriatelocation for new residential development. This area also contains other key provisionsrelating to the operational requirement of the Auckland International Airport, such as RunwayEnd Protection Areas, Obstacle Limitation Surfaces, Specifications to Discharges to Air withthe Approach Path.

37. Due to its strategic location beside the Auckland International Airport and adjacent urban

uses, Area C has potential for development and faces significant pressure for urbanisation.The Auckland Plan and Economic Development Strategy have identified strategic issuesrelated to business land demand and have made clear the business land targets the regionwill need to work towards over the next 30 years. The provision of new business land is anexplicit part of the Auckland Plans development strategy, and it is expected that up to 1400hectares of new business land could be required over the 30 year horizon of the AucklandPlan. This is split between 1000 hectares for industrial activities and 400 hectares forcommercial activities.

38. It has been highlighted that land to meet industrial growth is the most pressing given it needsto be well located, highly serviced including good transport connections, and be of sufficientsize to accommodate the nature of industrial activities. Land must also have adequateseparation from sensitive activities such as residential uses that can be negatively affectedby noise, other discharges, traffic and other impacts from industrial activities.

39. It is recommended that Area C be included within the RUB provided that all theinfrastructure, cultural heritage and funding issues are addressed, for the following reasons:

It is strategically located beside the Auckland International Airport to meet the businessneeds of the region.

It provides for a contiguous block of approximately 400 hectares for business uses,consisting of large land parcels.

A significant portion of the area is located within the High and Moderate Aircraft NoiseContours, making it an ideal location for business activities, as residential development

is not desirable in this location. It is located beside the Wiri Industrial Area, and therefore, provides for the contiguous

extension of the existing industrial areas.

SH20 acts as a significant buffer and provides separation from established residentialareas to the east, therefore, significantly reducing negative future impacts of businessdevelopment on surrounding residential uses.

Timing of MUL Shift vs RUB

40. At its February 2014 meeting, the ADC agreed that any decision to initiate a change to theMUL in response to PPC35 should not occur until the Puhinui structure planning process iscompleted. As discussed in the previous sections, parts of the structure plan area can be

urbanised. However, the policy context for an MUL shift is predicated on certainty regardinginfrastructure services and associated funding agreements. For the structure plan area,there are still outstanding infrastructure servicing issues to be worked through. On this basis,an MUL shift at this time cannot be supported.


16/92

Item9


16 October 2014


41. Council has received a number of submissions to the PAUP seeking that the Puhinuistructure plan area be incorporated within the RUB. The Auckland Unitary Plan IndependentHearing Panel has released the provisional hearing schedule, which states that the hearingson the Regional Policy Statement part of the Unitary Plan, seeking changes to the RUB inthe southern area will be heard in February 2015.

42. Even if the outstanding infrastructure servicing matters as part of an MUL shift are to be

addressed and agreement reached urgently, any gains in terms of time frames are notsignificant (see table below). Furthermore, promulgating an MUL shift alongside the PAUPhearing process is not an efficient use of resources and is therefore not recommended.

Option Ainitiate MUL shift Option BFollow the PAUP Process

Now toFebruary 2015

Finaliseoutstandinginfrastructureservicing issuesand preparechange to ARPS

Now toDecember2014

January 2015

Attend pre-hearing meetings, prepareevidence for PAUP hearing

Prepare rebuttal evidence

February 2015 Notify MUL shift,with supportinginformation

February2015

Hearings on Regional PolicyStatement matters relating tosubmissions on southern RUB matters

March - April2015

Summarisesubmissions andnotify furthersubmissions

March 2015onwards

Work on submissions on rezoning andprecincts

MayJuly2015

Complete furthersubmissions andprepare PlannerReport for

hearing

August 2015 Hearing

October 2015 Decision

November2015 onwards

Appeals andEnvironmentCourt process

February 2016 Final Decision

Sometime in2016

Hearings on Precinct provisions

August 2016 PAUP Decisions

Consideration

Local board views and implications

43. The Puhinui structure plan area is within the boundaries of the Otara Papatoetoe LocalBoard and the Mangere Otahuhu Local Board. Council staff have met with the Chairs of bothof these Local Boards to provide them with an update on the matters outlined in this report.Further updates to the Mangere-Otahuhu and Otara-Papatoetoe Local Boards were held on29thof September and the on 6 thof October respectively. The Local Boards were also invited

to a Puhinui structure plan workshop held on 8 August 2014.


17/92

Item9


16 October 2014


Mori impact statement44. The rohe of Puhinui is a place of deep cultural and spiritual significance to Te Akitai

Waiohua. The policy framework of the PAUP seeks to enable Mana Whenua to identify,articulate and integrate their values in the resource management processes affectingancestral lands.

45. Consultation has been undertaken with Te Akitai Waiohua to understand their position onthe matter of the RUB movement as it applies to the Puhinui structure plan area. While TeAkitai Waiohua is appreciative of the growth pressures facing the Puhinui area, it is stronglyopposed to any RUB movement without understanding the impacts of future development ontheir cultural heritage values.

46. Te Akitai Waiohua has prepared a cultural heritage assessment for the Puhinui peninsula toinform the structure planning process. The report highlights a series of key sites ofsignificance that connect the people of Te Akitai Waiohua to the Puhinui peninsula. Most ofthese sites are located either within the structure plan area or in close proximity to it. Sites ofsignificance include: Pukaki Crater; Wiri and McLaughlins Mountains; Crater Hill andKohuora Park; Wiroa Island; Waokauri, Otaimako, Tautauroa and Puhinui Creeks; headlandpa sites; and Pukaki Chapel.

47. The Cultural Heritage Assessment Report has been very useful in informing the strategicdirection of the Puhinui structure plan, in particular:

The stormwater management strategy seeks to ensure that the permanent andintermittent stream network within the structure plan area is retained and enhanced. Thisrecognises the importance of these waterways to the iwi.

Part 30 of this report states that the area around the Pukaki Marae and Pukaki Cratershould not be included within the RUB. This recognises that many of the sites ofsignificance to Te Akitai Waiohua are located within this area and retaining this areaoutside the RUB will ensure that the existing cultural heritage values are notcompromised.

The cultural values associated with Crater Hill are recognised and the structure plan willseek to ensure that these values are not compromised. However, it is acknowledged thatthis is a challenging issue given that the crater is in private ownership, and council has toconsider alternatives to the holistic protection of the site. Te Akitai Waiohuas strongobjection to this approach is noted.

Part 39 of this report recommends that the bulk of the area below Waiokauri Creek beincluded within the RUB. A number of sites of significance are located within the areabetween Waokauri Creek and Puhinui Road. This area requires further consideration interms of detailed precinct provisions to specifically address cultural heritage matters.

48. All the other iwi that have an interest in the Puhinui structure plan area were invited to a key

stakeholder workshop held on 8 August 2014 to enable information sharing on the project.Along with Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngati Tamaoho Trust and Huakina Development Trustattended the workshop.

Implementation49. Significant investment in new and upgrades to existing infrastructure, especially the

transport network, is required to service future development of the Puhinui structure planarea. There is currently no funding provision for such capital investments, nor is a fundingagreement in place. The infrastructure funding issue requires further collaborative work.


18/92

Item9


16 October 2014


Attachments

No. Title Page

A Map of Puhinui Structure Plan Area 19

B Conceptual Roading Network for the Puhinui Structure Plan 21

C Overview of Stream / Stormwater Management Strategy 23

D Recommendations Relating to the RUB Movement 25

E Crater Hill Area 27

F Preliminary Landscape Analysis of Crater Hill Development Proposal 29

Signatories

Authors Sukhdeep Singh - Principal Planner

Authorisers Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer


19/92

AttachmentA

Item9


16 October 2014



20/92


21/92

AttachmentB

Item9


16 October 2014



22/92


23/92

AttachmentC

Item9


16 October 2014



24/92


25/92

AttachmentD

Item9


16 October 2014



26/92


27/92

AttachmentE

Item9


16 October 2014



28/92

AttachmentE

Item9


16 October 2014



29/92

AttachmentF

Item9


16 October 2014



30/92

AttachmentF

Item9


16 October 2014



31/92

AttachmentF

Item9


16 October 2014



32/92


33/92

Item1

0


16 October 2014

Mangere Gateway - Rennie Homestead Future Use Page 33

Mangere Gateway - Rennie Homestead Future Use

File No.:CP2014/21998

Purpose

1. The report is to update the Auckland Development Committee on the potential use of theRennie Homestead and surrounding site as a visitors centre as part of the MngereGateway Programme (MGP).

Executive summary

2. In July 2014, the Auckland Development Committee (ADC) endorsed the investigation intothe use of Rennie Homestead and adjoining land as an alternative location for the MngereGateway and Visitor Centre and Visitor Experience. The Rennie Homestead was identifiedas a potential alternative to the originally proposed Otuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve asthe latter was considered to be a culturally sensitive site.

3. In particular, the ADC instructed staff to investigate the physical and financial viability of

using the property as a visitor centre and this has been undertaken based on:

The potential tourism generating uses that could be developed at the Rennie Homesteadand surrounding site

The ability to adapt the Rennie Homestead and surrounding site for these uses

The high-level costs for implementing the above

Iwi views on these proposals

4. Staff have examined the Business Case developed to support the previously proposedvisitor centre at the Otuataua Stonefields site as this provides a consistent basis forassessing the potential of Rennie Homestead. The tourist activities, supporting infrastructure

and financial assumptions within the Business Case are outlined in the report below and inmore detail within the appendices of this report.

5. Having considered the potential visitor attractions, the appropriateness of the RennieHomestead, the viability of the proposed centre, the financial requirements and iwisuncertainty about the Homestead as a preferred location, it is not considered RennieHomestead can be supported as a location for the Visitor Centre in the context of thefinancial constraints faced by Auckland Council under the proposed Long Term Plan.

Recommendations


a) note that staff have investigated the potential use of Rennie Homestead as a visitor

centre based on tourist activities, supporting infrastructure and financial assumptionsthat are consistent with those previously proposed on the Otuataua Stonefields site

b) note the investigations have indicated that the use of Rennie Homestead andsurrounding site as an alternative visitor centre location require a substantial capitalbudget ($3.6m) and operational (a minimum of $971,000) funding subsidy fromcouncil across a range of financial years

c) note budget requirements assume the Centre achieves 100,000 visitors and 45,000paying visitors a year

d) note Rennie Homestead is not considered entirely suitable as a location to receive100,000 visitors a year

e) note that whilst the Mngere-thuhu Local Board and local iwi are supportive of thedevelopment of a visitor centre, further discussions would be required with one iwigroup to agree that the Rennie Homestead is a suitable location


34/92

Item10


16 October 2014


f) note that the visitor centre project does not lie within any of the councils emergingSpatial Priority areas

g) resolve that council does not proceed with the Mngere Gateway Programme visitorcentre on the basis of the points outlined above within the financial constraints of theproposed Long-term Plan (2015-2025).

Comments

Background and Context

6. Since 1994 the Mngere Gateway Programme (MGP) has been a regional initiative thatseeks to harness tourism as a driver of economic development for the benefit of the localcommunity and the wider Auckland region. The MGP seeks to build on the cultural, built andnatural heritage within the area to potentially create a sustainable eco-tourism and heritagedestination. The MGP links with objectives set out within the Auckland Plan, (including TheSouthern Initiative) and the Mngere-thuhu Area Plan. A more detailed historicalbackground is attached as Appendix 1, a strategic policy context attached as Appendix 1.1and a map illustrating the extent of the area attached as Appendix 1.2.

7. Central to the MGP is the development of a visitor centre to provide a base from which arange of visitor services and experiences can be delivered. In 2012 the RegionalDevelopment and Operations Committee (RDO/2012/35,36,37,38,39) supported theconstruction of a visitor centre at the Otuataua Stonefields site. A budget of $3.6m wasallocated to the project within the in Councils current LTP (2012-2022).

8. A further recommendation was made to the Strategy & Finance Committee that operationalfunding of $971,000, for the first 5 years of operation of the visitor centre, be included in theLTP. The Business case supporting the visitor centre indicted an initial operating loss with apossible breakeven within 5 years.

9. More recently, a report was presented to the ADC on 10th July 2014, which endorsed the

investigation of options for the use of the Rennie Homestead as an alternative location forthe Mngere Gateway Visitor Centre and Visitor Experience.Further to this, the physical andfinancial viability of using the property as a visitor centre has been undertaken, based on:

The potential tourism generating uses that could be developed at the Rennie Homesteadand surrounding site

The ability to adapt the Rennie Homestead and surrounding site for these uses

The high-level costs for implementing the above

Iwi views on these proposals

The Rennie Homestead

10. The Rennie Homestead, owned by Council and now proposed as the location for theMngere Gateway visitor centre, has 8.9 hectares of adjoining land which presentsopportunities for a range of potential visitor initiatives. These initiatives would need to bedeveloped incrementally over a number of year dependent upon visitor demand andpotential interest from stakeholders and partners. It is anticipated that local iwi would run thevisitors centre with Councils role in the development evolving into one of facilitation ratherthan being the direct provider of the visitor offering. More information on this range of optionsis outlined below. A location plan of the Rennie Homestead is attached as Appendices 1.3.

11. Work is currently being undertaken to the property to ensure basic health and safety repairs(e.g. roof repair) are completed. This work is being managed and funded by AucklandCouncil Properties Limited (ACPL). Beyond this, the Rennie Homestead requires significant

repair and maintenance work (internal and external alterations to make the propertyweatherproof) estimated to cost around $800k.


35/92

Item1

0


16 October 2014


12. There is currently no budget allocation for the latter work. This expenditure therefore wouldneed to be met from the $3.6m deferred to FY 2015/6 with the balance of the funding usedto develop the Rennie Homestead and surrounding site.

13. The Rennie Homestead is currently managed by ACPL as a non-service property. TheHomestead has been occupied as a privately leased residential property over the last fewyears (although it is currently vacant as the essential repairs are carried out). Going forward,

staff will work with ACPL to determine a future use for the property. In the meantime, it isenvisaged that the property will continue to be used for residential purposes as this willprovide an active and secure use.

Proposed Visitor Offer at Rennie Homestead

14. The visitor offer proposed at Rennie Homestead, as outlined below, is consistent with thetourism activities, infrastructure and assumptions as outlined within the Business Case tosupport the previous Otuataua Stonefields project. As such, it is considered that assessingthe potential of Rennie Homestead and surrounding site to deliver a substantially similaroffer is a basis for making a decision on whether or not to proceed with the project.

15. Details of the visitor offer Stage 1 still need further detail but could comprise the following

within Rennie Homestead: Guided tours: General, Extended, Exclusive (+ Workshop) and Schools (including

Otuataua Stonefields accessed from Rennie Homestead)

Audio tours

Special events

Interpretive displays

Wider Mngere Gateway Information

Visitor Toilets

Small caf (wharekai) Retail space

A hub and central booking point for Mngere Gateway experiences (existing andproposed) e.g. Marae-based activities, fishing/boat trips, cycling, horse-riding etc.

16. The Rennie Homestead is a scheduled heritage resource. Whist this does not preventinterior alterations, the heritage status reflects the buildings historical importance - which isrepresented by the interior as well as the external appearance. An existing floor plan of theRennie Homestead is attached as Appendix 1.4.

17. Further to this, it is considered that in order to make the building suitable as a tourist facility,significant works to the interior would need to be undertaken in order to accommodate

additional (including disabled) bathrooms, disabled access, fireproofing and a more openplan layout. This would also include a kitchen, caf, interpretive displays, visitor informationand retail space.

18. In addition to internal works, the surrounding site would also need to be developed toprovide the facilities, infrastructure and buildings for further income generating activities.

19. Externally, it is therefore proposed the following buildings and infrastructure would berequired:

Car / Coach Parking areato provide 50 car parking spaces and 2 coach parkingspaces (based on previous proposals at Otuataua Stonefields)

Associated landscaping, services and pedestrian / vehicular access

A stand-alone building (to house a carving school, for example)


36/92

Item10


16 October 2014


20. In brief:

Whilst there is the potential for visitor activities, the details of these still need to beworked through;

It is questionable whether Rennie Homestead would be able to cope with the requisitevisitor numbers without alteration and/or additional facilities provided on the surrounding

land.Anticipated costs to Auckland Council

21. Capex funding of $3.6m for the construction of a visitor centre was previously allocatedwithin Councils LTP (2012-2022). This funding has been recently deferred to the nextfinancial year (2015/16). No funding is allocated for the repair and maintenance required tomake Rennie Homestead weatherproof. This cost could be met from reallocating $800K ofthe above funding.

22. In terms of timing, this repair and maintenance could be undertaken in the next (FY 15/16)financial year. Further detailed design work and construction would then require the balanceof the capex budget to be deferred across FY 2016/17, 2017/18 and 2018/19 (three financialyears). Detailed design work would be undertaken in consultation with partners including the

Mngere - thuhu Local Board and mana whenua.

23. In terms of post-construction operation, estimates undertaken by the previous Manukau CityCouncil, and based on the proposal at the Otuataua Stonefields, have suggested that visitornumbers of 100,000 per annum, of which 45,000 would be paying an entry fee, would berequired for the centre to break-even. As such the visitor centre would require additionalfunding support ($194,200 per FY) over at least the first five years until the visitor numbersoutlined are achieved. Accordingly, a minimum of $971,000 opex funding would be requiredin financial year 2015/16 to support operational requirements. The range of assumptions andestimates are outlined in Appendix 1.5.

24. Beyond this, estimates in the Business Case suggest the centre could potentially become

financially self-sufficient (breakeven) through income generating community/tourismactivities. Again, the tourism generating activities would require more detail and need to bedeveloped on the wider site. It is also anticipated that the presence of a major partner (suchas a carving school for example) could also assist with visitor numbers. Such an activitywould require an external standalone building to accommodate such an operation/offer.

25. It should be noted that previous tourism ventures undertaken by Council (e.g. The PaHomestead at Monte Cecilia Park), have required additional Council subsidy beyond whatwas originally anticipated.

26. Discussions with Councils Regional Parks team have indicated that a standalone, basicbarn like facility is likely to cost approx. $1m. The remaining $1.3m capex budget couldthen be utilised to construct a car and coach parking area, any remaining internal works,

along with the external landscaping, servicing and access works.27. The activity and associated works to Rennie Homestead and the surrounding site would

require Resource Consent under the current Auckland Council District Plan OperativeManukau Section (2002). Under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, the proposals wouldagain be considered a discretionary activity and require resource consent. Both plans aim toensure a rural / faming character is maintained within this area.


37/92

Item1

0


16 October 2014


28. An indicative summary of costs and timing is outlined below and a more detailed financialassessment is attached as appendix 1.5.

Financial Year Stage of work Anticipated cost

2014/15 Essential repair andmaintenance in order to

make the building Health andSafety compliant (undertakenby ACPL)

$200,000 (fromACPL budget and

not subject tobudget proposalsoutlined in thisreport)

2015/16 Complete Repair andMaintenance (external fabric,interior and prevent futuredeterioration) to makeweatherproof.

Start initial consultation anddesign work (focus on

external landscaping, carparking area and stand-alonebuilding)

$800,000

2016/17 Complete Planning, Designand Engineering,consultation and consentwork.

Start construction on externalwork.

Complete visitor centre

specific fit out infrastructure(e.g. caf fit toilets electricalwork)

$500,000

2017/18 Complete construction ofexternal landscaping,access, car / bus parking andstandalone building)

$2,300,000

Total Capex $3,600,000

2017/18-onwards (over fiveyears minimum)

Operational expenditure $971,000

29. Having considered all the information above and the attached Business Case, the RennieHomestead could have the potential to be used as a visitor centre, but would require thefollowing budgets:

Capex allocation of $3.6m across 3 years within the proposed LTP (2015-2025)

Opex allocation of $194,200 to cover operational loss in at least first five years 9aminimum of $971,000 in total) within the proposed LTP (2015-2025)

30. Within the context of the proposed LTP, which seeks to prioritise general rate funded capitalprojects, it should be noted that the proposed visitor centre does not lie within any ofCouncils emerging Spatial Priority areas. These Spatial Priority areas will be a significant

factor in determining future Council investment.


38/92

Item10


16 October 2014


31. In brief:

The financial viability of the Visitor Centre is reliant on the centre achieving 100,000visitors per annum, of which 45,000 would be fee paying and there appears to be nocertainty that these figures will be achieved.

Even assuming these figures are achieved, the Visitor Centre would still require $3.6

million capex budget and $971,000 opex budget to subsidise the centre for the first 5years until visitor numbers could be built up.

32. Given:

budget constraints faced by the Council over the next Long Term Plan;

the potential need for additional budget;

the uncertainties surrounding visitor numbers and viability;

the question about the suitability of the Rennie Homestead as a location;

the continued uncertainty about whether it is the preferred option for iwi (referred tobelow),

the Visitor Centre is not supported in this location.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

33. Extensive discussions have taken place with the Mngere-thuhu Local Board which hasbeen committed to the MGP Mangere Gateway programme for the last 10 years. The Boardstrongly supports the use of the Rennie Homestead site as an alternative visitor centre. TheMngere-thuhu Local Board presented views for ADC consideration at the July 10thmeeting and it is understood the Local Board will again present at this meeting.

34. In addition, the Mngere-thuhu Local Board has taken an active role in liaison with manawhenua (Waiohua)see below.

Mori impact statement

35. The Mngere Gateway Programme delivers on Mori outcomes and on The Mori Plan forTmaki Makaurau.

36. Discussions, led by the Local Board, have taken place with WaiohuaTe Akitai and TeAhiwaru. The views of the two mana whenua iwi groups are summarised below by theMngere-thuhu Local Board:

Te Ahiwaru (of Makaurau Marae) at a hui held on 9thSeptember 2014:

a) Te Ahiwaru support the intention to locate the visitors centre at Rennie Homestead -provided Makaurau Marae are consulted with in a meaningful way and the centre isrelevant in encapsulating their views.

b) The visitors centre can tell the History of Early Maori but also Early European settlers. Itis a unique piece of Auckland, New Zealand and has great potential for EconomicDevelopment.

c) The MGP needs to be focused on Marae in Mangere and the relationship with other iwihapu, not just a focus on Rennie Homestead, but this could be the flagship project withdirect benefit to not only Maori, but Tourists and the greater Auckland.

d) Te Ahiwaru are keen to ensure that the ADC understand that the MGP is not just aboutthe visitor centre, it is about the history, heritage, and all the area has to offer. People visitors and localsmust know, understand and learn about the place, experience thearea and location through a walk-about, paddling, and a hangi. The history needs to beretold somehow as Auckland Council is responsible for helping mana whenua restoreand allow the lands at Ihumatao to be healed moving forward.


39/92

Item1

0


16 October 2014


e) The officer report must reflect the nature of the vision and not focus on the Renniehomestead alone; the stories or narratives are critical and also about who speaks tothem. The story and passion for the local heritage and history is not quite conveyed inofficer language or reports

f) That the MGP is not about negative stories or images but the variety of cultural practicesand buildings in the area help to bridge connections with the whare representing a place

for learning Te Ahiwaru are well placed to speak about the area and its history. TeAhiwaru also have connections to other iwi

g) The MGP is not limited to the Stonefields. Te Ahiwaru are building a relationship with theairport to progress on project ideas. Council needs to support the resource / funding ofthe MGP through a range of options and Te Ahiwaru wish to work under a collaborativeframework, a network that brings in other iwi groups tooe.g. Robinson Road Marae

Te Akitai (of Pukaki Marae) at a hui held on 14thAugust 2014

a) This project is not about Rennie Homestead alone. There is concern with focusing onthis single option.

b) Pukaki Marae are mana whenua of Mangere. Te Akitai agree with the intention toprovide a visitor centre but Council should present a range of options.

c) Te Akitai support retention of budget for implementing projects within the area.

d) Otuataua Stonefields is waahi tapu land and not suitable for this MGP Visitors Centre.

e) However, a Cultural Impact Assessment should be prepared, as the site of OtuatauaStonefields needs to be preserved and protected accord ing to Mori traditions.

f) Rennie homestead is the first part of a much wider programme and, should supportplanned growth and address TSI outcomes such as employment, tourism and economicdevelopment.

g) There are broader implications if this opportunity is missed as the programme is ofbenefit to the region, there is a role for ATEED and stakeholders like the airport to play inbringing in resources

h) The report should reflect the dual history of the place

i) There is a perception that this is a council project and that needs to change must beowned by a wide range of stakeholders

j) That conversations with the two iwi show that there is room for many players tocontribute.

k) Council must re-build the connections with external stakeholders

Implementation

37. Details relating to implementation are outlined above.

Attachments

No. Title Page

A 1.0 Mngere Gateway Programme and Visitor Experience 41

B 1.1 Mngere International Gateway Area 57

C 1.2 Mngere Gateway - Strategic Context 59

D 1.3 Rennie Homestead Location Plan and Information 63

E 1.4 Rennie Homestead Floor Plan 67

F 1.5 Financial Performance 69


40/92

Item10


16 October 2014


Signatories

Authors John Dunshea - Manager City Transformation

Authorisers Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer


41/92

AttachmentA

Item1

0


16 October 2014


Appendix 1

MNGERE GATEWAY PROGRAMMEVISITOR CENTRE AND VISITOR EXPERIENCE

1 CONTEXT

Appendix 1.1 indicates the area known as Mngere- International Gateway.

The core purpose of the Mangere Gateway Programme is to harness tourism for local economicdevelopment for the benefit of the community and indigenous people.

Lifting the economic performance of South Auckland is essential to the Auckland region and to NewZealand as a whole. Creating Mngere Gateway as a globally significant international visitor destinationcould drive social and economic benefit to Mngere-thuhu, the area of The Southern Initiative (TSI)and the regional economy. The Programme delivers specifically on Mori outcomes presentingopportunities for meaningful employment and entrepreneurial initiatives. The Programme meets the gapin Aucklands visitor market for greater representation of Mori and Pasifika visitor experiences (ATEEDVisitor Plan).

The Mngere Gateway Programme is a regional programme that links directly with the Auckland Plan and

with The Southern Initiative -International Gateway & Destination workstream as well as the Mngere-thuhu Area Plan and the Mngere-thuhu Local Board Plan, Councils Economic DevelopmentStrategy, the ATEED Visitor Plan and the Mori Plan for Tmaki Makaurau (see appendix 1.2).

International tourism is New Zealands largest export industry after dairy and continues to grow withambitious targets to double visitor numbers by 2025. Tourism directly employs 5.7 per cent of theworkforce nationwide and, indirectly, a further 3.1 per cent. Tourism produces a net financial benefit tocentral government and is argued as cost neutral to local government (Dwyer and Forsyth - 2007)

The potential economic benefits to the region of the Mngere Gateway Programme have been estimatedat $40m per annum in additional GDP (Berl, 2008) and with the potential to create 700 jobs per annum.

Estimates completed in respect of Manukau suggested that a 10% increase in visitor numbers would

result in around $600k of additional business rates and $1.05m increase in residential rates (Covec2010).

The visitor destination allows an economy to grow beyond the constraints of the resident population. Itbecomes a catalyst for private sector development, stimulates community pride and engagement andcreates a range of employment opportunities which will bring diversity into the environs of the airportand The Southern Initiative.

In terms of the existing LTP and current Council activities, the Mngere Gateway Programme comprisesof three areas of activity:

Mngere Gateway operational funding for support, development and facilitation (including Moriand Pasifika initiatives);

Mngere Gateway Avenue Route capex funding which potentially is funding for initiatives such asthe internal interpretation of King Tawhiaos Cottage, development of the visitor experience at MangereMountain Education Centre (a CCO), walking routes, signage, landscape interventions etc

Capex funding (see below) for the Mngere Gateway visitor centre/visitor experience.

The visitor centre is intended as the base for the Mngere Gateway visitor experience and delivery of arange of visitor experiences across the area. It is an important component of the Programme which willgenerate increased visitation and new markets, acting as a catalyst for other community initiatives andprivate investment.

The Otuataua Stonefields was originally chosen for the visitor centre. In 2012 the Regional Developmentand Operations Committee (RDO/2012/35,36,37,38,39) supported the Mngere Gateway Programme,under the umbrella of The Southern Initiative, and agreed on the proposed site for Stage 1 of the visitorcentre including funding of $3.6m in Councils LTP (2012-2022).


42/92


43/92

AttachmentA

Item1

0


16 October 2014


2. BACKGROUND

The Mngere Gateway programme is a collaborative initiative across Council, together with externalstakeholders, notably Te Waiohua, AIAL, ATEED, to develop a visitor destination based on an area northof the airport to Kiwi Esplanade at Mngere Bridge and west of George Bolt Memorial Drive, including the

coastal area of the Manukau Harbour (see appendix 1.1 for map). It builds on the extraordinary wealthof cultural, built and natural heritage within the Mngere Gateway area to potentially create a major eco-tourism and heritage destination for the Auckland region, attracting international visitors and visitorspend.

The area depicted on the map (appendix 1.1) is the cultural heart of the Gateway. Longer term it hasbeen proposed that the visitor destination could embrace a wider area to the south and to the east. Theamalgamation of separate local authorities of the Auckland region now creates a greater opportunity toextend across the Manukau Harbour to embrace Awhitu, the Waitakeres and Onehunga.

The Programme comprises implementation projects and programmes around the Otuataua Stonefields,Mngere Mountain and the Mngere Mountain Education Centre, visitor information, interpretation, andproposals for cycleways, walkways, and driving routes which link key points of interest. It incorporateslandscape, streetscape, environment and re-vegetation initiatives to enhance the overall amenity valuesof the area for the community and visitors.

Central to the programme is the visitor centre as a base for the visitor experience(s). The visitor centreis critical to unlocking the economic potential of the area and will put a stake in the ground establishinga clear message that the Mngere Gateway is valued and that its character should be preserved.Increasing the number of visitors to the area will provide impetus to other community and private sectorinitiatives. Specifically it will create new opportunities for the Mngere Mountain Education Centre(MMEC). Currently MMEC delivers mainly to the non-profitable education market and, consequently,struggles to be sustainable.

The aim is to create a flagship international visitor destination incorporating best practice principles ofsustainability across all four well-beings (social, cultural, environmental and economic), to deliver abetter place for people to live and to work; and to create diverse opportunities for employment and

entrepreneurial initiatives in the environs of the airport. The programme contributes to Aucklandbecoming the Worlds most liveable city and to meeting the gap in Aucklands market for Mori andPasifka visitor offering.

The values of the programme are based on the principles of Responsible Tourism which seeks to:

Minimise negative environmental, social and cultural impacts;

Generate greater economic benefits for local people and enhance the wellbeing of host

communities by improving working conditions and access to the tourism industry;

Involve local people in decisions that affect their lives and life chances;

Make positive contributions to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage and to themaintenance of the worlds diversity;

Provide more enjoyable experiences for tourists through more meaningful connections with local

people, and a greater understanding of local cultural and environmental issues;

Provide access for physically challenged people;

Be culturally sensitive engendering respect between tourists and hosts.

Responsible Tourism Declaration Kerala 2008


44/92


45/92

AttachmentA

Item1

0


16 October 2014


As well as cultural and historical significance, this area has significant geological interest being a major,and contiguous, part of the Auckland volcanic field. Mngere Mountain (Te Pane Mataoho) is probablyAucklands best preserved volcano. The Otuataua Stonefields, a 100 hectare lava field, is the largestremaining area of what was once the 8,000 hectares of the Auckland volcanic field. Puketapapa (orPukeiti), Aucklands smallest volcano. is located on the Otuataua Stonefields and Puketutu Island is being

developed as a regional park.

Mngere Gateway has archaeological, cultural, historical, scientific, technological and educational valueand, over the years the area has attracted ecologists, geologists, archaeologists, artists, photographersand poets. It holds the opportunity to tell the science around the geological landscape of Auckland, thepre-colonial, settlement and urban development, intertwined with the Mori legends and stories ofWaiohua and of Mataoho, the god of volcanoes.

Councils vision of the International Gateway & Destination requires coordination and leadership todevelop Mngere Gateway as a unique, differentiated, destination which wi ll deliver the social andeconomic benefit to this area of South Auckland but also across the region by way of increased visitation.

4 MNGERE GATEWAY VISITOR EXPERIENCE

4.1 Strategic Intent

The strategic intent is to achieve a standard of quality and uniqueness in visitor experience that isrecognised as world class delivering:

An authentic experience of Mori heritage and culture and interpretation of the unique landscapeof the Mngere Gateway area and its significance within the Auckland Volcanic Field

An understanding of the indigenous settlement of Auckland, European settlement andurbanisation

An opportunity for iwi to develop their visitor products and services which can sustain their

cultural heritage and support their papakainga

A multi-disciplinary showcase of Aucklands pacific culture, art and commitment to sustainablepractices

A must do experience contributing to Aucklands reputation as one of the worlds top visitordestinations

4.2 The Visitor Centre

The visitor centre is a base and conduit for delivery of the Mngere Gateway visitor experience. Thevisitor experience is the guided and self-guided walks across the Otuataua Stonefields. Within the visitorcentre there would be interpretive displays and activities such as storytelling, together with a small cafand retail space.

In 2012 the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDO/2012/35,36,37,38,39) endorsed asite on the Otuataua Stonefields for Stage 1 of the proposed visitor centre, approving the capex fundingof $3.6m and recommending opex funding of $971k over the first 5 years, after which the financialmodel indicated that a near breakeven point would be achieved. This opex funding was approved by theStrategy & Finance Committee and incorporated into the 2012-2022 LTP but has subsequently beendiverted to other priorities.

Stage 2 of the proposed visitor centre incorporated a subterranean room which could be used for thedisplay of taonga. The cost of this second stage was estimated at $5m but was not incorporated intoCouncils 2012-2022 LTP. A decision to proceed with Stage 2 was predicated on demonstrating thatStage 1 was financially sustainable.

A number of factors now prompt a review of the location for the proposed visitor centre as proposed bythe Auckland Development Committee (AUC/2014/81).


46/92

AttachmentA

Item10


16 October 2014


Firstly, the Otuataua Stonefields site had always been contentious and there are differing views withinWaiohua as to the suitability of the Otuataua Stonefields for the proposed visitor centre and to thespecific site currently identified.

Secondly, Council now owns the adjacent Rennie Homestead (appendix 1.3), a double fronted early 19 th

century bay villa. This heritage property was purchased in 2010, after a several years of extensivenegotiation, by the former Manukau City Council, with a view to incorporating it into the MngereGateway visitor offering and into the open space network. For the last 4 years the property has beenmanaged as a tenancy by ACPL.

A building survey in 2012 indicated that the property required quite extensive repair and maintenancework estimated at approximately $1m. ACPL have recently undertaken around $200k of thisexpenditure to bring the property up to a level where it can be tenanted again.

Further expenditure of approximately $800k remains. Councils 2012-2022 LTP does not incorporatefunding for this work. Consequently it is proposed that this work could be funded from the $3.6midentified for the proposed visitor centre on the Otuataua Stonefields and that the visitor centre could berelocated to the Rennie Homestead. The property has 8.9 hectares of adjoining land which could beused to extend the visitor offering and to create opportunities for additional revenue streams.

The main advantages of the Rennie Homestead and adjoining land, as the main visitor centre are:

The land is not culturally sensitive to the same extent as the Otuataua Stonefields and thereforemore flexible use is possible.

The Rennie Homestead is fronted by a public highway and offers increased accessible for visitors The site has direct, Council owned access onto the Otuataua Stonefields The 8.9 hectares of adjoining land provides opportunity to develop additional infrastructure and

buildings required. There are potential opportunities for partnerships and access to external funding.

The main disadvantages are:

As with the Otuataua Stonefields, differences also exist within Waiohua as to the suitability of theRennie Homestead as the location for the visitor centre.

The visitor centre would not be embedded to the same extent, within the cultural landscape ofthe Otuataua Stonefields although the Mngere Gateway area as a whole is part of an extensive andcontiguous cultural landscape.

Pedestrian access to the Otuataua Stonefields is not as convenient for visitors although, duringthe main visitor season, a small transportable building could act as a meeting point/ticket office at themain entrance to the Otuataua Stonefields.

4.2.1 The Rennie Homestead Visitor Centre

The Rennie Homestead, with the adjoining land and potential to widen the visitor experience and createadditional revenue streams, offers considerable advantage. A further benefit is the ability to developincrementally and to use farm-type buildings for external covered space. The use of standardisedbuildings rather than purpose-built, would enable greater flexibility as small businesses developed andmoved off site. Additionally, the mix and flexibility offered by the site may open up opportunities forpartnerships and access to other funding sources.

4.2.2 Rennie Homestead Visitor Centre Capital Costs

Capex funding of $3.6m for the Visitor Centre/Experience is currently within Councils LTP (2012-2022).

No capex funding is allocated currently to the essential repair and maintenance required for the RennieHomestead. It is proposed that this cost could be met from the above funding, together with adaptation


47/92

AttachmentA

Item1

0


16 October 2014


of the Rennie Homestead to a visitor centre and, potentially, provision of some external accommodation.Indicative costs and timing are:

4.2.3 Rennie Homestead - Stage 1

At 211 square meters, the Rennie Homestead property itself is not considered to be large enough to

house all the necessary facilities and operations to support the Stage 1 (see below) development of avisitor centre. As such, additional buildings will need to be constructed.

This visitor offering (Stage 1) would be similar to that proposed for the visitor centre on the OtuatauaStonefields and could comprise of the following within Rennie Homestead itself:

Guided tours: General, Extended, Exclusive (+ Workshop) and Schools (including OtuatauaStonefields accessed from Rennie Homestead)

Audio tours Special events Interpretive displays Wider Mngere Gateway Information Visitor Toilets Small caf (wharekai) (potential to use locally grown produce) Retail space (potential for sale of locally produced offerings) A hub and central booking point for Mngere Gateway eco and cultural tourism experiences which

contribute to the existing and potential future destination portfolio e.g. Marae-based activities,fishing/boat trips, cycling, horse-riding etc.

Externally, it is proposed the following buildings and infrastructure would be required:

Car / Coach Parking area to provide 50 car parking spaces and 2 coach parking spaces (based onprevious proposals at Otuataua Stonefields)

Associated landscaping, services and pedestrian / vehicular access A stand-alone building (to house a carving school, for example)

Financial Year Stage of work Anticipated cost

2014/15 Essential repair andmaintenance in order to makethe building Health and Safetycompliant (undertaken byACPL)

$200,000 (fromACPL budget and notsubject to budgetproposals outlined inthis report)

2015/16 Complete Repair andMaintenance (external fabric,interior and prevent futuredeterioration) to makeweatherproof.

Start initial consultation and

design work (focus on externallandscaping, car parking areaand stand-alone building)

$800,000

2016/17 Complete Planning, Design andEngineering, consultation andconsent work.

Start construction on externalwork.

Complete visitor centre specificfit out infrastructure (e.g. caffit toilets electrical work)

$500,000


48/92

AttachmentA

Item10


16 October 2014


2017/18 Complete construction ofexternal landscaping, access,car / bus parking andstandalone building)

$2,300,000

Total Capex $3,600,000

2017/18-onwards (over fiveyears minimum)

Operational expenditure $971,000

A hub and central booking point for Mngere Gateway eco and cultural tourism experiences whichcontribute to the destination portfolio eg. Marae-based activities, fishing/boat trips, cycling, horse-riding etc.

The above visitor offering is based on that proposed for the Otuataua Stonefields. The capexexpenditure for repair and maintenance of the Rennie Homestead, together with its conversion to avisitor centre, can be met from the $3.6m currently in Councils LTP (2012-2012).

The operational expenditure, estimated at $971k over the first 5 years of operation, before achievingbreakeven, would need to be re-instated into Councils LTP (2015-2025).

Guided tours will be delivered by tangata whenua who will ensure the protection of the waahi tapulocated on the Otuataua Stonefields. The guides will incorporate lessons about tikanga and explanationsas to its relevance today. They will give visitors a deeper understanding of the Otuataua Stonefieldsand its significance as waahi taonga. This will become a rich part of the visitor experience asinternational visitors in particular are fascinated with how traditional maturanga (knowledge) and tikangaare incorporated into contemporary Mori life

The business model for Stage 1 is currently based on the direct employment of guiding services.However, a key objective is to facilitate development of the cultural guided tours as a stand-alonebusiness managed and operated by iwi and, to this end, funding for the Haere Whakamua programmehas been provided through the Mngere Gateway Programme.

The Haere Whakamua programme, led by Community Arts & Development in conjunction with theUniversity of Auckland, has been working with Waiohua (Te Ahiwaru) over the past year to develop theentrepreneurial skills required to enable iwi to develop, manage and operate their own guided walks.

Iwi have the potential to develop other visitor activities such as horse riding, fishing and marae-basedactivities. The most successful Mori visitor experiences are not dissimilar from other visitor activitiesbut when operated and managed by Mori, with a Mori dimension, values and storytelling have addedappeal, particularly in the international market.

4.2.4 Rennie Homestead - Stage 2

Stage 2 of development of the Rennie Homestead would be to expand the range of the visitor offering.This can be done incrementally over a number of years subject to potential partners and the availabilityof funding sources which might also come through external partnerships, grants etc.

Activities inside the homestead might be exte

Auckland Development Committee Agenda - October 14

Documents

Transcript of Auckland Development Committee Agenda - October 14