081a Ak CNCL - General - PAUP Business Land - Summary of Land Demand by Activitiy and PAUP Supply - Further Analysis

PAUP Business Land
Land Demand by Activity and PAUP Supply
Prepared for: Independent Hearing Panel
Date: March 2016

Status: Draft
PAUP Business Land

Land Demand by Activity and PAUP Supply
Independent Hearing Panel

Date of this version: 18/03/2016
Report author(s):
Rodney Yeoman Market Economics

Ting Huang Auckland Council
Greg Akehurst Market Economics
Disclaimer
Although every effort has been made to ensure accuracy and reliability of the information contained in this report,
neither Market Economics Limited nor any of its employees shall be held liable for the information, opinions and
forecasts expressed in this report.
www.me.co.nz
Market Economics Limited

Level 5, 507 Lake Road
PO Box 331 297, Takapuna
Auckland 0740, NZ
P 09 915 5510
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................12
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................17
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 17
OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................................... 18
REPORT STRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................... 19
STAGE 1: INDUSTRY GROWTH AND ACTIVITY ............................................20
1.1
STAGE 1.1 PROJECT GROWTH BY BUSINESS SECTOR.................................................................... 20
1.2
STAGE 1.2 BUSINESS SECTORS TO PAUP ACTIVITY..................................................................... 22
1.3
STAGE 1 FINDINGS............................................................................................................. 49
STAGE 2: LIGHT INDUSTRY EXISTING ACTIVITY ..........................................51
2.1
STAGE 2.1 EXPLORATORY DATA ANALYSIS OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ..................................................... 52
2.2
STAGE 2.2 PRIMARY RESEARCH OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE ..................................................... 65
2.3
STAGE 2 FINDINGS............................................................................................................. 83
STAGE 3: MARKET OUTCOMES..................................................................85
3.1
STAGE 3.1 LAND USE INTENSITY BY SECTOR AND ZONE ............................................................... 85
3.2
STAGE 3.2 LAND USE DEMAND BY SECTOR AND ZONE .............................................................. 102
3.3
STAGE 3.3 LAND USE PAUP CAPACITY BY SECTOR AND ZONE .................................................... 115
3.4
STAGE 3.4 LAND USE PAUP OUTLOOK BY ZONE..................................................................... 142
3.5
STAGE 3 FINDINGS........................................................................................................... 168
FURTHER/OTHER ANALYSIS ....................................................................170
REFERENCES........................................................................................................171
APPENDIX A: AUCKLAND CITY ECONOMIC FUTURE MODEL.................................173
APPENDIX B: INDICATOR CODES (STAGE 2.1) ......................................................183
APPENDIX C: MAPS OF ADDITIONAL SITES VISITED IN FIELD SURVEY ..................185

APPENDIX D: LOCATIONS OF AREAS COVERED BY THE FIELD SURVEY AND DATE
VISITED190
Figures
FIGURE 2-1: PROFILE OF LIGHT INDUSTRY FLOORSPACE THAT IS COMMERCIAL SPACE USE ..................................... 55
FIGURE 2-2: DOT PLOT OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONED LAND AND COMMERCIAL SPACE USE ..................................... 55
FIGURE 2-3: PROFILE OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE EMPLOYMENT PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL ......................... 58
FIGURE 2-4: DOT PLOT OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONED LAND AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT ............................... 59
FIGURE 2-5: PROFILE OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE EMPLOYMENT DENSITY OF PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL .......... 60
FIGURE 2-6: DOT PLOT OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONED LAND AND COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT ............................... 60
FIGURE 2-7: FIELD SURVEY AREAS IN THE NORTH SHORE............................................................................. 68
FIGURE 2-8: FIELD SURVEY AREAS IN WEST AUCKLAND .............................................................................. 69
FIGURE 2-9: FIELD SURVEY AREAS IN AUCKLAND ISTHMUS .......................................................................... 70
FIGURE 2-10: FIELD SURVEY AREAS IN EAST AUCKLAND .............................................................................. 71
FIGURE 2-11: FIELD SURVEY AREAS IN SOUTH AUCKLAND ........................................................................... 72
FIGURE 2-12: PROFILE OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONED LAND THAT IS NON-INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES ............................. 80
FIGURE 2-13: DOT PLOT OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONED LAND AND NON-INDUSTRIAL LAND USE ............................... 80
FIGURE 3-1: FLOOR AREA RATIO ILLUSTRATION ........................................................................................ 86
FIGURE 3-2: DISTRIBUTION OF FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1, 2 AND THE CITY CENTRE ................................ 87
FIGURE 3-3: DISTRIBUTION OF FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 - CENTRE ZONES .......................................... 88
FIGURE 3-4: DISTRIBUTION OF FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 OTHER BUSINESS ZONES .............................. 89
FIGURE 3-5: DISTRIBUTION OF FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 - INDUSTRIAL ZONES ..................................... 90
FIGURE 3-6: LOCAL BOARD GROUPING AND LOCAL BOARDS ........................................................................ 91
FIGURE 3-7: DISTRIBUTION OF WSR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1, 2 AND FOR THE CENTRAL CITY ZONE ..................... 95
FIGURE 3-8: DISTRIBUTION OF WSR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 - CENTRE ZONES ......................................... 96
FIGURE 3-9: DISTRIBUTION OF WSR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 OTHER BUSINESS ZONES ............................ 97
FIGURE 3-10: DISTRIBUTION OF WSR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 - INDUSTRIAL ZONES .................................. 98
FIGURE 3-11: EXAMPLE OF NON-MODELLED BUSINESS LAND ..................................................................... 118
FIGURE 3-12: ILLUSTRATION OF VACANT POTENTIAL IN CFG ...................................................................... 119

FIGURE 3-13: MAXIMUM THEORETICAL FLOORSPACE - COMMERCIAL ZONES PAUP 2013 TO 2015 .................. 128
FIGURE 3-14: MAXIMUM THEORETICAL FLOORSPACE INDUSTRIAL ZONES PAUP 2013 TO 2015 .................... 129
FIGURE 3-15: FUTURE URBAN ZONES OUTSIDE THE 2010 METROPOLITAN LIMIT............................................ 137
FIGURE 3-16: METROPOLITAN CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT........ 145
FIGURE 3-17: TOWN CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................... 146
FIGURE 3-18: LOCAL CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................... 148
FIGURE 3-19: NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ..... 149
FIGURE 3-20: MIXED USE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ........................ 150
FIGURE 3-21: GENERAL BUSINESS ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .............. 151
FIGURE 3-22: BUSINESS PARK ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ................... 152
FIGURE 3-23: HEAVY INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ................. 153
FIGURE 3-24: LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2026: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................. 154
FIGURE 3-25: METROPOLITAN CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT........ 156
FIGURE 3-26: TOWN CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................... 158
FIGURE 3-27: LOCAL CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................... 160
FIGURE 3-28: NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ..... 161
FIGURE 3-29: MIXED USE ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ........................ 163
FIGURE 3-30: GENERAL BUSINESS ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .............. 164
FIGURE 3-31: BUSINESS PARK ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ................... 165
FIGURE 3-32: HEAVY INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ................. 166
FIGURE 3-33: LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLOOK TO 2041: DEMAND AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT .................. 167
Tables
TABLE 1-1: REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS BY AEFM INDUSTRY, 2013-2041 (MEDIUM AND HIGH) ..... 22
TABLE 1-2: PAUP ACTIVITY STATUS BY PAUP ACTIVITY AND BY ZONE ........................................................... 26
TABLE 1-3: FARMING AND AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC SECTORS BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ........................ 27
TABLE 1-5: UTILITIES ECONOMIC SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ..................................................... 28
TABLE 1-6: HOUSEHOLD ECONOMIC SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ................................................ 28
TABLE 1-7: OTHER ZOOLOGICAL, BOTANICAL, RACE AND CORRECTIONS ECONOMIC SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY
DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................... 29
TABLE 1-8: MULTIPLE-TO-ONE ECONOMIC SECTORS BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ....................................... 30
TABLE 1-9: RETAIL SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... 32
TABLE 1-10: SUPERMARKET AND GROCERY RETAIL ECONOMIC SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ............... 33
TABLE 1-11: ANCILLARY RETAIL ECONOMIC SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ....................................... 33
TABLE 1-12: CAR WHOLESALING, RETAIL AND HIRING ECONOMIC SECTORS BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ......... 34
TABLE 1-12: FOOD AND BEVERAGE ECONOMIC SECTORS BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ................................. 35
TABLE 1-13: NESTING TABLE FOR PAUP ACTIVITY INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES AND SUB GROUPS OF PAUP ACTIVITY .... 36
TABLE 1-14: INDUSTRIAL ECONOMIC SECTORS BY NESTED PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ................................... 37
TABLE 1-15: WHOLESALE ECONOMIC SECTORS BY TRADE SUPPLIERS PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ...................... 38
TABLE 1-16: FACILITIES ECONOMIC SECTOR BY PAUP ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION .................................................. 38
TABLE 1-17: BUSINESS SIZE GROUPS AND ASSUMED NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ................................................. 42
TABLE 1-18: RETAIL FLOORSPACE ENABLED BY PAUP ACTIVITY .................................................................... 42
TABLE 1-19: OFFICE FLOORSPACE ENABLED BY PAUP ACTIVITY ................................................................... 43
TABLE 1-20: OFFICE FLOORSPACE REQUIREMENTS BY PAUP ACTIVITY ........................................................... 43
TABLE 1-21: FOOD AND BEVERAGE SECTOR FLOORSPACE ENABLED BY PAUP ACTIVITY ...................................... 44
TABLE 1-22: PROJECTED RETAIL PAUP ACTIVITY EMPLOYMENT GROWTH 2013-2041 ..................................... 47
TABLE 1-23: PROJECTED OFFICE PAUP ACTIVITY EMPLOYMENT 2013-2041 ................................................. 47
TABLE 1-24: PROJECTED FOOD AND BEVERAGE PAUP ACTIVITY EMPLOYMENT 2013-2031 .............................. 48
TABLE 1-25: PROJECTED INDUSTRIAL PAUP ACTIVITY EMPLOYMENT 2013-2031 ........................................... 48
TABLE 1-26: PROJECTED FACILITIES AND OTHER PAUP ACTIVITY TYPE EMPLOYMENT 2013-2041 ...................... 49
TABLE 2-1: SUMMARY OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................... 52
TABLE 2-2: AVERAGE PROFILE OF FLOORSPACE USE WITHIN LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE ............................................ 54
TABLE 2-3: AVERAGE PROFILE OF EMPLOYMENT IN MESHBLOCKS WITH LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONED LAND .................... 57
TABLE 2-4: LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLIERS COMMERCIAL FLOORSPACE INDICATOR ........................................ 62
TABLE 2-5: LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLIERS COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT INDICATOR ...................................... 63
TABLE 2-6: LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE OUTLIERS COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT DENSITY INDICATOR ........................... 64
TABLE 2-7: ADDITIONAL AREAS INCLUDED IN THE FIELD SURVEY SUGGESTED BY THE PLANNERS .............................. 67
TABLE 2-8: LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE SURVEY SUMMARY PROPERTY COUNT ..................................................... 74
TABLE 2-9: COUNT OF PARCELS FIELD SURVEYED BY WARD ........................................................................... 74
TABLE 2-10: FIELD SURVEY OF OUTLIERS BY WARD - PERCENTAGE OF LAND AREA BY USE .................................... 76
TABLE 2-11: FIELD SURVEY BY WARD - PERCENTAGE OF LAND AREA BY USE ..................................................... 78
TABLE 2-12: FIELD AND DESKTOP SURVEY BY WARD - PERCENTAGE OF LAND AREA BY USE................................... 79
TABLE 2-13: FIELD AND DESKTOP SURVEY BY WARD - PERCENTAGE OF LAND AREA BY USE................................... 82
TABLE 3-1: AVERAGE FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1, 2 - LOCAL BOARD GROUP ......................................... 92
TABLE 3-2: AVERAGE FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES - LOCAL BOARD GROUP ................. 92
TABLE 3-3: AVERAGE FAR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES - LOCAL BOARD GROUP .................... 93
TABLE 3-4: AVERAGE WSR BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE AND LOCAL BOARD GROUP ............................................ 99
TABLE 3-5: AVERAGE WSR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES - LOCAL BOARD GROUP ................ 99
TABLE 3-6: AVERAGE WSR FOR PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES - LOCAL BOARD GROUP................. 100
TABLE 3-7: ACTIVITY STATUS WEIGHTS ................................................................................................. 103
TABLE 3-8: LAND DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1, 2 TO 2026 HECTARES PER ANNUM .............................. 106
TABLE 3-9: LAND DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES TO 2026 HECTARES PER ANNUM ...... 107
TABLE 3-10: LAND DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES TO 2026 HECTARES PER ANNUM ....... 108
TABLE 3-11: FLOORSPACE DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 AND 2 TO 2026 (000 M2) PER ANNUM ............. 109
TABLE 3-12: LAND DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1, 2 TO 2041 HECTARES PER ANNUM ............................ 110
TABLE 3-13: LAND DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES TO 2041 HECTARES PER ANNUM .... 111
TABLE 3-14: LAND DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES TO 2041 HECTARES PER ANNUM ....... 112
TABLE 3-15: FLOORSPACE DEMAND PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 AND 2 TO 2041 (000 M2) PER ANNUM .............. 113
TABLE 3-16: VACANT LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLES AND LOCAL BOARD GROUP ........................................ 121
TABLE 3-17: VACANT LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES ............................................... 123
TABLE 3-18: VACANT LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES .................................................. 124
TABLE 3-19: VACANT POTENTIAL LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLES AND LOCAL BOARD GROUP ......................... 125
TABLE 3-20: VACANT POTENTIAL LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES ................................ 126
TABLE 3-21: VACANT POTENTIAL LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES ................................... 127
TABLE 3-22: CONTEMPORARY SCENARIO POTENTIAL FLOORSPACE (000 M2) BY PAUP ACTIVITY ZONE AND LOCAL
BOARD GROUP ................................................................................................................................ 130
TABLE 3-23: CONTEMPORARY SCENARIO POTENTIAL FLOORSPACE (000 M2) PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1
COMMERCIAL ZONES ......................................................................................................................... 132
TABLE 3-24: CONTEMPORARY SCENARIO POTENTIAL FLOORSPACE (000 M2) PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL
ZONES ........................................................................................................................................... 133
TABLE 3-25: MINOR BUSINESS AREAS LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLES AND LOCAL BOARD GROUP ................... 134
TABLE 3-26: MINOR BUSINESS AREAS POTENTIAL FLOORSPACE (000 M2) BY PAUP ACTIVITY ZONE AND LOCAL
BOARD GROUP CONTEMPORARY SCENARIO* ....................................................................................... 134
TABLE 3-27: FUZ AREAS BY LOCAL BOARD GROUP ................................................................................. 138
TABLE 3-28: FULSS INDUSTRIAL LAND IN FUZ AREAS HECTARES ............................................................. 138
TABLE 3-29: FULSS COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT IN FUZ AREAS BY CENTRE ZONE ....................................... 139
TABLE 3-30: FUZ LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE AND LOCAL BOARD GROUP HECTARES ................................. 139
TABLE 3-31: FUZ LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 COMMERCIAL ZONES .................................................... 140
TABLE 3-32: FUZ LAND BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 2 INDUSTRIAL ZONES ...................................................... 141
TABLE 3-33: FUZ FLOORSPACE BY PAUP ACTIVITY TABLE 1 AND 2 ............................................................. 141
Abbreviations
AEFM
Auckland Economic Futures Model
AUPIHP
Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel
CfG
Capacity for Growth
CfGS
Capacity for Growth Study
EDA
Exploratory Data Analysis
FAR
Floor Area Ratio
FULSS
Future Urban Land Supply Strategy
FUZ
Future Urban Zone
GFA
Gross Floor Area
HA
Hectares
IHP
Independent Hearings Panel
MB
Meshblock
m2
Square metre
PAUP
Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan
SNZ
Statistics New Zealand
WSR
Workspace Ratio
Glossary
Business zones:
Include the zones governed by the PAUP Activity Tables 1 and 2. The zones in
this group include seven Commercial zones and two Industrial zones. These
nine zones cover most of the land that allows for business activity. However,
the Business zones exclude some zones that allow for significant amounts of
economic activity. For example, the City Centre and other special purpose
zones (hospitals, education, utilities, facilities etc) are not included in the
business zones.
Commercial zones:
Include the zones governed by the PAUP Activity Tables 1. The zones in this
group are Metropolitan centre, Town centre, Local Centre, Neighbourhood
centre, Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park. These zones generally
enable commercial type activities (retail, office, services etc.).
Economic Industry:
Are standard industries used in the Auckland Economic Futures Model (AEFM),
which is the economic model of the Auckland economy used in this study. The
AEFM categories the economic activity in Auckland into 48 Economic Industry.
Economic Sector:
Specifically developed sub-grouping of Economic Industry. The Economic

Sectors were classified to align with the PAUP Activity types. There are a total
of 201 economic sectors which are defined using Statistics New Zealand
ANZSIC 6-digit framework.
Industrial Zones:
Include the zones governed by the PAUP Activity Tables 2. The zones in this
group are Heavy Industry and Light Industry. These zones generally enable
industrial type activities (manufacturing, wholesale, trade suppliers etc.).
Local Board Group:
A spatial definition based on groupings of Local Boards in Auckland. In this

study the local boards are combined into six groups, Urban Central1 (similar to
isthmus), Urban North2 (urban areas on the North shore), Urban South3 (urban
areas to the east and south of the isthmus), Urban West4 (urban areas to the
west of the isthmus), Rural South5 (south and east of the main urban area) and
Rural North6 (north and west of the main urban area). See Figure 3-6 below for
a map of the Local Board Groups.
PAUP Activity Table:
The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan has two Activity Tables that outline the
types of activities that can occur in each Business zone. The two PAUP Activity
Tables used in this study are found in Part 3 Business zones subsection 1.1 and
1.2 of the Councils closing remarks on topics 051-054.
Waitemata, Albert-Eden, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki and Puketapapa Local Board areas.

Upper Harbour, Kaipatiki, Devonport-Takapuna, Hibiscus and Bays Local Board areas.
3
Mangere-Otahuhu, Otara-Papatoetoe, Manurewa, Papakura and Howick Local Board areas.
4
Whau and Henderson-Massey Local Board areas.
5
Franklin, Waiheke and Great Barrier Local Board areas.
6
Rodney and Waitakere Local Board areas.
2
PAUP Activity type:
The activities described PUAP Activity Tables have been referred to specifically
as a PAUP Activity types. This is to distinguish them from other broader
activities mentioned within this document. For example, in the document
which we refer to both, PAUP Activity type industrial activities and industrial
activities. These are not the same, to avoid confusion we have used the prefix
PAUP Activity type when we are specifically referring to the PAUP definition.
Primary Research:
The collection of new data via observation. In this study we undertaken a field
survey and a desktop survey to collect data on the observed activity within the
Light Industry zone.
Vacancy:
The floorspace within a building that is not let by a business.
Vacant:
Parcels of land for which there are there are no buildings.
Vacant Potential:
Parcels that have an unusually large vacant area, when compared to other
parcels of similar generalised zoning within a similar location. The vacant
potential land (on these parcels) is equal to a proportion of the parcel that
does not have an existing structure, i.e. excludes land in the parcel that has an
existing building.
Executive Summary
This report has been commissioned by Auckland Council in response to a request for further
information by the Independent Hearing Panel (Panel or IHP) on the planned provision of
business zoned land in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP). The Panel, upon hearing
the evidence and submissions in the Business zoning Topics (Topic 051-054), put a number of
key questions to the Council and its economic witnesses. These matters required further
economic analysis with a particular focus on the Light Industry zone.
The questions (including sub-questions) were arranged as follows;
1. Question 1: What is the forecast growth by business sector for activities that are
likely to be focused on business zoned land, including Light Industry zoned areas?
And how are these activities provided for in the Activity Tables by zone?
2. Question 2: What is the proportion of business sector types that exist within Light
Industry zones (i.e., analysis showing the spectrum of existing activities from light
industrial production activities to commercial activities)?
3. Question 3: In light of the above, how do the PAUP provisions meet the projected
need for zoned opportunity, by zone? How does the supply of PAUP land compare to
future demand by business sector?
This report provides a description of the economic analysis and the results that have been
developed to address the Panels three questions. In this executive summary we provide an
abridged summary of the economic analysis applied in the study and the key results.
Question 1: Findings
The first question from the Panel is addressed in Section 2 - Industry Growth and Activity. In
brief, this question was addressed by two sets of economic analysis, economic forecasts and
an assessment of PAUP Activity types. The following key findings were made,
It is important to note that a large proportion of employment in the Auckland

economy is currently located in areas outside of the business zones covered by the
PAUP Activity Tables 1 and 2.7 The economic forecasts indicate that 36% of expected
growth in employment could be located in non-business zones, with net additional
employment of between 52,000 (Medium) to 65,000 (High) by 2026. The
employment in areas covered by the PAUP business zones could grow by 101,000
(Medium) or 134,000 (High) by 2041.
See Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel website, 051-054 - Auckland Council CLOSING
REMARKS - Annexure A.pdf.
12
Most growth in employment is expected in economic sectors that generally prefer to

locate in commercial zones8 (or in non-business zones). The forecasts indicate that
almost half of the growth in employment is expected in four industries; health,
professional services, retail and education. It therefore follows that there will be a
significant demand for business floorspace focussed on commercial zones.
Third, employment in construction and wholesale sectors are also expected to grow
strongly and these industries tend to locate in industrial zones9. These industries
tend to be land extensive, so we expect that demand for industrial zoned land is
likely grow (including Light Industry zone).
Finally, looking in detail at the PUAP Activity Tables for the business zones we found
that much of the growth in employment in the business zones will be located in a
small number of the PAUP Activity types (see list of nine PAUP Activity types below).
These PAUP Activity types are generally more enabled within commercial zones in
PAUP Activity Table 1 compared to PAUP Activity Table 2. This indicates that most of
the growth in employment is expected to be located within the commercial zones
(Activity Table 1).
The results from the modelling process also showed that most of the growth in employment
in these zones is expected to be located in the following PAUP Activity types,
Offices greater than 500m2 GFA per site: This activity accounts for 17% of
expected growth in employment. With net additional employment of between
25,000 (Medium) or 32,000 (High) by 2026.
Industrial activities: This activity accounts for 7% of expected growth in

employment. With net additional employment of between 10,000 (Medium) or
14,000 (High) by 2026.
Offices up to 500m2 GFA per site: Accounts for 5% of expected growth in

employment. With net additional employment expected to be between 8,000
Offices up to 100m2 GFA per site: This activity accounts for 4% of expected growth
in employment. With net additional employment of between 6,000 (Medium) to
7,000 (High) expected by 2026.
The core retail PAUP Activity types10 account for 5% of expected growth in
employment. With net additional employment of between 7,000 (Medium) to
9,000 (High) expected by 2026. The balance of retail growth is located outside these
business zones e.g. the Central City Zone
See Glossary above for definition.

10
Retail up to 200m2 GFA per tenancy, Retail exceeding 200m2 per tenancy and up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy
and Retail greater than 450m2 GFA per tenancy.
9
13
Healthcare facilities and Hospitals PAUP Activity types accounts for 4% of

6,000 (Medium) to 7,000 (High) expected by 2026.
These nine PAUP Activity types combined represent two thirds of the expected growth in
employment within the PAUP zones governed by the PAUP Activity Tables.
Question 2: Findings
The second question from the Panel is addressed in Section 3 Light Industry Existing
Activity, below. In brief, this question was addressed by two sets of statistical analyses;
Exploratory Data Analysis and primary research. The following key findings were made,
First, the Exploratory Data Analysis conducted in this study suggest a close match in
most locations between Light Industry zoned land and industrial activities that the
zone would be expected to accommodate. The spectrum of activities in the Light
Industry zone is mostly related to industrial production activities. However, the
analysis also suggested that there are outliers which have a wider spectrum of
activity, in particular a significant share of commercial or non-industrial activities
occurring. The Exploratory Data Analysis identified 75 meshblocks in the Light
Industry zone as potential outliers for further research to understand why they
differed from the majority, and to determine whether zoning changes need to be
considered. The properties in these outliers made up about 14% of all the 8,087
parcels in Light Industry zones.
Second, the primary research conducted for the study collected data for
approximately 91% of all properties in the Light Industry zone. We have conducted a
field survey on the properties in each of the potential outlier meshblocks, other
meshblocks that were contiguous to the outliers and some other meshblocks of
particular interest in the hearing process. In total, the field survey covered 58% of all
properties in the Light Industry zone. We have also supplemented the field survey
data with a desktop survey, in which we collected data for 33% of Light Industry zone
properties.
We consider that the primary research confirms that there is a strong match
between the Light Industry zone and industrial activity. However, there are some
meshblocks that are outliers with a wider spectrum of activities, i.e. with a higher
proportion of non-industrial activity. But when these outliers are placed within their
specific geographic context the mismatch is not as apparent given the activities
that occur in surrounding areas.
The results of the primary research showed high levels of industrial activity (where
the regional average is 83% of land used for industrial activities in Light Industry
zones). We found retail was the largest non-industrial use of land in the field survey
(8%), followed by Other (6%) and Office (3%).
14
In conclusion, a small percentage of the Light Industry zone (15% of meshblocks) has large
proportions of non-industrial activity. However these outliers should be viewed in their local
context.
The thorough survey of the Light Industry zone showed that much of the activity in these
zones is in fact industrial in nature, with the bulk of activity occurring down driveways and
off the main streets. While generally, there may be a narrow strip of non-industrial activity
(retail/office etc.) along the main roads there are large areas of industrial activity in behind,
on the side streets and down long driveways. This is logical because if retail and other nonindustrial services are seeking to locate in these industrial areas, it would be rational to do so
on main transport routes where their visibility is highest. Regardless of this visibility the
detailed analysis in this report shows that the vast majority of these areas are industrial in
nature (83% on average).
We consider that the IHP has to consider the unusual activity in the outliers alongside the
more standard activity in the local areas, in their determinations.
Questions 3: Findings
The third question from the Panel is addressed in Section 4 Market Outcomes. In brief, this
question was addressed by combining the results from the previously discussed analysis
(economic forecasts and primary research) and results from the Capacity for Growth model.
The following key findings were made,
Generally, there is sufficient vacant and vacant potential land in the industrial zones
to accommodate expected demand, with most areas having over 13 years land
under both the medium or high growth forecasts (i.e. enough supply until after 2026
which is the horizon of the PAUP). In detail, there is a longer term supply (over
decade and half), across most of the Local Board Groups11 for Light Industry zone
and Heavy Industry zone. However, we note that this assessment did not delve into
the nature of land available (in terms of scale or fragmentation) or extent to which
each economic sector demands large scale parcels.12
Generally, there is sufficient development potential in the commercial zones to

accommodate expected demand. In most cases the forecasted demand can be
accommodated even if the market is assumed to be frozen at historic levels of
development intensity (i.e. Contemporary scenario).
There are some instances where demand exceeds the historic levels of development
intensity. In these cases the market will need to increase development intensity
beyond historic levels (mostly in the Urban Central Local Board Group and across
Auckland in the Neighbourhood Centre zone).
However, the increase in
development intensity is well below the vast amounts of enabled development
11

See Section 5 of Nunns, .P (2014) PAUP Business Growth: Analysis of projected floorspace demand and
modelled plan-enabled capacity.
12
15
provided by the PAUP rules (generally less than 20% of the PAUP enabled
development).
The rules in the PAUP zones provide sufficient development potential to meet most
needs of the market, but the physical constraints in terms of vacant and vacant
potential land mean that the intensity of land use (built form) will have to increase
from historic levels (i.e. increased height and/or coverage envelopes).
This study has also assessed the demand and supply of commercial and industrial
land over the horizon of the Auckland Plan. This assessment compared the medium
and high economic forecasts to 2041 and the supply provided in the PAUP business
zones and the FUZ (as suggested by the FULSS). This assessment provides an
understanding of whether the PAUP urban zones and the FUZ provide enough
development potential, to accommodate demand for the horizon of the Auckland
Plan; i.e. until 2041. The results indicate in most zones and locations demand for
commercial space and industrial land by 2041 is not expected to exceed
development potential in the PAUP zones including the FUZ.
16
Introduction
This report has been produced to provide further information to the
Independent Hearing Panel (IHP) on the planned provision of business zoned
land in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP).
The research in this study was conducted with the primary goal of answering
the IHPs questions related to the following matters:
The proportion of existing activities in the Light Industry zone on the
spectrum from light industrial production to commercial activities; and
The extent to which the PAUP Business zone provisions (supply) meet
the projected need (demand) for business land/space/opportunity, by
business zone.
Background
In line with establishing an evidence base for the PAUP, Auckland Council commissioned
research on the demand and supply of business land in Auckland. The aim of this work was
to provide an assessment of whether the zoning in the PAUP was commensurate with the
existing and growth needs of businesses.13
This research provided information on the quantum of expected future growth in business
activity and the associated level of land required to accommodate business activity. The
regional level and Local Board level results were presented in 2015 at the Auckland Unitary
Plan Independent Hearings, in Topics 051-054 Centre Zones, Business Park and Industry
zones, Business activities and Business controls.
Towards the conclusion of those hearings, the IHP requested that the Council's economists,
Ms Fairgray and Mr Akehurst, be recalled. Ms Fairgray14 and Mr Akehurst were asked a
number of questions by the Panel that required further economic analysis on the type and
nature of existing activity in the PAUP business zones, and the degree to which growth
projections could be disaggregated and aligned with zone provisions to ensure growth was
appropriately accommodated. While the focus is on Light Industry zones, all business zones
were to be covered.15
13
See evidence presented to the IHP by Mr Akehurst, Ms Fairgray and Mr Nunns on Topic 051-054 and Topic 013,
3.1 Commercial and Industrial Growth. Also see background report Nunns, .P (2014) PAUP Business Growth:
Analysis of projected floorspace demand and modelled plan-enabled capacity.
14
Mr Yeoman and Ms Huang have replaced Ms Fairgray.
15
Auckland Council (2015) 051-054 - Auckland Council Memorandum 2 (Revised Economic Analysis of Light
Industry Zone).
17
Objectives
The overall objective of this report is to address the IHP questions on the potential demand
for and supply of business land in the Auckland Region, with specific consideration of the
PAUP land zoning and existing activities by economic sector16.
The IHP, upon hearing the evidence and submissions in the Topic 051-054 hearings,
prepared a number of key questions for Council. These matters required further economic
analysis with a particular focus on the Light Industry zone.
The questions (including sub-questions) were arranged as follows;
1. Question 1: What is the forecast growth by business sector for activities that are
likely to be focused on business zoned land, including Light Industry zoned areas?
2. Question 2: What is the proportion of business sector types that exist within Light
Industry zones (i.e., analysis showing the spectrum of existing activities from light
industrial production activities to commercial activities)?
3. Question 3: In light of the above, how do the PAUP provisions meet the projected
To answer these specific questions put to Council by the IHP, the following overall research
objectives were developed:
To project growth by all business sectors across all business zones within the
Auckland region, with a particular focus on activities that are likely to be located in
Light Industry zone areas;
To quantify and map the distribution of future demand for and supply of land and
floorspace, across all business zones and employment sectors in the Auckland
region;
To understand the proportion of business sector types that currently exist within
each zone, with a focus on the Light Industry zone. This seeks to highlight the
spectrum of existing activities from light industrial production activities to
commercial activities across all Business zones.
16
In this report the term economic sectors was specifically developed to match the PAUP Activity types. There
are a total of 201 economic sectors used in the following concordance, relationships and modelling discussed
from Section 2 onwards.
18
Given the level of analysis required to undertake the above objectives this report seeks to;
Evaluate the degree of alignment between PAUP supply of zoned land and business
land demand for Auckland (current and future), across all business zones, but with a
particular focus on the Activity Tables for the Light Industry zones.
Given the scope of the objectives a set of sub-objectives have been identified:
To determine the current and future demand for land within each business sector in
Auckland.
Identify how the requirements for the operation of each sector corresponds to
provisions within the activity tables for each PAUP activity description and PAUP
zone.
Evaluate whether the PAUP zoning reflects current land use activity patterns.
Report Structure
The report utilises the structure of the IHP request, with the following sections;
1. Stage 1: Industry Growth and Activity.
2. Stage 2: Light Industry Existing Activity.
3. Stage 3: Market Outcomes.
4. Further Analysis
Each of these sections provide a description of the analysis undertaken and a set of findings.
The report then provides a summary of the findings in the final section.
19
Stage 1: Industry Growth and Activity

The purpose of this section is to describe the analysis that was conducted to
answer the IHPs first set of questions and the results from this analysis.
The first set of questions was,
What is the forecast growth by business sector for activities that are
likely to be focused on business zoned land, including Light Industry zone
areas? And how are these activities provided for in the Activity Tables by
zone?
These questions have been assessed in two sub steps, the first step was to
establish a set of economic projections for all of Auckland (see Stage 1.1) and
second was to develop a link between the economic projections and the PAUP
Activity Tables for the business zones (see Stage 1.2).
These two steps allow us to understand how the economy is expected to grow
(i.e. which industries are expected to grow) and how this growth may translate
into activities defined in the PAUP Activity Tables (i.e. what PAUP Activity
types are expected to grow). This is important because each PAUP zone has
different allowances in terms of PAUP Activity types, which will affect the
locational opportunities that each industry could utilise.
1.1
Stage 1.1 Project growth by business sector

The purpose of this part of Stage 1 is to update the projections for the Auckland economy
and business sectors. 17 The following section outlines a brief description of the methods
used to establish the projections of the potential growth in business sectors in Auckland and
the key results.
The projections were developed using the Auckland Economic Futures Model (AEFM), which
is an economic model of the Auckland Economy that provides projections of employment,
GDP and other key metrics across 48 industries.18 The same AEFM was used in the previous
study of business land demand, however this particular study utilises the latest model
developed in late 2015.
The AEFM projections include differing growth rates for each industry, based on observed
and expected relationships for each industry. For example, this model captures structural
changes such as a shift toward a greater proportion of activity within tertiary sectors and
healthcare (as the population ages). Broadly, in the Auckland Region the higher growth
17
The previous research on business land utilised models and data from 2013.
It segments the Auckland economy into 48 sectors based on ANZSIC coding and projects growth in each sector.
The sum of the sectors is the total economic group anticipated for Auckland Region.
18
20
industries are expected to be population demand driven, such as services, and professional
based industries such as finance. The lower growth industries are expected to be export
driven industries, such as manufacturing.
We consider that GDP and employment are the most relevant economic metrics for
understanding growth in business activity and potential demand for land (floorspace).
Specifically, the employment metric is important from the planning perspective because
growth in employment in an urban economy commonly manifests as demand for floorspace
and/or land. The demand for floorspace (built form) or land (vacant) is driven by
employment which has important implications for planning rules and zoning. The study of
demand for floorspace and land in an urban economy commonly focusses on the
relationship between workers and their space requirement. AEFM provides projections of
both these metrics for future years in five year increments. For more detail on the model
see Appendix A or refer to the Market Economics report19.
In this research, two scenarios were used to illustrate the range of potential futures, under
both the Medium and the High growth future (Table 1-1). The Medium projection
represents the mid-point projection of potential future employment outcomes, and the High
projection provides an upper boundary of potential employment growth expectations.
Table 1-1 shows the AEFM employment projections for each scenario for the years 2026 and
2041. These years are important as they represent important planning periods for Council,
with the PAUP having a ten-year horizon (a new plan expected in 2026) and the Auckland
Plan, a 25-year horizon.
The projections show the following,
19
20
Employment in Auckland is expected to grow by 145,000 (Medium) to 182,000

(High) by 2026 (over the horizon of the PAUP) which is equivalent to growth of 22%
to 28% compared to 2013. The annual growth rate is expected to range between
1.6% and 1.9% per annum over this period.
Employment in Auckland is expected to grow by 274,000 (Medium) to 363,000
(High) by 2041 (over the horizon of the Auckland Plan), which is equivalent to growth
of 42% to 56% compared to 2013. The annual growth rate is expected to decrease
over the longer term, with growth ranging between 1.0% and 1.3% per annum
between 2026 and 2041.
Much of the growth in employment is expected in industries that generally prefer to
locate in commercial zones20 or non-business zones. The projections indicate that
almost half of employment growth is expected in four industries, health,
professional services, retail and education.
However, employment in construction and wholesale sectors is also expected to
grow strongly and these industries tend to locate in industrial or non-centre zones.
Market Economics (2014) Economic Future Model.

See Glossary for definition of commercial zones
21
Table 1-1: Regional Employment Projections by AEFM Industry, 2013-2041

(MEDIUM and HIGH)
Employment: ECs Projections [ECs]
Industry
Horticulture & fruit growing
Sheep, beef cattle & grain farming
Dairy cattle farming
Poultry, deer & other livestock farming
Forestry & logging
Fishing & aquaculture
Agri, forestry & fishing support svcs
Mining, quarrying, exploration & support svcs
Oil & gas extraction
Meat & meat product manuf
Dairy product manuf
Other food manuf
Beverage & tobacco product manuf
Textile & apparel manuf
Wood product manuf
Pulp, paper product manuf
Printing
Petroleum & coal product manuf
Chem, polymer & rubber product manuf
Non-metallic mineral product manuf
Primary metal & metal product manuf
Fabricated metal product manuf
Transport equipment manuf
Machinery & equipment manuf
Furniture & other manuf
Electricity generation & supply
Gas supply
Water, sewerage, drainage & waste svcs
Construction
Wholesale trade
Retail Trade
Accommodation & food svcs
Road transport
Other trans & support, postal & storage svcs
Air & space transport
Info media & telecommunications
Finance
Insurance & superannuation funds
Auxiliary finance & insurance svcs
Rental, hiring & real estate svcs
Ownership of owner-occupied dwellings
Prof, scientific, technical, admin & support svcs
Central govt admin, defence & public safety
Local govt admin
Education & training
Health care & social assistance
Arts & recreation svcs
Personal & other svcs
Industry Total
2013
3,006
439
382
378
321
57
724
321
6
2,634
1,437
10,140
2,822
4,234
2,648
1,536
4,503
219
8,863
2,977
2,186
8,249
4,495
10,639
3,643
1,176
131
2,583
34,759
53,081
62,704
43,152
9,581
16,080
6,527
17,489
15,279
6,250
6,291
10,768
0
106,576
23,597
6,883
54,151
63,443
10,990
21,806
650,156
Medium
2026
2041
3,667
4,238
474
504
407
428
427
459
445
417
72
86
943
1,083
410
468
0
0
2,854
2,976
1,515
1,561
12,138
13,630
3,107
3,268
4,421
4,631
3,706
3,004
1,830
1,810
5,353
5,998
269
307
10,976
12,721
3,664
4,121
2,689
3,042
10,075
11,536
5,323
5,956
14,785
18,344
4,348
4,909
1,579
1,969
174
216
3,492
4,392
44,964
53,407
64,272
73,992
81,121
97,557
49,164
53,765
11,479
12,929
18,980
21,359
7,435
8,040
20,049
21,794
19,152
22,383
7,781
9,030
7,839
9,120
13,925
16,817
0
0
127,849
143,483
29,560
34,871
8,625
10,173
58,897
63,435
85,343
116,754
13,190
14,522
26,007
28,789
794,775
924,294
High
2026
2041
3,844
4,644
488
537
419
456
443
493
487
473
76
95
996
1,189
431
510
0
0
2,930
3,152
1,554
1,652
12,624
14,734
3,234
3,518
4,596
4,998
4,277
3,538
1,913
1,984
5,599
6,561
282
336
11,564
14,047
3,864
4,537
2,837
3,349
10,606
12,709
5,568
6,512
15,972
21,033
4,535
5,347
1,653
2,156
182
236
3,647
4,789
47,481
58,805
67,750
81,961
84,532
106,174
50,858
57,874
12,069
14,249
19,837
23,344
7,763
8,781
20,935
23,791
20,055
24,558
8,125
9,872
8,203
9,992
14,552
18,381
0
0
134,322
158,080
30,731
37,820
8,965
11,029
61,828
70,626
88,863
126,964
13,727
15,736
27,162
31,393
832,379 1,013,015
High
Medium
2013 - 2026
22%
8%
7%
13%
39%
26%
30%
28%
-100%
8%
5%
20%
10%
4%
40%
19%
19%
23%
24%
23%
23%
22%
18%
39%
19%
34%
33%
35%
29%
21%
29%
14%
20%
18%
14%
15%
25%
24%
25%
29%
0%
20%
25%
25%
9%
35%
20%
19%
22%
2013 - 2041
41%
15%
12%
21%
30%
51%
50%
46%
0%
13%
9%
34%
16%
9%
13%
18%
33%
40%
44%
38%
39%
40%
33%
72%
35%
67%
65%
70%
54%
39%
56%
25%
35%
33%
23%
25%
46%
44%
45%
56%
0%
35%
48%
48%
17%
84%
32%
32%
42%
2013 - 2026
2013 - 2041
28%
11%
10%
17%
52%
33%
38%
34%
0%
11%
8%
24%
15%
9%
62%
25%
24%
29%
30%
30%
30%
29%
24%
50%
24%
41%
39%
41%
37%
28%
35%
18%
26%
23%
19%
20%
31%
30%
30%
35%
0%
26%
30%
30%
14%
40%
25%
25%
28%
54%
22%
19%
30%
47%
67%
64%
59%
0%
20%
15%
45%
25%
18%
34%
29%
46%
53%
58%
52%
53%
54%
45%
98%
47%
83%
80%
85%
69%
54%
69%
34%
49%
45%
35%
36%
61%
58%
59%
71%
0%
48%
60%
60%
30%
100%
43%
44%
56%
These employment projections are utilised in the following stages to understand potential
demand for land and floorspace within Auckland by zone and geographic location.
1.2
Stage 1.2 Business sectors to PAUP activity

The second assessment in Stage 1 was to analyse, at a detailed level, the concordance
between projected business sector growth and the PAUP Activity types (as shown in the
PAUP Activity Tables), with a focus on the Light Industry zones. This assessment seeks to
provide a better understanding of the (at times) ambiguous relationship between proposed
zoning and projected land use.
22
In this part of the research we established a concordance table that reflects the relationships
between; PAUP Activity types and AEFM business sectors. The concordance tables enable
the distribution of AEFM projected employment growth within each business sector, to
different PAUP Activity types.
The keys steps in this assessment were;
1) Analysis of the PAUP Activity Tables, to establish the activities that can occur in each
PAUP Activity table and zone.
2) An assessment of each PAUP Activity type and the nature of each industry to establish a
simple concordance that establishes whether an industry could operate within a given
PAUP Activity type.
3) An industry level assessment of available data sets, such as occupation, employment
location and business size, to establish the probable relationship between each industry
and the PAUP Activity types.
4) Apply the concordance and the relationships outlined above to the projected future
employment from the AEFM, to establish an estimate of activity by PAUP Activity type in
the future.
Each of these steps are discussed in the following subsections.
1.2.1
PAUP Activity Tables

The first step in understanding the link between PAUP Activity types and AEFM Industry was
to analyse the PAUP Activity Tables, land use controls and Nesting Tables. In the PAUP,
there are;
Two activity tables for business zones. PAUP Activity Table 1 (I3.1.1) covers
commercial zones21 and PAUP Activity Table 2 (I3.1.2) covers industrial zones22. The
two PAUP Activity Tables used in this study are located at I3.1.1 and I3.1.2 in the
Councils closing remarks on topics 051-054.23
Other land use controls which affect certain PAUP Activity types in certain zones.
Nesting Tables which provide further hierarchy descriptions of PAUP Activity types.24
As shown in Table 1-2, an activity status is assigned for each of the 54 PAUP Activity types as
per the rules of the specified zones. There are six activity status categories, Permitted (P),
Controlled (C), Restricted Discretionary (RD), Discretionary (D), Non-complying (NC) and
21
PAUP Activity Table 1 governs the Metropolitan Centre, Town Centre, Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre,
Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park zones.
22
PAUP Activity Table 2 governs the Light Industry and Heavy Industry zones.
23
See Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel website, 051-054 - Auckland Council CLOSING
REMARKS - Annexure A.pdf.
24
See 065 Hearing Auckland Council (Jennifer Caldwell) CLOSING STATEMENT
23
Prohibited (PR).25 The assigned activity status identifies the extent to which the PAUP
enables an activity in the given zone.
In some situations additional land use rules apply in addition to the assigned activity status.
These have been noted using stars * in the table. These land use controls may qualify the
activity status, so that if the activity is subject to the land use control the activity status will
change from P to RD26. As discussed below however, for the purposes of modelling the RD
activities are still considered as enabled in the particular zone. Nesting tables also have an
impact on how the activity statuses are shown in the PAUP activity tables and in Table 1-2.
The nesting tables provide a hierarchy of activities where each activity is a subset of the
activity above it. For example, the parent term Industrial activities include a range of
industrial activities beneath it. A reference to Industrial activities in the PAUP activity
tables will therefore include all activities included as a child of that parent term, unless the
activity is separately mentioned in the activity table. This will only occur if the activity
statuses for the child activity are different from the parent activity. This enables the PAUP
activity tables to be shorter than they otherwise might be, because each table does not have
to list all industrial activities separately.
For example, Repair and maintenance services are contained in Activity Table 1 but not
explicitly contained in Activity Table 2. This is because the Industry Nesting Table nests
Repair and maintenance services under Industrial activities. In this situation there is no
need to separately list Repair and maintenance services in Activity Table 2 as the activity
statuses are the same.
The activities that are not specifically listed in Activity Table 1 because they are nested under
other activities are shown in Table 1-2 in blue. See for example Dairies up to 100m which is
nested under Retail.
The activities that are not specifically listed in Activity Table 2 because they are nested under
other activities are shown in Table 1-2 in orange. See for example Repair and maintenance
services which is nested under Industrial activities.
Two final points in relation to Table 1-2 are:
If an activity is not listed in the PAUP activity tables and are not nested under
another activity, they are regarded as NC. In this situation they are not enabled in
the zone and are not shown in Table 1-2.
25
Activity Status have been ordered according to how permissive they are, with Permitted being the most
enabling and Prohibited being the most restrictive.
26
For example:
The office floorspace cap in the Business Park zone (see proposed consequential change to the business
provisions in Topic 051-054, as contained in Jeremy Wyatts evidence for Topic 081c Rezoning and Precincts
Business Park Precincts: Mt Albert 1 and Akoranga).
The agglomeration land use control for retail and food and beverage in the Mixed Use and General Business
zones (I3.3.2, I3.3.2a and I3.3.2b in Councils closing version for Topics 051-054).
The reverse sensitivity land use control for motor vehicle sales, garden centres and marine retail in the Light
Industry zone (I3.3.5 in Councils closing version for Topics 051-054).
24
The grey cells with no activity statuses listed are activities in the commercial zones
that are already covered by existing activity statuses. For example, Offices not
otherwise provided for is an activity status in Activity Table 2 for the Industrial
zones. This activity status does not need to be addressed in Activity Table 1 as it is
encompassed in the range of office activity statuses already within that table. In this
situation no activity status is required so the cell is blank.
As a final step the PAUP Activity types were coded as enabled in the zone, if the activity
status is Permitted, Controlled or Restricted Discretionary, and not enabled if the activity
status is Discretionary, Non-complying or prohibited. These codes have been utilised in the
following employment forecasts.
25
Table 1-2: PAUP Activity Status by PAUP Activity and by Zone

Activity table 1
Activity Description
Offices up to 100m2 GFA per site

Offices greater than 500m2 GFA per site
Offices that are accessory to the primary activity
on the site and the office GFA exceeds 30 per cent
of all buildings on site
Metropoli
tan centre
Town
centre
Local
centre
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
RD
Activity table 2
Neighbour
hood
General
centre Mixed Use Business
P
P
NC
P
P
D
P
P
D
Business
Park
Heavy
Industry
Light
Industry
P
P
P*
NC
NC
NC
RD
NC
NC
RD
NC
D
NC
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P*
P
NC
P
D
RD
NC
NC
NC
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
RD
P
P
P
NC
P
P
D
D
P
P
D
P
D
D
D
D
P
P
NC
Pr
P
NC
NC
NC
P
NC
NC
RD
RD
NC
NC
NC
RD
NC
RD
NC
NC
NC
RD
NC
RD
NC
NC
NC
P
P
RD
P
P
P
RD
P
P
P
P
P
NC
P
P
NC
D
P
P**
NC
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
D
P
RD
P
P
P
P
P
P
RD
P
P
P
RD
P
P
P
P
P
NC
P
P
NC
D
P
P**
NC
P
P
P
D
P
P
P
P
D
P
RD
P
P
P
P
P
P
RD
D
P
D
RD
RD
D
P
D
P
NC
P
D
NC
NC
P
P**
NC
P
P
P
D
D
P
RD
P
NC
D
RD
P
D
P
P
P
P
D
NC
P
NC
D
NC
NC
P
D
P
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
P**
NC
NC
D
D
D
D
D
D
P
NC
NC
D
D
D
P
P
P*
P*
P
D
P
D
RD
D
D
P
NC
P
NC
P
D
NC
D
P
D**
NC
P
P
P
D
P
P
P
P
D
D
RD
P
P
P
P
P*
P*
P
P
P
P
RD
RD
P
D
NC
D
P
P
P
P
P
P
D**
NC
P
P
D
D
P
D
D
D
D
D
RD
D
NC
NC
NC
P
P
NC
D
P
D
D
D
D
P
NC
D
NC
P
D
NC
D
P
D**
NC
P
P
D
D
NC
D
D
P
NC
D
RD
NC
NC
NC
RD
P
P
NC
NC
NC
P
NC
P
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
P
P
NC
NC
NC
P
NC
P
P
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
RD
NC
Pr
NC
NC
P
P
NC
P
P*
P
P*
P
NC
P*
D
NC
D
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
D
D
NC
D
D
D
NC
D
NC
P
D
NC
NC
NC
Offices not otherwise provided for

Commercial services
Retail up to 200m2 GFA per tenancy
Retail exceeding 200m2 per tenancy and up to
450m2 GFA per tenancy
Retail greater than 450m2 GFA per tenancy
Dairies up to 100m2 GFA
Supermarkets up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy
Supermarkets exceeding 450m2 and up to
Supermarkets exceeding 2000m2 per tenancy
and up to 4000m2 GFA per tenancy
Supermarkets greater than 4000m2 GFA per
tenancy
Retail accessory to an industrial activity on the
site, where the goods sold are manufactured on
site and the retail GFA does not exceed 10 per
cent of all buildings on the site
Food and beverage up to 120m2
Food and beverage
Drive-through restaurant
Marine retail
Repair and maintenance services
Motor vehicle sales
Service stations
Department stores
Garden centres
Care centres
Cinemas
Commercial sexual services
Industrial activities
Light manufacturing and servicing
Trade suppliers
Wholesaler
Storage and lock-up facilities
Warehousing and storage
Show homes
Waste management facilities
Industrial laboratories
Recreation facility
Community facilities
Conference facilities
Entertainment facilities
Education facilities
Tertiary education facilities
Healthcare facilities
Hospitals
Justice facilities
Emergency services
Funeral directors' premises
Retirement villages
Supported residential care
Visitor accommodation and boarding houses
Home based business
n/a
Nesting Rules mean that these Activities are indirectly included in the PAUP Activity Table 2
Nesting Rules mean that these Activities are indirectly included in the PAUP Activity Table 1
The accessory retail and office are implicitly enabled via broader Office and retail PAUP Activities in PAUP Activity Table 1
* in some circumstances the Activities are restricted by other land use rules (i.e. P changes to RD).
2
** Show homes are enabled by the nesting rules, we have assumed that they generally locate in space of 250-450m . So they have the same activity status as
2
'Retail exceeding 200m per tenancy and up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy' PAUP activity.
The resulting activity statuses in Table 1-2 provide an understanding of what PAUP Activity
types can occur in each zone. However, the PAUP Activity types do not relate directly to any
data set that measures the economy or industry in Auckland.
26
In order to understand the amount of employment within each of the PAUP Activity types
we must develop a concordance to understand the relationship between PAUP Activity types
in Table 1-2 and the Industries in Table 1-1.
1.2.2
Concordance between PAUP Activity types and Economic sectors

In this step we developed a complete list (concordance) of industries in Aucklands economy
and the potential PAUP Activity types that these industries may concord with. The
concordance between industries and PAUP activity was created by assessing descriptions
contained in:
Industries in the Australia and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification 2006
(ANZSIC06). The ANZSIC06 is a detailed list of sub-industry types in New Zealand
which has 507 categories,27 and
PAUP Activity tables.
First, we developed an industry classification framework which we have called the economic
sectors. The economic sectors were specifically developed to match the PAUP Activity
types. There are a total of 201 economic sectors used in the following concordance,
relationships and modelling. Collectively they encompass all economic activity.
In this study we undertook the following steps to develop a concordance between the
economic sectors and the PAUP Activity types,
1) Rural and Special Zones: In the first instance, we established which industries
would not operate in commercial or industrial zones.
For example, it is very unlikely for agricultural economic sectors to be located in a
Business zone. This is because they are predominantly rural activities and do not
occur within the developed metropolitan areas. Agricultural activities are also land
extensive and the value of business land would generally exclude this type of
activity. Table 1-3 shows the farming or agricultural economic sectors coded as
n/a.
Table 1-3: Farming and Agricultural Economic Sectors by PAUP Activity Description
27
Economic Sectors
PAUP Activity Description
Horticulture and fruit growing
n/a
Sheep, beef cattle and grain farming
n/a
Dairy cattle farming
n/a
Poultry, deer and other livestock farming
n/a
Forestry and logging
n/a
Fishing and aquaculture
n/a
Agriculture, forestry and fishing support services
n/a
Farm animal and bloodstock leasing
n/a
The AEFM uses these codes as the bases of the industry definition displayed in Figures 2.1 and 2.2.
27
In addition, the utilities sectors generally do not operate within business zones
because of the particular needs of these industries. Major Utilities include
sewerage and drainage, power generation, water supply and airports, which
generally operate in other areas and/or have their own special purpose zones. The
table below shows the utilities economic sectors coded as n/a, and excluded from
this assessment. We note that there are some instances where there may be
utilities (e.g. substations) located in business zones.
Table 1-4: Utilities Economic Sector by PAUP Activity Description

Economic Sectors
Electricity generation and on-selling
n/a
Electricity transmission and distribution
n/a
Gas supply
n/a
Water supply
n/a
Sewerage and drainage services
n/a
Air and space transport
n/a
We also consider household consumption of housing and other private own use
economic sectors that could potentially operate within business zones, occurs
within the component of theoretical built form outside of either the contemporary
scenario (discussed in Section 4 below) or the 20% of theoretical capacity (also
discussed below). In addition, these activities will mostly take place in residential
zones. The table below shows the household economic sectors coded as n/a and
excluded.
Table 1-5: Household Economic Sector by PAUP Activity Description

Economic Sectors
Residential property operation
n/a
Owner-occupied property operation

n/a
Undifferentiated goods-producing activities of private
households for own use
n/a
Undifferentiated service-producing activities of
private households for own use
n/a
Finally, economic sectors associated with zoological and other activities were
excluded as these activities are unlikely to occur in business zones. The table below
shows the economic sector coded as n/a.
28
Table 1-6: Other Zoological, Botanical, Reserve and Corrections Economic Sector by
Economic Sectors
Correctional and detention services
n/a
Zoological and botanical gardens operation
n/a
Nature reserves and conservation parks operation
n/a
Other horse and dog racing activities
n/a
2) Home Based: The next step was to include a Home based business PAUP Activity
code for the remaining economic sector industries. This code is used to capture the
parts of each of the economic sectors that do not locate in business zones.
For example, businesses in the Preschool education economic sector commonly
operate within non-business zones, i.e. residential zones. To account for this in the
concordance this economic sector was assigned a Home Based PAUP activity code.
This PAUP activity code was assigned to each economic sector, to account for the
share of activity occurring in residential zones (i.e. at home) and also other nonbusiness zones, as a catch all code.
3) Multiple-to-One Match: The next step was to establish any industries that had a
direct multiple-to-one match with a specific PAUP Activity type. For example, the
economic sector Garden supplies retailing is likely to only occur in the PAUP
Activity type Garden centres. Other examples, include
i. Car retailing was coded as Motor vehicle sales,
ii. Marine equipment retailing was coded as Marine retail,
iii. Preschool education was coded as Care Centres,
iv. Motion picture exhibition was coded as Cinemas,
v. Brothel keeping and prostitution services was coded as Commercial sexual
services.
In total there were 50 economic sectors that were fully captured within an
individual PAUP Activity type (excluding home based business). The table below
shows the list of the economic sectors and the assigned PAUP Activity type.
29
Table 1-7: Multiple-to-one Economic Sectors by PAUP Activity Description
Economic Sectors
Other waste collection services
Waste treatment and disposal services
Car retailing
Motor vehicle sales
Motor cycle retailing
Motor vehicle sales
Trailer and other motor vehicle retailing
Motor vehicle sales
Motor vehicle parts retailing
Trade suppliers
Tyre retailing
Trade suppliers
Fuel retailing
Service stations
Hardware and building supplies retailing
Trade suppliers
Garden supplies retailing
Garden centres
Marine equipment retailing
Marine retail
Department stores
Department stores
Accommodation
Motion picture exhibition
Cinemas
Passenger car rental and hiring
Motor vehicle sales
Heavy machinery and scaffolding rental and hiring
Trade suppliers
Video and other electronic media rental and hiring
Commercial services
Real estate services
Commercial services
Veterinary and other professional services
Commercial services
Justice
Justice facilities
Police services
Emergency services
Fire protection and other emergency services
Emergency services
Other public order and safety services
Emergency services
Preschool education
Care centres
School education
Tertiary education
Adult, community and other education
Hospitals
Hospitals
Medical and other health care services
Other residential care services
Child care services
Care centres
Museum operation
Performing arts operation
Creative artists, musicians, writers and performers
Performing arts venue operation
Health and fitness centres and gymnasia operation
Recreation facility
Sports and physical recreation clubs and sports professionals

Sports and physical recreation venues, grounds and facilities
operation
Recreation facility
Gambling activities
Commercial services
Recreation facility
Automotive electrical services
Automotive body, paint and interior repair
Other automotive repair and maintenance
Clothing and footwear repair
Commercial services
Hairdressing and beauty services
Commercial services
Funeral, crematorium and cemetery services
Laundry and dry-cleaning services
Commercial services
Photographic film processing
Commercial services
Brothel keeping and prostitution services
Commercial sexual services
Other personal services n.e.c.
Commercial services
Religious services
30
4) Retail Activity: The PAUP Activity tables allow for a single retail economic sector to
occur in a range of PAUP retail Activity types. The retail PAUP Activity types are
defined based on floorspace area, for example Retail up to 200m2 GFA per
tenancy, Retail exceeding 200m2 per tenancy and up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy
and Retail greater than 450m2 GFA per tenancy. Each retail economic sector was
assigned three PAUP Activity types in order to ensure that all formats of retail by
retail type are captured.
31
Table 1-8: Retail Sector by PAUP Activity Description
Economic Sectors
Specialised food retailing
Retail exceeding 200m2 per tenancy and up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy
Furniture retailing
Furniture retailing
Furniture retailing
Floor coverings retailing
Houseware retailing
Houseware retailing
Houseware retailing
Manchester and other textile goods retailing
Electrical, electronic and gas appliance retailing
Computer and computer peripheral retailing
Other electrical and electronic goods retailing
Sport and camping equipment retailing
Entertainment media retailing
Toy and game retailing
Newspaper and book retailing
Clothing retailing
Clothing retailing
Clothing retailing
Footwear retailing
Footwear retailing
Footwear retailing
Watch and jewellery retailing
Other personal accessory retailing

Other store based retailing; non-store and commission based
retailing
retailing
retailing

32
The supermarket and grocery store economic sector was assigned five PAUP
Activity types. The assignment of five PAUP Activity types was due to the level of
detail surrounding supermarket and grocery store operation contained within the
PAUP. Table 1-9 shows the assignment of the core retail economic sector industries
to each PAUP retail activity code.
Table 1-9: Supermarket and Grocery Retail Economic Sector by PAUP Activity
Description
Economic Sectors
Supermarket and grocery stores

tenancy

The PAUP Activity Tables also includes retail that is accessory to an industrial
activity on the site. This PAUP Activity type permits manufacturers to have a small
amount of retail as an accessory activity to their core activity. We have assessed
the economic sector types within the broad groups of manufacturing, to establish
which of the sub-industries are likely to have accessory retail. The table below
shows the economic sectors that were assigned retail accessory activity status
(PAUP Activity type Retail accessory to an industrial activity on the site, where the
goods sold are manufactured on site and the retail GFA does not exceed 10 per cent
of all buildings on the site).
Table 1-10: Ancillary Retail Economic Sector by PAUP Activity Description

Economic Sectors
Clothing, knitted products and footwear manufacturing
Wood product manufacturing
Furniture manufacturing
Jewellery and silverware manufacturing
Toy, sporting and recreational product manufacturing
Other manufacturing n.e.c.

site and the retail GFA does not exceed 10 per cent
The PAUP Activity Tables also include a Motor vehicle sales PAUP Activity type,
which has been assigned to the economic sectors that provide wholesale and retail
33
services or alternatively provide rental vehicles. The table below shows the
economic sectors that have been assigned with Motor vehicle sales PAUP activity.
Table 1-11: Car Wholesaling, Retail and Hiring Economic Sectors by PAUP Activity
Description
Economic Sectors
Car wholesaling
Motor vehicle sales
Commercial vehicle wholesaling
Motor vehicle sales
Trailer and other motor vehicle wholesaling
Motor vehicle sales
Car retailing
Motor vehicle sales
Motor cycle retailing
Motor vehicle sales
Trailer and other motor vehicle retailing
Motor vehicle sales
Passenger car rental and hiring

Other motor vehicle and transport equipment rental
and hiring
Motor vehicle sales

Motor vehicle sales
5) Office Activity: Office activity is covered by multiple PAUP Activity types in the
PAUP Activity Tables. The different PAUP Activity types capture different sized
offices based on floorspace area rather than the nature of the activity. In the
concordance, the following core office activity codes were used, Offices up to
100m2 GFA per site, Offices up to 500m2 GFA per site and Offices greater than
500m2 GFA per site.
There are also two industrial specific office activity uses which include, enable
accessory office under certain condition. In the modelling these two PAUP Activities
have been collapsed into one Offices that are accessory to the primary activity on
the site and the office GFA exceeds 30 per cent of all buildings on site.
Economic sectors within the following broad industry groupings were assigned
three commercial core office PAUP Activity types, Government Services,
Professional Services, Financial Services and Other Services. We consider that these
economic sectors are unlikely to demand accessory office space as by definition
their primary activity will be office activities.
The economic sectors within the following broad industry groupings were assigned
four office PAUP activity types; Wholesale, Manufacturing, Mining, Repairs and
Maintenance, Information, Telecommunications and Transport. We consider that
all of these economic sectors could demand office space in each of the office PAUP
Activity types.
For example, a manufacturing company may produce gizmo within a factory in the
Light Industry zone, which could include accessory office for the factory managers
and staff (accessory office in the PAUP Activity). The same company could have a
separate head office in a commercial zone, which is also office space (the core
office PAUP Activity types). In the concordance, this economic sector would be
34
assigned the three core office PAUP Activity types and an additional accessory
office PAUP Activity.
Finally, the commercial services PAUP Activity Type was assigned to the Economic
sectors within the following broad industry groupings, Building Services, Financial
Services, Professional Services and other Personal Services.
6) Food and Beverage Activity: The food and beverage economic sectors are also
covered by multiple codes in the PAUP Activity Tables. These different PAUP
Activity types capture different sized establishments based on floorspace area. In
the concordance the following key Food and Beverage activity codes were used,
Food and beverage up to 120m2, Food and beverage and Drive-through
restaurant. These PAUP Activity types have been assigned to four economic sector
industries that provide food and beverages:
Cafes and restaurants,
Takeaway food services,
Pubs, taverns and bars, and
Clubs (hospitality).
The Drive-through restaurant activity was only assigned to the first two economic
sector industries.
Table 1-12: Food and Beverage Economic Sectors by PAUP Activity Description
Economic Sectors
Cafes and restaurants
Food and beverage
Takeaway food services
Food and beverage
Pubs, taverns and bars
Food and beverage
Clubs (hospitality)
Food and beverage
Clubs (hospitality)
7) Industrial Activities: The industrial PAUP Activity types have mainly been assigned
to economic sectors within the broad industry groups of manufacturing, waste
management, construction, wholesale and transport.
The PAUP Activity tables has one core industrial PAUP Activity types, Industrial
activities. The industrial activities code has been assigned to 70 economic subsectors, within the broader industries of manufacturing, construction, transport and
35
machinery repairs. We note that the Nesting tables describe the relationship
between PAUP Activity type industrial activities and the other related PAUP
Activity types (see Table 1-13).
Table 1-13: Nesting Table for PAUP Activity Industrial activities and sub groups of
PAUP Activity
Group
Industrial
Activities
Sub-Groups
Freight depots
Warehousing and
storage
Manufacturing
Artisan industries
Light manufacturing and

servicing
Repair and maintenance

services
Refuse transfer station
Recycling facility
Waste Management facilities

Rail siding
Bus depots
Storage and lock up facilities
Wholesalers
Source: Nesting Tables 065 Hearing Auckland Council Jennifer Caldwell Closing Statement pg 30-194
The Light manufacturing and servicing PAUP Activity type has been assigned to 40
economic sub sectors, within the broader industries; manufacturing, construction
and publishing.
The PAUP Activity Tables also have other industrial PAUP Activity types that relate
to wholesale, trade suppliers and warehousing. These include:
Warehousing and storage,
Industrial laboratories,
Waste management facilities,
Storage and lock-up facilities,
Wholesalers, and
Show Homes.
36
Generally, PAUP defined activities were assigned to economic sectors in the waste,
wholesales, storage, repairs services and scientific research industry groupings (see
table below).
Table 1-14: Industrial Economic Sectors by Nested PAUP Activity Description

Economic Sectors
Solid waste collection services
Other waste collection services
Waste treatment and disposal services
Waste remediation and materials recovery services
Residential building construction
Show homes
Basic material wholesaling
Wholesaler
Machinery and equipment wholesaling
Wholesaler
Car wholesaling
Car wholesaling
Wholesaler
Wholesaler
Wholesaler
Motor vehicle new parts wholesaling
Wholesaler
Motor vehicle dismantling and used parts wholesaling
Wholesaler
Grocery, liquor and tobacco product wholesaling
Grocery, liquor and tobacco product wholesaling
Wholesaler
Other goods and commission based wholesaling
Other goods and commission based wholesaling
Wholesaler
Warehousing and storage services
Warehousing and storage services
Scientific research services
Scientific testing and analysis services
Automotive electrical services
Automotive body, paint and interior repair
Other automotive repair and maintenance
Finally, the wholesale economic sectors were assigned the Trade suppliers PAUP
Activity type.
37
Table 1-15: Wholesale Economic Sectors by Trade suppliers PAUP Activity

Description
Economic Sectors
Hire of construction machinery with operator
Trade suppliers
Trade suppliers
Trade suppliers
Trade suppliers
Motor vehicle dismantling and used parts wholesaling
Trade suppliers
Motor vehicle parts retailing
Trade suppliers
Tyre retailing
Trade suppliers
Trade suppliers
Hardware and building supplies retailing
Trade suppliers
Catering services
Trade suppliers
Other motor vehicle and transport equipment rental and hiring
Trade suppliers
Heavy machinery and scaffolding rental and hiring
Trade suppliers
Other goods and equipment rental and hiring n.e.c.
Trade suppliers
8) Facilities Activities: The last step was to assign the PAUP Activity types related to
facilities. The remaining facilities PAUP Activity types included; Community
facilities, Conference facilities, Entertainment facilities and Recreation facilities.
We have reviewed the description of each economic sector to establish which of
the sectors would operate as facilities in this context. The following table shows
the list of economic sectors that were assigned Facility PAUP Activity.
Table 1-16: Facilities Economic Sector by PAUP Activity Description

Economic Sectors
Catering services
Clubs (hospitality)
Library and other information services
Other social assistance services
Museum operation
Performing arts operation
Creative artists, musicians, writers and performers
Performing arts venue operation
Health and fitness centres and gymnasia operation
Recreation facility
Sports and physical recreation clubs and sports professionals

Sports and physical recreation venues, grounds and facilities
operation
Recreation facility
Recreation facility
Sports and physical recreation administrative service
Recreation facility
Amusement parks and centres operation
Recreation facility
Amusement parks and centres operation
Amusement and other recreation activities n.e.c.
Recreation facility
Amusement and other recreation activities n.e.c.
Religious services
Other interest group services n.e.c.
38
1.2.3
Relationship PAUP Activity and Economic sector

The next step was to develop a set of relationships between employment in each economic
sector and the PAUP Activity types in the concordance tables. This allows translation of
employment by economic sector into each of the PAUP Activity types as they occur in the
zoning Activity Tables.
The output from this step was a distribution of each AEFM employment sector across all
PAUP Activity types. Summing up all AEFM sectors gives an aggregate employment within
each PAUP Activity type.
The relationships were developed using the following key datasets:
Employment by Meshblocks 2013, by economic sector,28
Land area29 by PAUP zone30 and meshblock,
Employment by occupation and economic sector31,
Employment by business size and economic sector,32 and
Floorspace by PAUP zone and meshblock.33
The relationship between economic sectors and PAUP Activity types has been developed as
follows,
1) Rural and Special: As these economic sectors only operate in non-business zones all
of the employment from these economic sectors is allocated to n/a PAUP activity.
2) Home Based: Before we discuss our estimations of the proportion of economic
sectors that are located at home or non-business locations it is important to
understand that there are limitations in the data sets. At present there is no
detailed data that links economic sectors to particular properties and/or zoned land.
In this study we have used the most detailed spatial data sourced from,
Business Demography Statistics: This is Statistics New Zealands database of

employment by economic sector and meshblock. A meshblock is a
geographic spatial definition that SNZ maintains and is generally an
aggregation of properties equivalent to a block. There are roughly 12,000
meshblocks in Auckland.
28
Statistics New Zealand (2014) Business Demography Statistics 2013.

Auckland Council (2015) Parcel Database.
30
Auckland Council (2015) Proposed Zones GIS layer (Adopted December).
31
Statistics New Zealand (2014) Census 2013.
32
Statistics New Zealand (2014) Business Demography Statistics 2013.
33
Property IQ (2014) Floorspace and Use Database.
29
39
Parcel Property Database: This data set records the land area and zoning of
all properties in Auckland and includes roughly 460,000 records. In this
study we have used the Councils December 2015 position on zoning. For
completeness we note that the business zoning is not affected by the
Councils decision in February 201634 to withdraw its evidence on out of
scope residential zoning.
On average each meshblock has around 40 properties, which gives an indication of

the level of granularity at which the meshblocks are defined.
The first step used to estimate the employment located at home was to aggregate
the Property database to meshblocks, which provided land area by zone and
meshblock. This allowed us to establish that 2,087 meshblocks contain some
business zoned land. The remaining 10,000 meshblocks did not have any Business
zone land.
However, approximately one fifth (21%) of employment is located in areas
(meshblocks) with no business land.35 We assume that this employment is home
based for the purposes of this study. These meshblocks had an employment density
of 0.3 jobs per hectare of land.
Second, it is recognised that not all of the employment in business zoned
meshblocks will be located in business areas. There will be some employment in
these meshblocks that is located in non-business zones.36 In this study we have
estimated employment by assuming that employment density observed in nonbusiness meshblocks (density of 0.3 employees per hectare) also occurs on balance
of non-business land in meshblocks that have business land. While this calculation
was undertaken at the detailed economic sector level, we estimate that
approximately 7,600 employees may be located within non-business land in the
meshblocks with business land (which is approximately 1% of employment in
Auckland).
3) Many-to-One Match: As these economic sectors only operate in one specific PAUP
Activity type, a many-to-one relationship is applied between employment and the
one unique PAUP Activity type. This means that 100% of employment in these
economic sectors is allocated to one specific PAUP Activity type, but that a number
of economic sectors may locate in each specific PAUP Activity type.
4) Retail Activity: At present, there is no detailed data that links retail economic
sectors to particular properties and/or PAUP Activity types. We cannot directly
establish the relationship between each retail economic sector and each of the retail
PAUP Activity types.
34
Special Council Meeting.

This is equivalent to approximately 135,000 employment.
36
These business zoned meshblocks have approximately 25,000 hectares of non-business zoned land.
35
40
To fill this gap, we have produced a framework which draws on two datasets to
estimate the relationship between retail economic sectors and PAUP Activity types,
Business Demography Statistics: This data set provides information about

business size in each economic sector, measured in terms of employment.
The data includes the following employment categories; no employee (i.e.
sole trader), 1 to 5, 6 to 9, 10 to 19, 20 to 49, 50 to 99 and 100+.
PropertyIQ: This data set provides information on floorspace by use

codes. This gives an insight into the use of retail floorspace within
Auckland.
We utilised business demography statistics and current floorspace data (PropertyIQ)

to establish the potential floorspace demands of retail businesses of different sizes.
We then distributed different sized businesses to each retail PAUP Activity type
(which are based on size).
For example, the Supermarket and grocery stores economic sector included both
small (dairies) and large (supermarkets) businesses. These two business types, small
and large operations are unlikely to be able to operate in premises of the same scale.
We considered that it is reasonable to assume businesses in this economic sector
that employ very few staff are most likely to be small dairies that operate within the
PAUP Activity Dairies up to 100m2 GFA.37 Conversely, large scale businesses in this
sector are most likely to operate in stores with larger floorspace, i.e. Supermarkets
exceeding 2000m2 per tenancy and up to 4000m2 GFA per tenancy.38
In order to estimate this relationship two key assumptions are made;39
An average retail employee in the region will require 40 m2 of floorspace.

This assumption is based on the retail floorspace use data from PropertyIQ
and the retail employment data to establish a regional workspace ratio.
A number of employees for each of the business size categories (see Table
1-17).
We note that the assumptions have been set conservatively, with the model
potentially allocating a greater proportion of employment to PAUP Activity types
with larger floorspace. These assumptions result in an overestimation of the
demand, in terms of employment and floorspace.
37
The business demography data shows that there are approximately 800 business in this economic sector which
have zero employees (i.e. owner operators).
38
The business demography data also shows that there are forty businesses with 50 or more employees.
39
These assumptions have been set using the best available data. However, we consider that other sensible
assumptions could be substituted to test the sensitivity of the results.
41
Table 1-17: Business Size Groups and Assumed Number of Employees
Business size Groupings

0
1 to 5
6 to 9
10 to 19
20 to 49
50 to 99
100+
Assumed
# employees
1
5
9
19
49
99
150
These two assumptions were used to convert business demography data into
floorspace requirements. For example, an average retailer with 1 to 5 employees
would require a tenancy of 200 m2 to operate.
We also transcribed PAUP Activity Types into a set of rules that established the
range of floorspace enabled in each of the PAUP Activity types (see Table 1-18).
Table 1-18: Retail Floorspace Enabled by PAUP Activity

Retail Activity Text
tenancy
Retail exceeding 200m2 per tenancy and up to
Min (m2)
Max (m2)
101
100
450
451
2,000
2,001
4,000
4,001
-
201
451
200
450
Combining the floorspace requirements with the transcribed PAUP Activity rules we
were able to estimate the relationship between economic sectors and each of the
PAUP retail activity types.
5) Office Activity: The relationship between the economic sectors and PAUP Office
Activity types used a similar approach as the retail economic sectors and the PAUP
retail activity types.
Again we made two key assumptions;
The average office employee in the Auckland region requires nearly 30 m2 of

floorspace. This assumption was based on the office floorspace use data
from PropertyIQ and the office employment data to establish a regional
workspace ratio.
42
As stated in the retail activity section, an assumed number of employees for

each of the business size categories (see Table 1-17).
These two assumptions were used to covert the business demography data into
floorspace requirements.
The table below shows the transcription of the PAUP Office Activity types into a set
of rules which established the range of floorspace enabled in each type.
Table 1-19: Office Floorspace Enabled by PAUP Activity

Office Activity Text
Offices that are accessory to the primary
activity on the site and the office GFA exceeds
30 per cent of all buildings on site
Min (m2)
Max (m2)
101
501
100
500
However unlike retail, the PAUP Office Activity types provide for activities that are
similar and there may be some intersect between the accessory Office PAUP
Activity type and the other three Office PAUP Activity types.
To understand the potential distribution of office activity, we examined the existing
distribution of floorspace based on its geographic location in Auckland.40
Unsurprisingly, this data showed that most office space was located in a commercial
zone. For example, of the properties with less than 100 m2 of office floorspace, only
12% were located in industrial zones. Table 1-20 below, was used to separate the
relative proportion of the accessory and non-accessory office activity.
Table 1-20: Office Floorspace Requirements by PAUP Activity

Office Space (m2)
Less than or eqaul to 100
101 - 500
Greater than 500
Commercial
Zones
88%
80%
87%
Industrial
Zones
12%
20%
13%
Finally, we established what proportion of each economic sector could be located in

office space. Many of the economic sectors operate entirely in office spaces. For
example, almost all of legal and accounting services will operate within an office
space. In contrast, manufacturing economic sectors are likely to only have a small
proportion of employees in office space, such as managers, marketing and
administration staff etc.
40
PropertyIQ floorspace data.
43
In this study we estimated the proportion of each industry that is office related by
assessing occupation data from the SNZ Census. This occupation data includes
information about the number of office type roles in each economic sector.
For example, the Printing economic sector has approximately 48% of its
employment in occupations that are office based. Therefore, it is assumed that 48%
of this economic sector is allocated to PAUP Office Activity types.
6) Food and Beverage Activity: The relationship between the food and beverage
economic sectors and PAUP food and beverage Activity types, also uses the same
approach discussed above in sections on retail and the office PAUP Activity types.
Again we made two key assumptions;
The average food and beverage employee in the Auckland region requires
nearly 39 m2 of floorspace. This assumption is based on the floorspace use
data from PropertyIQ and employment data to establish a regional
workspace ratio.
As stated in the retail activity section, an assumed number of employees for

each of the business size categories (see Table 1-17).
These two assumptions were used to convert the business demography data into
floorspace requirements.
The table below shows the transcription of food and beverage PAUP Activity types
into a set of rules that establish the range of floorspace enabled in each of the PAUP
Activity types.
Table 1-21: Food and Beverage Sector Floorspace Enabled by PAUP Activity
Food
Food and beverage
Min (m2)
121
121
Max (m2)
120
The food and beverage PAUP activity provides for two PAUP Activity types that are
similar. There may be some intersect between Food and beverage and Drivethrough restaurant activities. However, there is no data available from which we
can estimate the distribution between these two activities (from a demand
perspective), in this study we assumed that Drive-through restaurant activity makes
up 10% of the food and beverage economic sectors in premises over 120 m2.
7) Industrial Activities: The industrial relationships were established in this study using
occupation data from the Statistics New Zealand Census. Occupation data includes
information about the job types in each economic sector. This data was used to
understand what proportion of the employment in each sector is related to job types
that are,
44
Industrial,
Accessory Retail, and,
Wholesale/storage.
For example, we discuss how the industrial relationship was established for the
Printing economic sector. In this instance, the occupation data showed that
approximately 49% of employment is in occupations that are factory based.
Therefore, it is assumed that 49% of employment in this economic sector is allocated
to industrial PAUP Activity types. The allocation of industrial employment to three
separate PAUP Activity types was established based on an assumed even spread
between each PAUP Activity type. This approach was adopted in order to ensure
that the distribution of activity types present today would also be represented in the
future projections. However, the effect of this assumption is minor with respect to
allocating employment to PAUP Activity type.
The Clothing Manufacturing economic sector is an example of how the accessory
retail relationship was established. The occupation data shows that this economic
sector has approximately 12% of employment in occupations that are retail based.
Therefore, it is assumed that 12% of employment in this economic sector is allocated
to Retail accessory activities on an industrial activity on the site as a PAUP activity
type.
The Car Wholesaling economic sector is an example of how the Wholesale/storage
relationship was established. The occupation data showed that this economic sector
had approximately 8% of employment in occupations that are not industrial, retail or
office based. Therefore, it is assumed that the remaining employment (92%) in this
economic sector was allocated to Wholesale PAUP Activity types.
8) Facilities Activities: The last step in the development of relationships between PAUP
Activity types and economic sectors was to allocate employment into Facilities PAUP
Activity types. It is assumed that these PAUP Activity types captured the remaining
employment in each of the associated sectors, and in cases where there were
multiple facilities for each economic sector we assumed an even split between the
facilities PAUP Activity types.
1.2.4
Projected Growth by PAUP Activity

Employment forecasts and the concordance/relationship tables have been used to convert
employment growth in each of the economic sectors into PAUP Activity type growth. To do
this we undertook the following steps,
First, we removed employment in the City Centre zone, as this area is not governed
by the PAUP Activity Tables. This employment is easily identified using the
meshblock employment data that has City Centre zone. This area accounts for 13%
of employment in Auckland Region.
45
Next, we used the concordance and the relationship tables to estimate the
distribution of total employment in the base year (2013) within each of the PAUP
Activity types.
Finally, we estimated the future distribution by assuming that the relationships
remains constant in the future. This means that changes and shifts in PAUP Activity
type employment are driven by the relative growth expected in each economic
sector.
The following points provide a summary of the results for each PAUP Activity type of
employment,
1) Rural and Special Zones: The n/a PAUP Activity type represents less than 3% of
employment in the Auckland Region. The model indicates that employment in this
PAUP activity type was around 17,000 in 2013 and could grow to 21,000 (Medium)
or 22,000 (High) by 2026 (the horizon of the PAUP). By 2041 (Auckland Plan period),
employment in this PAUP activity could grow to 23,000 (Medium) or 25,000 (High).
2) Home Based: In total the home based relationship assigned 20% of employment in
the Auckland Region. The model indicates that employment in this PAUP Activity
type was around 131,000 in 2013 and could grow to 161,000 (Medium) or 168,000
(High) by 2026. By 2041, the employment in this PAUP activity could grow to
191,000 (Medium) or 210,000 (High).
3) Retail Activity: In total, the retail relationships assigned 9% of employment in the
Auckland Region. The models results indicated that employment in the core retail
PAUP Activity types (first three in Table 1-22) was around 25,000 in 2013 and is
expected to see strong growth to either 32,000 (Medium) or 33,000 (High) by 2026.
By 2041, the employment in these PAUP Activity types could grow to 38,000
(Medium) or 42,000 (High).
The model also indicated that employment in the supermarket retail PAUP Activity
types (next four in Table 1-22) was around 13,000 in 2013 and could grow to 17,000
(Medium and High) by 2026. By 2041, the employment in these PAUP Activity types
could grow to 20,000 (Medium) or 22,000 (High).
As seen in Table 1-22, other retail PAUP Activity types show minimal employment
growth in the future.
46
Table 1-22: Projected Retail PAUP Activity Employment Growth 2013-2041

Supermarkets exceeding 450m2 and up to 2000m2 GFA per tenancy
Supermarkets exceeding 2000m2 per tenancy and up to 4000m2 GFA per
tenancy
Supermarkets greater than 4000m2 GFA per tenancy
Marine retail
Motor vehicle sales
Service stations
Department stores
Garden centres
2013
9,016
Medium
2026
2041
11,663
14,026
High
2026
2041
12,154
15,265
5,419
10,243
1,441
2,354
1,094
7,010
13,250
1,864
3,045
1,415
8,430
15,934
2,242
3,661
1,702
7,305
13,807
1,943
3,173
1,475
9,175
17,342
2,440
3,985
1,853
1,590
6,359
147
4,052
1,633
5,300
400
2,056
8,226
190
5,223
2,112
6,856
517
2,473
9,892
228
6,272
2,540
8,245
622
2,143
8,572
198
5,450
2,201
7,144
539
2,692
10,766
248
6,840
2,764
8,973
677
4) Office Activity: In total, the office relationships assigned 27% of employment in the
Auckland Region.
The model indicates that employment in the core office PAUP Activity types (first
three in Table 1-23) was around 174,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow strongly to
between 212,000 (Medium) or 223,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these
PAUP Activity types could grow to 243,000 (Medium) or 268,000 (High) by 2041.
The model indicates that employment in the accessory office PAUP Activity types
was around 4,000 in 2013 and is expected to show minimal growth to 5,000
(Medium and High) by 2026. The employment in these PAUP Activity types could
grow to 6,000 (Medium and High) by 2041.
Table 1-23: Projected Office PAUP Activity Employment 2013-2041

Offices that are accessory to the primary activity on the site and the
office GFA exceeds 30 per cent of all buildings on site
2013
26,002
34,464
114,006
4,127
Medium
2026
2041
31,684
36,040
42,015
48,087
138,559 159,099
4,971
5,694
High
2026
2041
33,298
39,686
44,162
52,951
145,587 175,035
5,240
6,289
5) Food and Beverage Activity: In total, the food and beverage relationships assigned
4% of employment in the Auckland Region.
The model indicates that employment in the Food and Beverage PAUP Activity types
(first two Table 1-24) was around 19,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow strongly to
between 21,000 (Medium) or 22,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these
PAUP Activity types could grow to 23,000 (Medium) or 25,000 (High) by 2041.
The model also indicated that employment in the Drive-through restaurants PAUP
activity was under 2,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow slowly to just over 2,000
(Medium and High) by 2026 and 2,200 by 2041.
47
Table 1-24: Projected Food and Beverage PAUP Activity Employment 2013-2041
Food and beverage
2013
1,097
17,821
1,713
Medium
2026
2041
1,239
1,355
20,134
22,018
1,935
2,116
High
2026
2041
1,282
1,459
20,827
23,700
2,002
2,278
6) Industrial Activities: In total the industrial activity relationships allocated 12% of

employment in the Auckland Region.
The model indicates that employment in the core industrial PAUP Activity type (first
in Table 1-25) was around 47,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow to between
57,000 (Medium) or 60,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these PAUP Activity
types could grow to 65,000 (Medium) or 72,000 (High) by 2041.
The model further indicates that employment in the other industrial PAUP Activity
types (Table 1-25) was around 39,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow to around
48,000 (Medium) to 50,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these PAUP Activity
types could grow to 55,000 (Medium) or 60,000 (High) by 2041.
Table 1-25: Projected Industrial PAUP Activity Employment 2013-2041

Industrial activities
Light manufacturing and servicing
Trade suppliers
Wholesaler
Show homes
2013
46,847
8,815
11,632
5,234
5,075
1,249
6,363
34
838
183
Medium
2026
2041
57,286
65,151
10,511
11,806
14,552
17,148
6,297
7,250
5,991
6,632
1,468
1,651
7,621
8,736
43
52
1,130
1,422
225
252
High
2026
2041
60,441
71,843
11,056
12,940
15,187
18,708
6,638
8,031
6,257
7,232
1,534
1,805
8,021
9,652
46
57
1,180
1,550
236
278
7) Facilities Activities and Other Activities: In total, the facilities activity relationships
allocated 8% of employment in the Auckland Region.
The model indicates that the employment in the education PAUP Activity types
(middle of Table 1-26) was around 14,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow rapidly to
between 16,000 (Medium) or 17,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these PAUP
Activity types could grow to 17,000 (Medium) or 19,000 (High) by 2041.
The model also indicates that the employment in the health PAUP Activity types
(Table 1-26) was around 18,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow to around 25,000
(Medium) or 26,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these PAUP Activity types
could grow to 34,000 (Medium) or 37,000 (High) by 2041.
The model shows that the employment in the remaining facilities PAUP Activity
types was around 16,000 in 2013 and is expected to grow to around 20,000
(Medium) to 21,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these PAUP Activity types
could grow to 24,000 (Medium) or 26,000 (High) by 2041.
48
Table 1-26: Projected Facilities and Other PAUP Activity Type Employment 20132041
Recreation facility
Hospitals
Justice facilities
Emergency services
Retirement villages
1.3
2013
2,644
2,238
1,846
643
5,621
8,595
14,070
4,224
334
3,532
139
656
3,195
1,252
Medium
2026
2041
3,174
3,495
2,675
3,002
2,086
2,281
772
850
6,198
6,676
9,477
10,207
18,941
25,912
5,686
7,779
408
482
4,316
5,092
164
182
883
1,208
4,301
5,884
1,414
1,546
High
2026
2041
3,303
3,787
2,790
3,267
2,158
2,455
804
921
6,506
7,432
9,949
11,364
19,722
28,178
5,921
8,460
424
522
4,487
5,522
172
198
919
1,313
4,478
6,398
1,463
1,665
Stage 1 Findings
Before presenting the findings of this stage of the research, the IHPs questions are restated.
We have structured the findings in order to provide direct answers to the IHP questions.
IHP Question 1
What is the forecast growth by business sector for activities that are likely to be focused
on business zoned land, including Light Industry zone areas?
First, it is important to note that a large proportion of employment in the Auckland Economy
is currently located in areas outside of the business zones covered by the PAUP Activity
Tables 1 and 2 (37% in 201341).
We consider that it is natural that a proportion of businesses will choose to locate in nonbusiness zones and that this observed locational choice is likely to continue in the future.
The results from the forecasts indicated that the non-Business PAUP zones are expected to
continue providing locations for a significant proportion of employment in Auckland in the
future. The model indicates that 36% of expected growth in employment could be located in
City Centre Zone, Home based business and n/a PAUP activity types, with employment
growth of between 52,000 (Medium) to 66,000 (High) by 2026. The employment in these
areas could grow by 101,000 (Medium) or 134,000 (High) by 2041.
Most growth in terms of employment is expected in economic sectors that generally prefer
to locate in commercial zones (or in non-business zones). The forecasts indicate that almost
half of the growth in employment is expected in four industries, health, professional
services, retail and education. It therefore follows that there will be a significant demand for
business floorspace focussed on commercial zones.
41
In 2013 15% was in City Centre zone, 20% in home based and 2% in n/a.
49
However, employment in construction42 and wholesale sectors are also expected to grow
strongly and these industries tend to locate in industrial zones. These industries tend to be
land extensive, so we expect that demand for industrial zoned land will likely grow (including
the Light Industry zone).
IHP Question 2;
Finally, we found that much of the growth in employment in the business zones governed by
the PAUP Activity Tables will be located in a small number of the PAUP Activity types (see list
of nine PAUP Activity types below). These PAUP Activity types are generally more enabled
within commercial zones in PAUP Activity Table 1 rather than PAUP Activity Table 2. This
indicates that most of the growth in employment is expected to locate within the
commercial zones (Activity Table 1). This finding is discussed in more detail (by zone and
geography) in section 3.2.
The results from the modelling process also show that most of the growth in employment in
these zones is expected to be located in the following PAUP Activity types,
Offices greater than 500m2 GFA per site: This activity accounts for 17% of
25,000 (Medium) or 32,000 (High) by 2026.
Industrial activities: This activity accounts for 7% of expected growth in
employment. With net additional employment of between 10,000 (Medium) or
14,000 (High) by 2026.
Offices up to 500m2 GFA per site: Accounts for 5% of expected growth in
employment. With net additional employment expected to be between 8,000
Offices up to 100m2 GFA per site: This activity accounts for 4% of expected
growth in employment. With net additional employment of between 6,000
(Medium) to 7,000 (High) expected by 2026.
The core retail PAUP Activity types43 account for 5% of expected growth in
employment. With net additional employment of between 7,000 (Medium) to
9,000 (High) expected by 2026.
Healthcare facilities and Hospitals PAUP Activity types accounts for 4% of
6,000 (Medium) to 7,000 (High) expected by 2026.
These nine PAUP Activity types combined represent two thirds of the expected growth in
employment within the PAUP business zones governed by the PAUP Activity Tables.
42
Note that much of construction employment is located in non-business zones. For example builders, plumbers
etc. operate out of home offices.
43
Retail up to 200m2 GFA per tenancy, Retail exceeding 200m2 per tenancy and up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy
and Retail greater than 450m2 GFA per tenancy.
50
Stage 2: Light Industry Existing Activity

The purpose of this section is to describe the analysis that was conducted to
answer the IHPs second question.
What is the proportion of business sector types that exist within Light
Industry zones (i.e., analysis showing the spectrum of existing activities
from light industrial production activities to commercial activities)?
To answer this question we have undertaken an Exploratory Data Analysis and
primary research to identify the spectrum of existing activities that occur in
areas zoned Light Industry in the PAUP.
The Exploratory Data Analysis drew on readily available data, to establish a
preliminary understanding of the potential spectrum of activities in these
areas. In this study, secondary data (land use and economic activity) was used
to produce a set of indicators that provided an understanding of the profile of
activities within Light Industry zones. These indicators highlighted locations
within Auckland that had unusual profiles, i.e. exhibit high levels of nonindustrial activity (such as retail, offices and services activities). Each of the
unusual areas were identified as outliers, warranting further investigation.
The exploratory data analysis only provides an indication of the spectrum of
activities in the Light Industry zone, these indicators per se do not constitute
evidence of the distribution of land use within the Light Industry zones.
The second step was therefor to undertake primary research to establish a
new data set that provided detail of actual on the ground activity within the
Light Industry zone.
To establish a data set of actual activity we have undertaken a field survey and
desktop survey. As part of our primary research we used a field survey as a
comprehensive census of each property within all areas identified as outliers
in the exploratory data analysis, described above.
In addition we
supplemented the field survey with additional data collected via a desktop
survey based on Street View. This increased the coverage of the survey, which
does not have the same level of accuracy.
The resulting data from the primary research surveys was used to provide an
answer to the IHPs question, i.e. used to produce a profile of activities within
the Light Industry zones by geographic location within Auckland.
51
2.1
Stage 2.1 Exploratory Data Analysis of Light Industry

Before we discuss the method and results used in the Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA) we
provide a brief summary of the spatial extent of the Light Industry zone as provided for in
the proposed PAUP zones.44
In this stage we have utilised property level data (land and floorspace) to describe the scale
of the Light Industry zone as provided within the PAUP.45 This data indicates that there are
8,087 properties in the zone with a total land area of 4,386 hectares (see Table 2-1). The
Light Industry zone is the largest business zone in Auckland, accounting for approximately
half of all Business zoned land. The zone is concentrated into 130 locations across
Auckland.46
The average property in the Light Industry zone is relatively large (approx. 5,000 m2 of land)
with low site coverage (approx. 1,500 m2 of floorspace). Table 2-1 summarises the property
data for the zone. We also noted that 376 meshblocks in Auckland have properties zoned
Light Industry (out of a total of over 9,000).
Table 2-1: Summary of Light Industry Zone Characteristics

Light Industry Zone
Properties
8,087
Land Area (ha)
4,386
2
Floorspace (000 m )
Meshblocks
2.1.1
11,431
376
Indicators of Activity in Light Industry Zone

In the EDA we have used the two existing secondary data sets to provide insights into the
range of activity within the Light Industry zone. They are;
Rateable property floorspace by use types47, and

Employment by sector and meshblock.48
These two data sets were used to build indicators to provide a preliminary understandings of
activities that could be occurring within Light Industry zones.
We emphasise, that there are no existing datasets that record actual activities within land
parcels or even zones. Neither the employment nor floorspace use data applied in this study
provided a complete picture of activity occurring in the Light Industry zone.
44
Auckland Council (2015) Proposed Zones GIS layer (Adopted December).

Auckland Council (2015) Parcel Database and Auckland Council (2015) Rateable Property Database.
46
Auckland Council (2016) Capacity for Growth Study Business Areas.
47
PropertyIQ (2014) Floorspace and Use Database.
48
Statistics New Zealand (2014) Business Demography Statistics.
45
52
At best these data sets provide an indication, the results presented in this EDA acting as a
guide to activity. The following discussion provides a summary of the datasets used,
potential issues and the methods applied to establish the indicators.
Floorspace use indicator
The floorspace use indicator was built using the rateable property floorspace and land use
data set which is collected and maintained by Corelogic (formerly PropertyIQ). This data set
records floorspace on each rateable property, which provides a reasonably accurate
measure of built form in the Light Industry zone.49
In addition to floorspace, the data set records predominant land use for the underlying
parcel. In this data set each rateable property has been assigned the predominant land use
type of the parcel in which the rateable property resides.
Unfortunately, the parent-child hierarchy between parcels and rateable properties (i.e.
commonly a parcel can have multiple associated rateable properties) means that the
predominant land use of the parcel (parent) may not accurately reflect activity on a
particular rateable property (child).
The issue is best understood by way of hypothetical example. A parcel (parent) is made up
of two associated rateable properties (children), one with a large industrial building and the
other a small retail store. The parcel is coded as industrial land use and the two Rateable
properties would be assigned the same land use. This results in an incorrect coding of some
floorspace to the wrong land use type. We consider that in the case of the Light Industry
zone that the likely result is an underestimation of the potential scale of non-industrial
activities.
Notwithstanding these irregularities, we consider that this data provides a reasonable
indication of the range of activity currently present within the Light Industry zone.
In the EDA we developed a floorspace indicator using the following method;
1. Code Land Use: We assessed land use codes and descriptions to establish which
land use types are most likely to be related to industrial, commercial and other
activities. The commercial activities included office, retail, services50, taverns and
food land uses (see Appendix B, where EDA code = 1). Industrial activities included
engineering, industrial, depots and wholesale land uses (see Appendix B, where EDA
code = 2). The remaining land uses were coded as Other51 and any remaining
floorspace that had no defined land use was coded as Unknown. We note that
there may be instances were a land use code could be incorrectly coded to
commercial or industrial. Notwithstanding this limitation, the assessment
49
There are known issues with this data set, including missing floorspace information for some older buildings
(more common in residential) and there may be newly constructed properties that have not been included in the
data.
50
Services Beauty Salon etc.
51
Residential, infrastructure, agricultural, public, special purpose etc.
53
undertaken in this study is exploratory and is only intended to provide a reasonable

indication of activity in the Light Industry zone.
2. Spatial Profiles: Property level data is then aggregated to meshblocks, which are
often much smaller than business areas.52 This allowed us to build up a set of
detailed area profiles of the range of activity within Light Industry zones.
Table 2-2 provides a summary of results from the floorspace indicator. The average
meshblock with a Light Industry zone may have 82% of its floorspace used by
industrial activities and 7% is used by commercial activities.
At this general and aggregate floorspace level it appears that non-industrial activities
are limited in the Light Industry zone.
Table 2-2: Average Profile of floorspace use within Light Industry zone
Average Floorspace per
Meshblock
Industrial
Floorspace
2
(000 m )
Proportion of
Space
24.8
82%
Commercial*
2.2
7%
Other
1.2
4%
2.3
7%
30.4
100%
Unknown
Total
*includes retail, office, services
1. Summary Statistics: Finally the spatial profiles have been analysed using standard
descriptive statistics to understand their structure. This included the following
simple summary statistics: mean, standard deviation, quartiles, skewness, median,
maximum and minimum. We also investigated the data using other multivariate
measures such as correlation.
Figure 2-1 shows the profile of meshblocks within Light Industry zones. The results
indicate that commercial activity in Light Industry zones is heavily skewed to zero,
with most meshblocks having no commercial activity (green line indicates the
Median/Mode= 0%). However, the profiles show a long tail in the data, with the
mean (average) at approximately 10% (red line) and one a standard deviation at just
over 30% (orange line).
52
There are 376 meshblocks in Auckland with Light Industry zoned properties. This compares to 130 main
business areas with Light Industry zones.
54
Figure 2-1: Profile of Light Industry floorspace that is commercial space use
60%
Median/Mode
% of Light Indsutry Zone meshblocks
50%
Mean
+1 s.d.
40%
30%
20%
10%
95%
100%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
5%
10%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
0%
% floorspace that is Commercial
Overall, the data indicates a weak negative link between meshblocks with Light
Industry zoning and commercial activities (see red line which is the best fit). The dot
plot in Figure 2-2 shows no apparent relationship between these data sets. The
random pattern of dots yields a correlation of less than -0.12. However, there are
some outliers for which the data indicates a high level of commercial floorspace
(dots above the orange line).
Figure 2-2: Dot Plot of Light Industry Zoned Land and commercial space use
% light industrial zoned land vs. % commercial floorspace by MSB
% of floorspace in Light Industry zone used for

commercial
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% of Business Land that is Light Industry zone
We consider that the meshblocks with profiles that have more than 30% of
floorspace used for commercial activities are outliers (i.e. more than one standard
deviation above the mean). In terms of the commercial floorspace use indicator,
approximately 11% of Light Industry zoned meshblocks outliers according to this
55
indicator. These meshblocks are the ones of interest and have been investigated
further.53
Employment indicators
The employment indicators were built using Statistics New Zealands database of
employment by sector and meshblock.54 This data set is useful for understanding, in more
detail, the range of economic activity in locations with Light Industry zoning.
While this data set provides greater detail about the types of activities that are occurring in
an area, it does not provide an exact understanding of the actual floorspace that the
economic activity requires or whether the economic activity is actually located in the Light
Industry zone or some other zone in the meshblock.
The following examples demonstrate some of the limitations in this data;
In some instances economic activity in the SNZ employment data may not reflect the
actual activity type. This is caused by the fact that each business is coded according
to its core activity and other minor activities are not coded. For example,
supermarket economic activity has a core activity of retailing and generally uses
retail type space. However, in the supermarket business operation there are other
non-core activities, such as centralised storage/distribution and supply chain
management (which require large warehouse type space). In the SNZ employment
data this supply chain activity would be coded as supermarket, when in fact this
particular part of the business operation is better categorised as
warehousing/storage.
There are instances where there are multiple zones within a meshblock. This means
that we cannot be certain that employment in these meshblocks is actually located
in the Light Industry zone. Of the 379 meshblocks with some Light Industry zoning
there are 81 that have another business zone (21% of the meshblocks).
Miscoding. This can mean activities coded to the wrong location or to the wrong
activity type.
These limitations in the employment data means that secondary data can only be viewed as
an indicator of the range of economic activity in the Light Industry zone.
In the EDA we developed two employment indicators using the following method;
1. Code Economic Activity: We have assessed the employment codes (ANZSIC) and
descriptions to establish which types are most likely to be predominantly matched to
industrial, commercial and other zones/activities. Commercial activities included;
retail, business services, hospitality and community services (see Appendix B, where
EDA code = 1). The predominant industrial activities included; manufacturing,
construction, maintenance, transport and wholesaling (see Appendix B, where EDA
53
54
Note that we investigated Light Industry zone in other non-outlier areas.

56
code = 2). The remaining economic activities were coded as Other55. We note that
there may be instances were an economic sector in the code could be incorrectly
coded to commercial or industrial. Notwithstanding this limitation, the assessment
undertaken in this study is exploratory and is only intended to provide a reasonable
indication of activity in the Light Industry zone.
2. Spatial Profiles: We have developed a set of detailed area profiles that indicate the
spectrum of economic activity within the Light Industry zone.
Table 2-3 provides a summary of the results from this employment indicator. The
average meshblock with Light Industry zoned land is likely to have 58% of
employment in predominantly industrial type activities and 33% in commercial
activities, some of which may be industrial in nature.56
Table 2-3: Average Profile of Employment in meshblocks with Light Industry zoned
land
Average Employment
per Meshblock
Employment
Proportion of
Emp
Industrial
319
58%
Commercial*
180
33%
51
9%
550
100%
Other
Total
*includes retail, services etc
We have also developed an indicator using commercial employment density, that

attempts to control for employment in other zones within these meshblocks (see
limitations above). This indicator was developed by first removing commercial
employment that may be located in non-Light Industry zones within each
meshblock57. The remaining employment was then divided by the area of land in the
Light Industry zone to establish an employment density for predominantly
commercial employment. The results suggest that an average meshblock in a Light
Industry zone had an employment density of 21 commercial jobs per hectare of
land.58
3. Summary Statistics: As with the floorspace indicator, we have analysed the spatial
profiles using standard descriptive statistics to understand their structure.
First, we examined the proportion of commercial employment in each meshblock
indicator (see Table 2-2). Broadly, the distribution shows that this employment
indicator is relatively less skewed to zero than the floorspace indicator. The
55
Residential ownership, infrastructure provision, agricultural and extraction, other public services, special
purpose etc.
56
Note that the term commercial activities does capture a range of industrial/warehousing type activities that
are appropriately located in industrial zones. For example, a supermarket distribution centre.
57
2
We have assumed that for every 50m of floorspace in other zones there is one employee. This estimation
method assigned approximately 40% of the predominantly commercial employment in the meshblocks.
58
Based on meshblocks that have no other commercial zones.
57
distribution of commercial employment in Light Industry zones is flatter and wider

than the floorspace indicator, with the median (green line) revealing that half of the
meshblocks had more than 20% commercial employment. The profile has a mean
(average) at approximately 30% (red line) and one standard deviation at around 55%
(orange line).
Figure 2-3: Profile of Light Industry zone Employment Predominantly Commercial
% Light Indsutry Zone meshblocks
60%
Median
50%
+1 s.d.
Mean
40%
30%
20%
10%
100%
95%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
5%
10%
0%
0%
% employment that is predominately commercial
Overall, the data indicates a very weak negative link between the Light Industry zone
and commercial employment (see red line which is the best fit in 3-4, below). The
dot plot in Figure 2-4 shows no apparent relationship between these data sets, with
what appears to be random pattern of dots (correlation of less than -0.15).
However, there are some outliers for which the data indicates a high level of
commercial employment (dots above the orange line).
58
Figure 2-4: Dot Plot of Light Industry Zoned Land and Commercial Employment
% light industrial zoned land vs. % predominantly commercial employment by MSB
% of employment that is predominantly

commercial
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
We consider that meshblocks with profiles that have more than 53% of employment
in commercial activities are outliers (i.e. more than one standard deviation above
the mean). In terms of the commercial employment indicator, approximately 13% of
meshblocks are one standard deviation above the mean. This helped to define the
selection of areas for further investigation using field survey.
Second, we examined the density of commercial employment in the Light Industry
zone indicator (see Table 2-3). Broadly, the distribution of this indicator shows that
it is skewed to zero with the median (green line) revealing that half the meshblocks
had an employment density of less than 8 commercial jobs per hectare. The profile
had a mean (red line) of approximately 20 commercial jobs per hectare and one
standard deviation at around 60.
59
Figure 2-5: Profile of Light Industry zone Employment Density of Predominantly

commercial
% Light Indsutry Zone meshblocks
60%
Median
50%
Mean
+1 s.d.
40%
30%
20%
10%
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
0%
Employment that is predominately commercial per hectare of Light Industry Zone Land
Overall, the data indicates a very weak negative link between Light Industry zoned
land and commercial activities (see red line which is the best fit in 3-6 below). The
dot plot in Figure 2-6 shows no apparent relationship between these data sets, with
correlation of less than -0.13.
However, there were meshblock outliers for which the data indicates a high level of
commercial employment (dots above the orange line). These are the subject of
further investigation.
Density of predominantly commercial employment

per hectare
Figure 2-6: Dot Plot of Light Industry Zoned Land and Commercial Employment
% light industrial zoned land vs. Density of predominantly commercial employment
by MSB
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
60
We consider that the meshblocks with profiles that have density of more than 60
commercial workers per ha of Light Industry zoned land are outliers (i.e. more than
one standard deviation above the mean). In terms of the employment indicator,
approximately 8% of the meshblocks are one standard deviation above the mean.
2.1.2
Results Exploratory Data Analysis

In this study three indicators were developed to establish which areas in the Light Industry
zone may have a wider spectrum of activities (these areas are deemed to be outliers). The
outliers were defined as locations,
With more than 31% of the Light Industry zoned floorspace was used by commercial
activities,
With more than 53% of employment in the meshblock was predominantly
commercial, and
With more than 60 predominantly commercial employment per ha of Light Industry
zoned land.
The indicators developed in the EDA suggested that there may be a very weak link between
commercial activities and the Light Industry zone. This result was to be expected as the
planners who defined the Light Industry zone intended to capture areas which were
predominantly industrial in nature. The results suggest a reasonably strong match between
the Light Industry zone and industrial activity.
However, the indicators did demonstrate that there may be some locations within the Light
Industry zone that are outliers, with significantly higher levels of commercial activity. We
consider that these areas should be investigated further to understand the potential
spectrum of activity that is occurring.
From this set, meshblocks with small areas of Light Industry zoned land are filtered out (less
than 1,000 m2 of land)59 These outliers with small land areas will only have a few businesses
(one or two at most). Given the limited resources available for this study we have chosen
not to visit these areas as they are unlikely to provide much additional information.
The following tables list the meshblocks that had unusually high commercial activity located
on Light Industry zoned land and have been defined as outliers for further investigation (see
Table 2-4, Table 2-5 and Table 2-6). In total 75 meshblocks that could be outliers, this is 20%
of the all Auckland meshblocks that have Light Industry zoned land.
59
This filter removed four outliers, 749500, 766500, 801600 and 442100.
61
Table 2-4: Light Industry zone Outliers commercial floorspace indicator

Meshblock
Census Area Unit Census Area Unit Name
Ward No
Ward
Floorspace
Indicator
214102
505602
Huapai
7601
Rodney Ward
43%
213700
505604
Kumeu East
7601
Rodney Ward
48%
177803
506614
Tahekeroa
7601
Rodney Ward
33%
178900
508701
Albany
7602
Albany Ward
100%
178501
508701
Albany
7602
Albany Ward
89%
180823
508805
Windsor Park
7602
Albany Ward
100%
180813
508805
Windsor Park
7602
Albany Ward
32%
304000
507900
Westlake
7603
North Shore Ward
96%
304200
507900
Westlake
7603
North Shore Ward
41%
304100
507900
Westlake
7603
North Shore Ward
34%
198600
508320
Glenfield North
7603
North Shore Ward
34%
198500
508320
Glenfield North
7603
North Shore Ward
34%
183700
508420
Target Road
7603
North Shore Ward
53%
361400
509800
Northcote South
7603
North Shore Ward
69%
357500
510500
Birkenhead East
7603
North Shore Ward
241500
510800
Henderson South
7604
Waitakere Ward
230401
513301
Kingdale
7604
Waitakere Ward
33%
442000
514302
Grafton East
7605
Waitemata and Gulf Ward
33%
453200
515902
Parnell West
7605
77%
453000
515902
Parnell West
7605
265200
511303
Lynnmall
7606
Whau Ward
543000
518101
Mt Eden North
7607
Albert-Eden-Roskill Ward
51%
569800
518701
Hillsborough West
7607
47%
569504
518701
Hillsborough West
7607
44%
579300
518802
Wesley
7607
626304
517202
Stonefields
7608
Orakei Ward
612502
520202
Ellerslie South
7608
Orakei Ward
51%
611500
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
Maungakiekie-Tamaki Ward
79%
611700
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
35%
619600
519400
One Tree Hill East
7609
83%
620400
519500
Penrose
7609
82%
620500
519500
Penrose
7609
33%
602200
519810
Onehunga South West
7609
37%
625800
520302
Mt Wellington West
7609
53%
625400
520302
Mt Wellington West
7609
37%
644502
520401
Ferndale
7609
100%
644102
520401
Ferndale
7609
96%
636400
520500
Mt Wellington South
7609
100%
781700
521901
Otahuhu West
7611
Manukau Ward
806700
521201
Hingaia
7612
Manurewa-Papakura Ward
100%
767921
523920
Takanini West
7612
81%
37%
100%
51%
100%
55%
100%
36%
62
Table 2-5: Light Industry zone Outliers commercial employment indicator

Meshblock
Ward No
Ward
Employment
Indicator
142500
505300
Wellsford
7601
Rodney Ward
60%
215904
505602
Huapai
7601
Rodney Ward
65%
139507
506631
Snells Beach
7601
Rodney Ward
62%
138203
506659
Matakana
7601
Rodney Ward
73%
178900
508701
Albany
7602
Albany Ward
94%
180823
508805
Windsor Park
7602
Albany Ward
100%
180813
508805
Windsor Park
7602
Albany Ward
58%
304100
507900
Westlake
7603
North Shore Ward
63%
304200
507900
Westlake
7603
North Shore Ward
61%
183800
508420
Target Road
7603
North Shore Ward
89%
360100
509800
Northcote South
7603
North Shore Ward
55%
224306
513511
Westgate
7604
Waitakere Ward
85%
442000
514302
Grafton East
7605
57%
453200
515902
Parnell West
7605
86%
453000
515902
Parnell West
7605
77%
453103
515902
Parnell West
7605
76%
265200
511303
Lynnmall
7606
Whau Ward
65%
265400
511303
Lynnmall
7606
Whau Ward
60%
569000
518701
Hillsborough West
7607
61%
579200
518802
Wesley
7607
98%
626304
517202
Stonefields
7608
Orakei Ward
96%
612502
520202
Ellerslie South
7608
Orakei Ward
96%
612700
520202
Ellerslie South
7608
Orakei Ward
94%
626302
517202
Stonefields
7609
93%
620400
519500
Penrose
7609
94%
621200
519500
Penrose
7609
85%
621400
519500
Penrose
7609
59%
621000
519500
Penrose
7609
59%
611500
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
85%
612200
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
78%
611700
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
71%
625800
520302
Mt Wellington West
7609
63%
627600
520303
Mt Wellington North
7609
57%
644502
520401
Ferndale
7609
99%
644501
520401
Ferndale
7609
93%
636400
520500
Mt Wellington South
7609
76%
648500
521602
Howick Central
7610
Howick Ward
82%
649600
521602
Howick Central
7610
Howick Ward
55%
711902
523113
Greenmount
7610
Howick Ward
66%
638001
520500
Mt Wellington South
7611
Manukau Ward
74%
781700
521901
Otahuhu West
7611
Manukau Ward
58%
711801
523113
Greenmount
7611
Manukau Ward
69%
712304
523711
Rongomai
7611
Manukau Ward
83%
729400
524404
Favona North
7611
Manukau Ward
72%
780209
524604
Manukau Central
7611
Manukau Ward
74%
765700
523912
Takanini South
7612
85%
767503
523920
Takanini West
7612
58%
758200
524902
Manurewa East
7612
70%
752802
525002
Beaumont
7612
79%
791700
525420
Papakura North
7612
57%
823600
525922
Bledisloe Park
7613
Franklin Ward
61%
63
Table 2-6: Light Industry zone Outliers commercial employment density indicator
Meshblock
Ward No
Ward
Employment
Density Indicator
178900
508701
Albany
7602
Albany Ward
1,572
180823
508805
Windsor Park
7602
Albany Ward
114
304200
507900
Westlake
7603
North Shore Ward
336900
509300
Narrow Neck
7603
North Shore Ward
80
453000
515902
Parnell West
7605
78
303
67
453200
515902
Parnell West
7605
265200
511303
Lynnmall
7606
Whau Ward
165
612502
520202
Ellerslie South
7608
Orakei Ward
220
621000
519500
Penrose
7609
621200
519500
Penrose
7609
90
621400
519500
Penrose
7609
109
620400
519500
Penrose
7609
316
611500
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
1,959
612200
520202
Ellerslie South
7609
4,339
644501
520401
Ferndale
7609
178
644502
520401
Ferndale
7609
205
636400
520500
Mt Wellington South
7609
128
648500
521602
Howick Central
7610
Howick Ward
64
711801
523113
Greenmount
7611
Manukau Ward
64
765700
523912
Takanini South
7612
158
758200
524902
Manurewa East
7612
157
752802
525002
Beaumont
7612
73
84
64
2.2
Stage 2.2 Primary Research of the Light Industry Zone

The primary research in this study developed a new data set that appraised actual land use
activities occurring in the Light Industry zone. In this step we have used two primary
research techniques, a field survey and a desktop survey.
Both surveys used the same method, with each property in the Light Industry zone viewed
(either in the field or using images) and then coded to a broad activity type. This data was
recorded spatially in GIS software and has been linked directly to the Auckland Council
property database.
Given the limited time and resources, it was not possible to develop a method to code actual
activity on each property to each specific PAUP Activity types. A detailed survey of this
nature would require more time than is available to design and then implement. In this
study we have taken a conservative approach, with coding tending to favour non-industrial
activities (i.e. it is likely that there are some properties that are coded non-industrial when
they could be industrial). This means that the estimate of industrial in the survey results are
most likely lower than actual PAUP Activity types would suggest.
In this study we have opted for a practical solution, using six broad codes for activity;
industrial,
retail,60
office,61
mixed,62
other,63 or
vacant.
These six codes were developed to correspond with the PAUP Activity tables. The industrial
code covered activities that are mostly Permitted (enabled) in the PAUP Activity Table 2
(Light Industry zone). While the remaining codes (retail/office/other/mixed) covered
activities that are mostly Discretionary or Non-complying (not enabled) in the PAUP
Activity Table 2 (Light Industry zone). For parcels that had two types of land uses, we
recorded the codes for both the predominant use and the other use on the same parcel.64
In the following subsections we describe the extent of the geographic areas covered by the
surveys and results.
60
Excluding retail that was accessory to an industrial activity.

Excluding office space that was accessory to an industrial activity.
62
Parcels with more than two types of land uses were regarded as mixed.
63
Properties occupied by community services, medical, educational and recreational activities, as well as
residential dwellings, were regarded as other.
64
Due to the time constraints of this study, we did not go into identifying the proportion of the parcel used by
each of the two activity types.
61
65
2.2.1
Field Survey
The geographic extent of the field survey was designed to collect data for meshblocks that
were indicated as being outliers in the EDA (see Table 2-4, Table 2-5 and Table 2-6). In total
the EDA suggested that there were 75 meshblocks with Light Industry zone that may be
outliers.
The field survey was extended to include other areas that were not indicated in the EDA.
These areas were included for the following two reasons;
1. Contiguous to Outliers: The field survey was extended to include meshblocks in
close proximity to the outliers. These meshblocks have been included because data
could be collected simultaneously, and helped eliminate any miscoding by location in
the base data that could skew the results. The outlier meshblocks were mapped
along with the Light Industry zone to establish which additional areas could easily be
surveyed.
The outliers and contiguous areas covered in the field survey are displayed in the
following maps (see red overlay), Figure 2-7 (North Shore), Figure 2-8 (West
Auckland), Figure 2-9 (Isthmus), Figure 2-10 (East Auckland) and Figure 2-11 (South
Auckland). In total, an additional 132 meshblocks have been included in the field
survey as a result of being contiguous to the outliers.
2. Planning Reasons: The field survey was also extended to meshblocks that included
specific areas of debate in the PAUP process. Our discussions with Auckland Council
planners on site-specific submissions to the PAUP suggested five additional areas
that could be investigated; Ti Rakau Drive, Otahuhu West, Rosebank, Te Atatu and
Albany Highway. There are seventeen additional meshblocks in these areas (Table
2-7 below). The maps showing the locations of those areas are attached in Appendix
C: Maps of additional sites visited in field survey.
66
Table 2-7: Additional areas included in the field survey suggested by the
planners
Meshblock
Ward No
Ward
711402
523107
Burswood
7610
711404
523112
Highbrook
7610
Howick Ward
Howick Ward
711408
523107
Burswood
7610
Howick Ward
711702
523107
Burswood
7610
Howick Ward
711703
523113
Greenmount
7610
Howick Ward
782700
521901
Otahuhu West
7611
Manukau Ward
783000
521901
Otahuhu West
7611
Manukau Ward
783500
521901
Otahuhu West
7611
Manukau Ward
783600
521901
Otahuhu West
7611
Manukau Ward
388700
514801
Rosebank
7606
Whau Ward
389300
514801
Rosebank
7606
Whau Ward
389400
514801
Rosebank
7606
Whau Ward
389500
514801
Rosebank
7606
Whau Ward
245300
512202
Durham Green
7604
Waitakere Ward
180301
508807
North Harbour East
7602
Albany Ward
180302
508807
North Harbour East
7602
Albany Ward
180809
508807
North Harbour East
7602
Albany Ward
A full list of the locations covered in our field survey, including the dates each site was visited
is provided in Appendix D: Locations of areas covered by the field survey and date visited.
Given time constraints the field survey did not include areas in the rural North (e.g.
Matakana, Snells Beach and Wellsford) and in the rural South (e.g. Pukekohe).
67
Figure 2-7: Field Survey Areas in the North Shore
68
Figure 2-8: Field Survey Areas in West Auckland
69
Figure 2-9: Field Survey Areas in Auckland Isthmus
70
Figure 2-10: Field Survey Areas in East Auckland
71
Figure 2-11: Field Survey Areas in South Auckland
72
2.2.2
Desktop Survey
In addition to the field survey, we surveyed the remaining Light Industry areas using a
desktop process. The desktop survey utilised several geospatial data sets to attribute codes
to properties in the Light Industry zone. The data sets included, GIS property layers,65 aerial
photos,66 street imagery67 and publicly available business information.68
The desktop survey has two limitations;
In some instances aerial layers and street imagery can be out-of-date, which means
that the data collected may not reflect actual current use.69 However, we consider
that in most cases the current use is likely to be similar to the use established in the
desktop survey. The rate of change in the Light Industry zone is relatively slow
compared to other business zones and as such the desktop survey will be reasonably
accurate (the imagery was less than two years old).
In some instances the desktop survey was unable to ascertain a use for a property.
With the aerial photos, street imagery and publicly available business information
providing inconclusive information about an activity on a property.
We note that properties tend to be located down long driveways, the field survey
showed that most properties located on long driveways tended to be industrial in
nature. Therefore, we consider that non-coded properties are more likely to be
industrial in nature. The exclusion of these properties is likely to slightly skew the
results from the primary research towards non-industrial activities.
Notwithstanding the limitations mentioned above, we consider that inclusion of the desktop
survey provided valuable insights for the IHP. In summary the desktop survey collected data
for an additional 137 of the meshblocks with Light Industry zone.
2.2.3
Coverage Primary Research

Before we present results from the research it is instructive to understand the coverage of
the primary research in terms of the numbers of properties in the Light Industry zone and
their geographic distribution.
The primary research collected data for 91% of properties in the Light Industry zone. Table
2-8 shows that the field survey provided data for 58% of properties, of which 14% were in
the meshblocks that were indicated as outliers via the EDA. The field survey collection was
extended to include a further 34% of properties in meshblocks that were contiguous to these
65
Auckland Council (2015) Parcel GIS layer.

ArcGIS Aerial layers and Google Earth.
67
Google Streetview (2015).
68
In some cases where activity type on a property was unclear research of publicly available information about
the business name or address was conducted.
69
The aerial photos taken between 2015 and 2016 and street imagery was generally taken between 2013 and
2014.
66
73
outlier areas. In addition, a further 10% of properties were included in the field survey for
planning reasons associated with the PAUP hearings. The desktop survey collected data for
approximately one-third of properties in the Light Industry zone.
The primary research did not collect data for 9% of the properties in the Light Industry zone.
Table 2-8: Light Industry zone Survey Summary Property Count

Properties
Field Survey
Outliers
1,155
Contiguous
2,773
34%
776
10%
4,704
58%
2,677
33%
Planning Reasons
Total in Field Survey
Desktop Survey
Not Surveyed
Total
14%
706
9%
8,087
100%
Table 2-9 provides a Local Board level summary of the survey coverage for the Light Industry
zone. The primary research coverage of Light Industry zoned properties ranged from 71%
(Rodney) to 100% (Upper Harbour, Kaipatiki, Waitemata and Whau).
Table 2-9: Count of parcels field surveyed by ward

Local Board
Field
Survey
Desktop
Survey
Not
Surveyed
% Surveyed
Rodney
144
127
110
71%
Hibiscus and Bays
104
49
68%
Upper Harbour
617
99
100%
Kaipatiki
629
35
100%
82
15
98%
Henderson-Massey
223
376
147
80%
Waitakere Ranges
61
29
68%
100%
Devonport-Takapuna
Waitemata
51
12
476
84
Albert-Eden
99
12
90%
Puketapapa
143
99%
43
91
97%
Whau
Orakei
100%
Maungakiekie-Tamaki
996
258
53
96%
Howick
277
254
28
95%
Mangere-Otahuhu
233
407
81
89%
Otara-Papatoetoe
396
162
51
92%
Manurewa
47
156
44
82%
Papakura
195
186
65
85%
Franklin
Auckland Region
147
145
23
93%
4,704
2,677
706
91%
74
2.2.4
Results Primary Research

In this section we discuss results from the primary research. Firstly focus on results for
meshblocks that have been indicated as outliers in the EDA. The results for the entire field
survey are then discussed. Finally, we provide overall results for the entire set of primary
research data (i.e. field survey and desktop survey).
The results have been displayed using the following extractions,
Percentage of Existing uses: In this study we are primarily interested in percentage

usage of existing activities in the Light Industry zone. Therefore vacant properties
have been excluded, as they are not in use. In total, vacant properties accounted for
24% of the Light Industry zoned land.
Local Board level: It is possible to present the data at various spatial definitions
(Region, Ward, Local Board, Business area,70 Census Area Unit or meshblock) or to
produce maps of the results. However most of these spatial definitions would
introduce significant volumes of results and detail, which is not necessary for this
study. For example, it would require more than 130 maps to display the results for
each of the Business areas. Therefore, we have opted to present results at the Ward
level and in tabular form. We consider that this provides enough detail for the IHP
to understand the potential variation of activity across the region, while maintaining
a manageable level in terms of reporting. We will provided a map booklet for the
final set of outliers, alongside this study.71
Metrics Utilised: There are multiple metrics that could be used to display the results
of the primary research including, count of properties, land area and floorspace.72
A count of properties and floorspace are not relevant for understanding land use in
the Light Industry zone. When assessing land use, we consider that these two
metrics are not as applicable because they can create an over-representation for
activity types that require less space (retail and other non-industrial activities), and
produce an under-representation of activities that require more space (industrial
activities).
In this study we have chosen to display activity use in terms of land area, as we
consider it the best metric for understanding the Light Industry zone.
70
As defined by the CfGS.

Huang, T. (2016) Map Booklet of Outliers in the Light Industry Zone.
72
Count of businesses is another alternative metric, which has not been recorded in this primary research.
However when assessing land use, we consider this metric is not as applicable because it creates an overrepresentation for activity types that require less space (retail and other non-industrial activities) and underrepresentation of activities that require more space (industrial activities).
71
75
Field Survey of Outliers

Table 2-10 displays the field survey results by ward for meshblocks classed as outliers.
Broadly, the results show that outlier meshblocks do have a high proportion of Light Industry
zoned land used by non-industrial activities (the regional average is 36% of land area).73
Retail is the largest non-industrial use of this land (22%), followed by Office activities (7%)
and Other (5%).
In summary, by Local Board:
Meshblock outliers in Upper Harbour, Kaipatiki, Devonport-Takapuna, HendersonMassey, Waitemata, Whau, Albert-Eden, Puketapapa, Manurewa and Papakura have
large shares of land used for non-industrial activities in Light Industry zone (40% or
more).
Meshblock outliers in Rodney, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Howick, MangereOtahuhu, Otara-Papatoetoe and Franklin had medium shares of land used for nonindustrial activities in Light Industry zone (30% or less).
Table 2-10: Field Survey of Outliers by Ward - percentage of land area by use
Local Board
Rodney
Industrial
Office
Retail
77%
0%
Upper Harbour
45%
Kaipatiki
55%
Devonport-Takapuna
Henderson-Massey
Other
Mixed
15%
0%
8%
18%
25%
11%
2%
3%
36%
5%
0%
41%
12%
20%
19%
8%
55%
8%
26%
11%
0%
Waitemata
29%
10%
49%
13%
0%
Whau
47%
0%
11%
0%
42%
Albert-Eden
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
Puketapapa
56%
4%
32%
1%
7%
Hibiscus and Bays*
Waitakere Ranges*
Orakei
88%
2%
9%
1%
0%
Maungakiekie-Tamaki
74%
13%
5%
6%
1%
Howick
85%
1%
7%
7%
0%
Mangere-Otahuhu
93%
0%
5%
2%
0%
Otara-Papatoetoe
75%
9%
9%
4%
3%
Manurewa
27%
13%
49%
11%
0%
Papakura
19%
1%
75%
3%
2%
Franklin
Auckland Region
87%
0%
13%
0%
0%
64%
7%
22%
5%
3%
*EDA indicated no outliers in these Local Board areas
73
These activities are not directly related to the PAUP Activity types in the PAUP Activity Tables.
76
We consider that the results from the field survey of the outlier meshblocks show that there
are some areas in the Light Industry zone that have a significant amount of non-industrial
use. However, it is important to note that these are outlier meshblocks they are not
representative of the Light Industry zone. These outlier meshblocks may be located
contiguous to other meshblocks with more industrial activity, providing a range of support
services to the more industrial locations.
It is important to view outliers within their local context, as is discussed in the following
results covering the entire field survey and shown in the booklet of maps (that are currently
being developed).
Entire Field Survey
Table 2-11 displays the results by Local Board for the entire field survey. Results for the
entire field survey show much higher levels of industrial activity (Auckland average of 75% of
land) in Industrial zones than the outlier meshblocks alone. Retail is still the largest nonindustrial use of land in the field survey (13%), followed by Other (6%) and Office (4%).
We can see the following:
Areas in the field survey in the Devonport-Takapuna, Waitemata, Albert-Eden,

Manurewa and Papakura had large shares of land used for non-industrial activities in
Light Industry zones (50% or more).
Areas in the field survey in Upper Harbour, Kaipatiki, Henderson-Massey, and OtaraPapatoetoe had medium shares of land used for non-industrial activities in Light
Industry zone (approximately 30%).
Areas in the field survey in the Rodney, Whau, Puketapapa, Orakei, MaungakiekieTamaki, Howick, Mangere-Otahuhu, and Franklin had low shares of land used for
non-industrial activities in Light Industry zone (approximately 20% or less).
77
Table 2-11: Field Survey by Ward - percentage of land area by use

Local Board
Rodney
Industrial
Office
Retail
Other
7%
Mixed
80%
0%
9%
4%
Upper Harbour
70%
11%
11%
6%
2%
Kaipatiki
69%
2%
25%
4%
0%
Devonport-Takapuna
42%
12%
20%
18%
8%
Henderson-Massey
67%
3%
16%
11%
2%
Waitemata
28%
10%
50%
13%
0%
Whau
Hibiscus and Bays*
Waitakere Ranges*
88%
2%
6%
3%
2%
Albert-Eden
0%
0%
32%
68%
0%
Puketapapa
78%
2%
15%
1%
3%
Orakei
90%
3%
4%
3%
0%
Maungakiekie-Tamaki
87%
5%
5%
2%
1%
Howick
78%
2%
16%
2%
2%
Mangere-Otahuhu
86%
1%
12%
1%
0%
Otara-Papatoetoe
69%
5%
11%
15%
1%
Manurewa
49%
3%
43%
5%
0%
Papakura
43%
1%
50%
6%
1%
Franklin
Auckland Region
79%
0%
16%
1%
4%
75%
4%
13%
6%
1%
Total Primary Research

Table 2-12 displays the results by ward for the entire field survey and the desktop survey.
Relative to the previous results for the field survey, the results for the entire primary
research process revealed much higher levels of industrial activity (Auckland average of 83%
of land). Retail is still the largest non-industrial use of land in the field survey (8%), followed
by Other (6%) and Office (3%).
We note:
The majority of Local Boards (15 of the areas) had low shares of land used for nonindustrial activities in Light Industry zone (approximately 20% or less).
Data collected in the primary research shows that Upper Harbour, Kaipatiki and
Puketapapa had medium-low shares of land used for non-industrial activities in Light
Industry zone (20% to 30%).
Data collected in the primary research shows that Papakura had medium shares of
land used for non-industrial activities in Light Industry zone (30% to 40%).
Data collected in the primary research showed that the Devonport-Takapuna and
Albert-Eden had large-medium shares of land used for non-industrial activities in
Light Industry zone (40% to 50%).
78
Data collected in the primary research showed that only the Waitemata had a large
share of land used for non-industrial activities in Light Industry zone (more than
50%).
Table 2-12: Field and Desktop Survey by Ward - percentage of land area by use
Local Board
Industrial
Office
Retail
Other
Mixed
Rodney
82%
0%
7%
8%
2%
Hibiscus and Bays*
99%
0%
1%
0%
0%
Upper Harbour
74%
9%
9%
6%
3%
Kaipatiki
72%
2%
23%
3%
0%
Devonport-Takapuna
54%
10%
16%
14%
6%
Henderson-Massey
82%
1%
8%
8%
1%
Waitakere Ranges*
92%
0%
5%
4%
0%
Waitemata
28%
10%
50%
13%
0%
Whau
86%
2%
5%
6%
1%
Albert-Eden
53%
0%
20%
27%
0%
Puketapapa
77%
2%
17%
1%
3%
Orakei
89%
1%
2%
7%
0%
Maungakiekie-Tamaki
88%
4%
4%
3%
1%
Howick
85%
4%
8%
2%
1%
Mangere-Otahuhu
89%
0%
3%
8%
0%
Otara-Papatoetoe
81%
3%
7%
9%
0%
Manurewa
92%
0%
5%
3%
0%
Papakura
64%
1%
28%
7%
1%
Franklin
Auckland Region
86%
0%
11%
1%
2%
83%
3%
8%
6%
1%
Figure 2-12 shows the primary research profile for meshblocks with Light Industry
zoned land. The results indicated that commercial activity in Light Industry zones is
skewed to zero, with most meshblocks having a small proportion of non-industrial
activity (green line indicates the Median= 15%). However, the profiles show a long
tail in the data, with the mean (average) at approximately 25% (red line) and one
standard deviation at just over 55% (orange line).
79
Figure 2-12: Profile of Light Industry zoned land that is Non-industrial Activities
60%
Median
% of Light Indsutry Zone meshblocks
50%
+1 s.d.
Mean
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
% Land used by non-industrial
Overall, the data shows that meshblocks with industrially zoned land generally have
very little other activity within them, over 30% have none, and half have less than
15% of land area used for non-industrial activities.
In addition, the data indicates a weak negative link between the Light Industry zone
and non-industrial activities (see red line which is the best fit). The dot plot in Figure
2-13 shows no apparent relationship between these data sets, with what appears to
be random pattern of dots (correlation of -0.14).
Figure 2-13: Dot Plot of Light Industry Zoned Land and Non-industrial land use
Light industrial zoned land vs. % non-industrial activity by MSB
% of land in Light Indsutry zone used for nonindustrial
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Light Industry zone Land in hectares
While the results from the primary research show a strong match between Light
Industry zone and industrial activity, approximately 15% of meshblocks have
relatively high levels of non-industrial use.
80
This small proportion of meshblocks could be viewed as outliers, with activity in

them more closely related to non-industrial activity. The volume is not significant in
total terms.
However, we also note that meshblocks are relatively small in geographic terms and
that in many instances outliers will be located proximate to other more normal
meshblocks with greater levels of industrial activity. We consider that it is logical to
assess groupings of meshblocks rather than individual outliers in isolation.
Notwithstanding the noted concern, Table 2-13 outlines the list of meshblocks that
may be viewed as outliers. Of the 57 meshblocks in the table,
33 or 58% were also indicated as outliers in the EDA, see meshblocks with a
,
A further 14 (25%) were contiguous to an outlier in the EDA, see meshblocks
with a , and
10 or 18% were not indicated in the EDA or contiguous to an outlier in the
EDA. These meshblocks were not included in the field survey, see
meshblocks with a .
81
Table 2-13: Field and Desktop Survey by Ward - percentage of land area by use
Meshblock Census Area Unit Census Area Unit Name
Ward No
Ward
Primary Research
% Non-Industrial
Indicator
Floorspace %
Commercial
Indicator MSB
Employment %
Commercial
Indicator MSB
Employment
Density per ha
Commercial
177802
506614 Tahekeroa
7601 Rodney Ward
66%
31%
54%
28
177803
506614 Tahekeroa
7601 Rodney Ward
62%
33%
44%
19
208300
506800 Helensville
7601 Rodney Ward
100%
3%
50%
178900
508701 Albany
7602 Albany Ward
100%
100%
94%
1,572
178501
508701 Albany
7602 Albany Ward
85%
89%
46%
180823
508805 Windsor Park
7602 Albany Ward
100%
100%
100%
114
223802
513431 Hobsonville East
7602 Albany Ward
100%
12%
41%
304000
507900 Westlake
7603 North Shore Ward
100%
96%
44%
41
183700
508420 Target Road
79%
53%
48%
203700
508620 Sunnybrae
100%
0%
0%
45
-
361400
509800 Northcote South
100%
69%
14%
36
241500
510800 Henderson South
7604 Waitakere Ward
100%
100%
55%
87
231700
513301 Kingdale
7604 Waitakere Ward
100%
0%
0%
230500
513301 Kingdale
7604 Waitakere Ward
67%
0%
5%
224306
513511 Westgate
7604 Waitakere Ward
442100
514302 Grafton East
7605 Waitemata and Gulf Ward
65%
21%
85%
19
100%
0%
16%
119
-
442000
514302 Grafton East
68%
33%
57%
453103
515902 Parnell West
100%
10%
76%
453200
515902 Parnell West
82%
77%
86%
303
63%
51%
77%
78
100%
100%
65%
165
453000
515902 Parnell West
265200
511303 Lynnmall
7606 Whau Ward
379401
514402 Glenavon
7606 Whau Ward
100%
0%
0%
542700
518101 Mt Eden North
7607 Albert-Eden-Roskill Ward
100%
9%
6%
543000
518101 Mt Eden North
100%
51%
28%
28
569000
518701 Hillsborough West
65%
2%
61%
25
612502
520202 Ellerslie South
7608 Orakei Ward
72%
51%
96%
220
619600
519400 One Tree Hill East
7609 Maungakiekie-Tamaki Ward
100%
83%
15%
10
621600
519500 Penrose
100%
0%
47%
210
620400
519500 Penrose
73%
82%
94%
316
611500
82%
79%
85%
1,959
612200
72%
0%
78%
4,339
644102
520401 Ferndale
100%
96%
3%
636400
520500 Mt Wellington South
100%
100%
76%
128
711403
523107 Burswood
7610 Howick Ward
100%
0%
0%
711408
523107 Burswood
7610 Howick Ward
100%
0%
37%
711402
523107 Burswood
7610 Howick Ward
79%
0%
54%
34
711702
523107 Burswood
7610 Howick Ward
76%
0%
27%
781700
521901 Otahuhu West
7611 Manukau Ward
67%
36%
58%
36
-
659400
522100 Papatoetoe West
7611 Manukau Ward
100%
0%
40%
712305
523711 Rongomai
7611 Manukau Ward
73%
0%
26%
10
749500
524402 Mangere Station
7611 Manukau Ward
100%
0%
6%
169
673900
524603 Puhinui South
7611 Manukau Ward
100%
0%
100%
674200
524603 Puhinui South
7611 Manukau Ward
100%
0%
0%
806700
521201 Hingaia
7612 Manurewa-Papakura Ward
100%
100%
4%
767704
523912 Takanini South
100%
7%
33%
765800
77%
0%
0%
767600
65%
17%
22%
767921
523920 Takanini West
71%
81%
0%
767503
523920 Takanini West
62%
0%
58%
780100
524720 Homai East
100%
0%
0%
13
7
0
2
14
45
-
758200
524902 Manurewa East
73%
0%
70%
752801
525002 Beaumont
100%
0%
0%
157
752802
525002 Beaumont
73%
0%
79%
791700
525420 Papakura North
67%
0%
57%
810901
521122 Kingseat
7613 Franklin Ward
100%
0%
0%
719105
523300 Beachlands-Maraetai
7613 Franklin Ward
65%
0%
22%
818200
525910 Pukekohe North
7613 Franklin Ward
58%
9%
15%
73
53
-
meshblock was an outlier in the EDA

meshblock was contiguous to an outlier in the EDA
meshblock was not an outlier in the EDA or contiguous to an outlier (i.e. not in field survey).
82
2.3
Stage 2 Findings
Before presenting the findings of this stage of the research, the IHPs questions are restated.
We have structured the findings in order to provide direct answers to the IHP questions.
IHP Question 2
What is the proportion of business sector types that exist within Light Industry zones (i.e.,
analysis showing the spectrum of existing activities from light industrial production
activities to commercial activities)?
The EDA and the primary research conducted in this study suggest a close match in most
locations between Light Industry zoned land and the industrial activities that the zoning
would be expected to accommodate. The spectrum of activities in the Light Industry zone
are mostly related to industrial production activities. However, the analysis also suggested
that there are some outliers which have a wider spectrum of activity, in particular a
significant share of commercial or non-industrial activities occurring.
The EDA performed in this study identified 75 meshblocks in the Light Industry zone as
potential outliers for further research to understand why they differed from the majority,
and to determine whether zoning changes need to be considered. The properties in these
outliers made up about 14% of all the 8,087 parcels in Light Industry zones. These were
established as outliers using the following indicators:
More than 31% of the Light Industry zoned floorspace was used by commercial
activities,
More than 53% of employment in the meshblock was predominantly commercial,
and
More than 60 predominantly commercial employment per ha of Light Industry zoned
land,
We have conducted a field survey on the properties in each of the potential outlier
meshblocks, other meshblocks that were contiguous to the outliers and some other
meshblocks of particular interest in the hearing process were also included. In total, the
field survey covered 58% of all properties in the Light Industry zone.
We have also supplemented the field survey data with a desktop survey, in which we
collected data for 33% of Light Industry zone properties. In total, the primary research
conducted in this study collected data for approximately 91% of all properties in the Light
Industry zone.
The results of our field survey showed that overall,
The outlier meshblocks had a high proportion of Light Industry zone land used by
non-industrial activities as recorded in the primary research (regional average is 36%
83
of land).74 Retail was the largest non-industrial use of land in the outlier meshblocks
(22%), followed by Office (7%) and Other (5%).
The entire field survey, which included areas contiguous to the outliers showed
larger levels of industrial activity (regional average is 75% of land). Retail was still
the largest non-industrial use of land in the field survey (13%), followed by Other
(6%) and Office (4%).
The entire primary research process revealed much higher levels of industrial activity
(regional average is 83% of land used for industrial activities in Light Industry zones).
Retail remained the largest non-industrial use of land in the field survey (8%),
followed by Other (6%) and Office (3%).
We consider that the primary research confirms that there is a strong match between the
Light Industry zone and industrial activity. However, there are some meshblocks that are
outliers with a wider spectrum of activities, i.e. with a higher proportion of non-industrial
activity. Nonetheless when these outliers are placed within their specific geographic context
the mismatch was not as apparent given the activities that occur in surrounding areas.
In conclusion, a small percentage of the Light Industry zone (15% of meshblocks) had large
amounts of non-industrial activity. However, these outliers should be viewed in their local
context.
We note that during the survey it was apparent that to the casual observer the Light Industry
zone may seem to be infiltrated by significant amounts of non-industrial activity. For
example, the general public would mostly visit a Light Industry zone via the main roads (i.e.
to visit non-industrial locations in the zone or to transit the area as quickly as possible). By
only visiting a small proportion of the zone, these casual observers may have the impression
that much of the zone is non-industrial.
Contrary to this, a more thorough survey of the Light Industry zone shows that much of the
activity in these zones is in fact industrial in nature, with the bulk of activity occurring down
driveways and off the main streets. While generally, there may be a narrow strip of nonindustrial activity (retail/office etc.) along the main roads there are large areas of industrial
activity in, behind, on the side streets and down long driveways. This is logical because if
retail and other non-industrial services are seeking to locate in these industrial areas, it is
rational that they will do so on the main transport routes where there visibility is highest.
Regardless if this visibility, the detailed analysis in this report shows that the vast majority of
these areas are industrial in nature (83% on average).
If required, a booklet of maps can be supplied to the IHP to facilitate an assessment of the
outliers within in their local context will be provided.75
74
75
These activities are not directly related to the PAUP Activity types in the PAUP Activity Tables.
Huang, T. (2016) Map Booklet of Outliers in the Light Industry Zone (to come if required).
84
Stage 3: Market Outcomes

The purpose of this section is to describe the analysis conducted to answer the
IHPs third question.
The third question was,
In light of the above (Stages 1 and 2), how do the PAUP provisions meet
the projected need for zoned opportunity, by zone?
How does the supply of PAUP land compare to future demand by business
sector?
In the following study we have undertaken four steps to answer the IHPs
questions. First, we have assessed the land use observed in Auckland by zone
to develop a set of metrics that measure land use intensity (Stage 3.1).
Second, the land use intensity metrics developed in Stage 3.1 are used in to
convert employment growth (Stage 1.2) into demand in terms of land area
(Stage 3.2). Third, the supply of land and floorspace is established for the
PAUP zones and the Future Urban Zone (Stage 3.3).
Finally, the demand and supply of land is compared to understand whether
the provisions in the PAUP zones are sufficient to meet the likely current and
future needs of the economy (Stage 3.4).
3.1
Stage 3.1 Land use Intensity by Sector and Zone

Land is used more intensively in some locations than others due factors such as land value,
access to regional infrastructure, population demand, accessibility, etc. This affects the rate
at which employment in each business sector may translate into land or floorspace
requirements in each location. In addition characteristics of the business sector itself have a
strong influence on the volume of land area required to cater for growth.
Empirical data on current land uses can be triangulated to establish the intensity of land use
by location (and differentials between locations) across Auckland. In this section we
establish the existing built form requirements and workspace ratios (taking into account
both floorspace and land, and the relationship between floorspace and land by sector) by
various categories.
In this study we have assessed land use intensity using two metrics,
1. Floor Area Ratio (FAR). This is a measure of the degree of intensity to which land is
utilised (described below). Specifically, it is the amount of built floorspace divided
by land area for each parcel and,
85
2. Workspace ratio (WSR). This is a measure of the amount of built floorspace per
employee. It is a measure of the level of intensity of floorspace usage by industry.
These metrics are commonly used in urban economics to understand the utilisation of land
in terms of building (built form) and the density of activity within buildings.
3.1.1
Land use Intensity by Zone

The FAR has been used in this study to understand the different rates of land utilisation in
Auckland, both geographically and within each zone type. The FAR provides a measure of
the amount of built form in terms of building floorspace that is generally developed on a
parcel of land.
The FAR is simply calculated by dividing the building floorspace by the total land area of the
property. For example, a property that has a building with 500m2 of floorspace and land
area of 1,000m2 would have a FAR of 0.5. Likewise, a property that has a building with two
levels of 250m2 of floorspace and land area of 1,000m2 would also have a FAR of 0.5. The
figure below shows an illustration of various FAR.
Figure 3-1: Floor Area Ratio Illustration
In this study we have used the following two data sets to inform the FAR,
Land Area: This was drawn from the Parcel Property Database (Auckland Council),
which records each properties land area and zone. We have only assessed
properties that have floorspace, i.e. vacant properties have been excluded.
Floorspace: This was drawn from the Rating Database (Auckland Council), which
records each Rateable propertys floorspace and zone.
86
FAR estimations were conducted at the meshblock level. Figure 3-2 below shows the
distribution of FAR for PAUP Activity Table 1 (commercial in blue), Activity Table 2 (industrial
in orange) and the City Centre Zone (grey).
Figure 3-2 shows that commercially zoned areas tends to have a broader/flatter distribution,
with a higher FAR than industrial zoned areas. What this means is that properties in the
commercial zones tend to have more floorspace per square meter of land. This is revealed
by the high proportion of commercial zoned areas which have a FAR over 0.50 (average of
0.55). In contrast, the majority of areas zoned industrial (Activity Table 2) had a FAR of less
than 0.50. We have also included the City Centre zone where most areas had a FAR over 1.
Figure 3-2: Distribution of FAR for PAUP Activity Table 1, 2 and the City Centre
% of meshblocks with PAUP zone
30%
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
City Centre
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
5 +5
Floorspace Area Ratio
The FAR for each of the unique commercial zones are shown below in Figure 3-3 (centre
zones) and Figure 3-4 (other business zones).
The main difference observed between the commercial centres zones are,
The Metropolitan Centre (black) zone: Has a flatter distribution with multiple small
peaks. This zone has the largest proportion of areas, with a FAR greater than 0.8
(over 35% of the areas in this zone). There are very few areas in this zone with a
FAR below 0.3. The average FAR for the zone was 0.81.
The Town Centre (purple), Local Centre (blue) and Neighbourhood Centre (green)
zones: All have a similar distribution, with approximately 70% of the areas in these
zones having a FAR between 0.2 and 0.8. This indicates that the activities that
locate in these zones tend to have a narrower range of floorspace requirements.
The average FAR was approximately 0.50 for these three zones.
87
Figure 3-3: Distribution of FAR for PAUP Activity Table 1 - Centre Zones
30%
Metropolitan centre
Town centre
25%
Local centre
Neighbourhood centre
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
The main difference observed between the commercial other business zones76 are,
76
The Mixed Use zone (pink): Has the flattest distribution. This zone is the second
densest commercial zone, with an average FAR is 0.61. This indicates that the
activities that locate in these zones tend to have a wider range of floorspace
requirements.
The General Business zone (blue): Distribution is mostly focused on lower
floorspace densities, with over 60% of areas having a FAR less than 0.40. This
indicates that the activities that locate in this zone tend to have a narrower range of
floorspace requirements and tend to be more land intensive.
Business Park zone excluded as there was too few data points to produce a distribution.
88
Figure 3-4: Distribution of FAR for PAUP Activity Table 1 Other Business Zones
30%
Mixed Use
25%
General Business
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
The FAR for each of the industrial zones are shown below in Figure 3-5. The main differences
observed between the industrial zones are,
The Heavy Industry zone (brown): Has a more condensed distribution, with the
bulk of the areas (over 85%) having a FAR between 0.2 and 0.6. There are few areas
with a FAR over 0.6. This indicates that the activities that locate in the Heavy
Industry zone areas tend to have similar floorspace requirements, with lower
intensity of use in other words the activities are more land extensive.
The Light Industry zone (orange): Has a less pronounced peak, with 60% of the
properties having a FAR between 0.2 and 0.6. However, there are around 13% of
the properties with a FAR between 0.6 to 1.5 and 24% of areas with a FAR below
0.2. This indicates that the activities that locate in the Light Industry zone areas
tend to have a wider range of floorspace requirements.
89
Figure 3-5: Distribution of FAR for PAUP Activity Table 2 - Industrial Zones
35%
Light Industry
30%
25%
Heavy Industry
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
The land use patterns within the Auckland local board areas were analysed to provide an
understanding of the differences in land use intensity across Auckland spatially. The
Auckland Local Boards were grouped into six geographic areas for ease of reporting and
commonality of locational characteristics (see Figure 3-6),
Urban Central,77
Urban North,78
Urban South,79
Urban West,80
Rural North,81 and
Rural South.82
77
Waitemata, Albert-Eden, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki and Puketapapa local board areas.

Upper Harbour, Kaipatiki, Devonport-Takapuna, Hibiscus and Bays local board areas.
79
Mangere-Otahuhu, Otara-Papatoetoe, Manurewa, Papakura and Howick local board areas.
80
Whau and Henderson-Massey local board areas.
81
Rodney and Waitakere local board areas.
82
Franklin, Waiheke and Great Barrier local board areas.
78
90
Figure 3-6: Local Board Grouping and Local Boards
As would be expected the FAR is largest for the more central (older) areas. The Urban
Central area has an average FAR of 0.66 in the commercial zones and 0.43 in the industrial
zones. The observed higher utilisation in Urban Central area is likely to be driven by the
higher land values (and rents) which mean that businesses must utilise land more intensively
in this area.
The Urban North, Urban South and Urban West have similar FAR for both commercial
(ranging from 0.35 to 0.38) and industrial (ranging from 0.25 to 0.33) zones. The Rural North
and Rural South also have similar FAR for both commercial (0.23 and 0.22) and industrial
(0.14 and 0.11) zones.
91
Table 3-1: Average FAR for PAUP Activity Table 1, 2 - Local Board Group
Local Board Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
Urban Central
0.66
0.43
Urban North
0.35
0.32
Urban South
0.37
0.25
Urban West
0.38
0.33
Rural North
0.23
0.14
Rural South*
0.22
0.11
* excludes Glenbrook Steel Mill from Heavy Industry
Table 3-1 shows the average FAR for each geographic area for each of the commercial zones
in PAUP Activity Table 1. Generally the average FAR:
Is highest in more central locations (older developments), in each zone;

Increases with the scale of the centres (i.e. Metropolitan > Town > Local >
Neighbourhood);
In non-centre zones (Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park) tends to vary
significantly across Auckland.
Table 3-2: Average FAR for PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial Zones - Local Board
Group
Local Board Group
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhood
centre
Mixed Use
General Business
Business Park
Urban Central
0.83
0.62
0.51
0.48
0.69
0.54
0.60
Urban North
0.64
0.45
0.32
0.35
0.34
0.11
0.31
Urban South
0.52
0.43
0.31
0.39
0.27
0.32
Urban West
0.48
0.38
0.29
0.38
0.24
0.41
Rural North
0.32
0.17
0.13
0.16
0.35
Rural South*
0.55
0.09
0.12
0.25
0.27
Table 3-3 shows the average FAR for each local board group for Heavy and Light Industry
Zones in PAUP Activity Table 2. In general,
Heavy Industry Zones FAR had a relatively even average across all areas (0.30-0.40),
where the highest FAR average occurred in Urban Central and West.
On average, the Light Industry zone had the highest FAR in the Central Urban (0.48)
and Urban West and Urban North areas (0.32). The Rural areas had the lowest FAR,
at less than 0.15 this possibly points to zoning ahead of low utilisation in these
areas.83
83
We exclude vacant land. This low FAR in the rural areas shows that parcels may have a high degree of vacant
potential.
92
Table 3-3: Average FAR for PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial Zones - Local Board
Group
Local Board Group
Heavy Industry
Light Industry
Urban Central
0.37
0.48
Urban North
0.33
0.32
Urban South
0.29
0.24
Urban West
0.37
0.32
Rural North
0.14
Rural South*
0.11
3.1.2
Floorspace use Intensity by Zone

The workspace ratio (WSR) has been used in this study to understand the different rates of
floorspace utilisation in Auckland, both geographically and within each zone. The WSR
provides a measure of the amount of built form in terms of building floorspace that is
generally required for one employee.
The WSR is calculated by dividing the total floorspace on a property by the total number of
employees. For example, a property that has a 1,000 square meters of floorspace and 50
employees generates a workspace ratio of 20 square meters per employee.
In this study we have used the following two data sets to generate the WSR,
Non-Residential Floorspace: This was drawn from the Rating Database (Auckland
Council), which records each Rateable properties floorspace, zone and use. We have
excluded floorspace that is used for residential purposes.
Employment: This data was derived from Statistics New Zealand Business Directory.
This is Statistics New Zealands database of employment by economic sector and
meshblock.
It was not feasible to measure the WSR at a property level as this would require employment
data for each of the properties. Given this data limitation, we have estimated the WSR at
the meshblock level. This estimate provides a detailed overview of average floorspace per
employee by PAUP zone.
The reader should be aware of three aspects of the method applied to estimate WSR in this
study,
The WSR quoted in the following tables is an average of all business activities in each
zone. For example, the centre zones will include many economic sectors with
different floorspace requirements. At one end of the scale office space tends to
have lower floorspace requirements per employee (lower than average WSR,
commonly less than 20 m2 per employee), while in contrast retail or community
services will have higher floorspace requirements per employee (higher than
average WSR, commonly greater than 40 m2 per employee). This is important to
93
understand because most studies that report WSR, tend to focus on distinct types of
floorspace and do not provide an overall average measure for a location or a zone.
The floorspace data used in this study covers all non-residential space, which
includes floorspace that is not currently used (i.e. a vacancy). It is not possible to
estimate the level of vacancy within the floorspace data. The inclusion of this
floorspace is likely to result in an overestimation of the average WSR. However, we
note that in most markets there will always be a proportion of floorspace that is not
used (vacancy rate will never reach 0%), so the inclusion of this floorspace in the
WSR indirectly allows for this fact.
The range of different WSR at a property level is likely to be much more diverse than
is observed when conducting an assessment at the meshblock level (as is applied in
this study). There is no data available that allows a direct link between floorspace, at
the property level, to employment or business activity. We consider that the
meshblock level assessment is a pragmatic solution.
In this study we have developed average WSR for each zone using the following steps,
1. Base WSR Estimate: There are some meshblocks that are entirely zoned for one
Business zone.84 In these instances the employment in the meshblock can only be
located in a single zone. These cases have been used to develop a base estimate of
the average WSR for each Business zone for the Local Board Group areas.
2. Control for Non-Business Zone employment: There are meshblocks that have both
a Business zone and other non-business zones. For example, a meshblock may be
mostly Neighbourhood Centre Zone and have some residential. In these instances
some of the employment in this meshblock will be located in the non-business zone.
We have applied the base WSR estimate from step one to the floorspace in the
Business zone for each meshblock to estimate the employment that is attributable
to the zone. The remainder of the employment in these meshblocks is assumed to
be located in non-business zones.
3. Multiple Business Zones: There are meshblocks that have multiple business zones.
In these instances the employment in these meshblocks will be located across
multiple business zones. In this study we have used the base WSR estimate to
attribute employment between the different business zones. The method allocates
employment to the zones in the following order, City Centre > Metropolitan Centre >
Town Centre > Local Centre > Neighbourhood Centre > Mixed Use > Light Industry >
Heavy Industry > General Business > Business Park.85
For example, in the case of a meshblock that has some Mixed Use zone and Light
Industry zone we needed to estimate the amount of employment that is located in
84
There were 306 meshblocks that only had one business zone, 132 with one commercial zone, 46 with one
industrial zone and 128 only City Centre Zone.
85
This ordering is based on relative sample size for each zone. The base WSR estimate is more reliable for the
zones with higher sample size. For example, the City Centre zone base WSR estimate was calculated using a
sample of 128 meshblocks. This compares to the Metropolitan Centre zone base WSR estimate was calculated
using sample of 23 meshblocks. The larger sample size of the City Centre zone is likely to provide a more robust
estimate of the actual WSR. So it is reasonable to start the allocation with this zone.
94
both zones. In this study we first attributed employment to the Mixed Use zone,
using the floorspace in the zone and the base WSR estimate.86 The remaining
employment in the meshblock is then attributed to the Light Industry zone.
4. Average WSR Estimate: We then calculated an average WSR estimate based on the
employment allocated in steps 1 to 3. This provides an estimate of the average WSR
by Business zone and Local Board Group.
The graph below shows the average WSRs for PAUP Activity Table 1 (Commercial in blue),
Activity Table 2 (Industrial in orange) and the City Centre Zone (grey). Figure 3-7 shows that,
Commercial zoned (Activity Table 1) WSR distribution has a wide peak, with most
areas having a WSR of 20m2 to 80m2 per employee. The median WSR for
commercial zones was 56m2 per employee.
Industrial zoned (Activity Table 2) WSR distribution has multiple peaks, with areas
tending to have higher WSR. The industrial areas have a peak WSR of 80m2 to 100m2
and a smaller peak in WSR at 140m2 to 160m2 per employee. The median WSR for
industrial zones was 101m2 per employee.
We have also included the City Centre zone, which had a similar WSR distribution to
the commercial zoned areas, with a peak at around 40m2 to 60m2 per employee.
Figure 3-7: Distribution of WSR PAUP Activity Table 1, 2 and for the Central City
Zone
40%
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
City Centre
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Workspace Ratio,
m2
120
140
160
180
200
per employee
The WSR for each of the unique commercial zones are shown below in Figure 3-8 (centre
zones) and Figure 3-9 (other business zones).
86
For example the WSR for the Mixed Use zone in Urban North is 56m2 per employee. If the meshblock had
2
5,600m floorspace in Mixed Use zone, then the model would attribute 100 employment to the Mixed Use zone.
95
The centre zones covered by PAUP Activity Table 1 had similar distributions for the WSR.
The WSR distribution for these four commercial centre zones had a larger peak, however the
location of the peak varies between 40m2 to 80m2 per employee. The distribution was also
much tighter around this peak, with WSR inmost (80%) areas having a WSR between 20m2
and 80m2.
Figure 3-8: Distribution of WSR for PAUP Activity Table 1 - Centre Zones
70%
Metropolitan centre
Town centre
60%
Local centre
Neighbourhood centre
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Workspace Ratio,
m2
120
140
160
180
200
per employee
The commercial other business zones had a similar WSR distribution, seen in Figure 3-9. The
Mixed Use zone (pink) and General Business (blue) zones had a median WSR of 44m2 and a
number of areas that had WSR over 80m2, which represents a relatively low utilisation of
space. In contrast the Business Park Zone has a high peak with most areas having a WSR of
less than 20m2 per employee (meaning a very high utilisation rate).
96
Figure 3-9: Distribution of WSR for PAUP Activity Table 1 Other Business Zones
70%
Mixed Use
General Business
60%
Business Park
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Workspace Ratio,
m2
120
140
160
180
200
per employee
The WSR for each of the unique industrial zones are shown below in Figure 3-10. The main
differences observed between the industrial zones are,
The Heavy Industry zone (brown): The distribution shows that most (over 90%) of
the areas in this zone have a WSR greater than 80m2 per employee. This is
unsurprising as Heavy Industry zoned activities require a much larger spatial foot
print to maximise production (heavy industrial activities such metal processing, for
example, take up large spatial areas to maximise their production outputs). The
median WSR for this zone was 114m2 per employment
The Light Industry zone (orange): The distribution for the Light Industry zone is
flatter, with more areas having lower WSR than the other industrial zone. This zone
had a median WSR of 92m2 per employee. Again unlike commercial zone WRS in
the Light Industry zone were on average higher, floorspace per employee being
higher because of the larger spatial layout required to operate industrial activities.
97
Figure 3-10: Distribution of WSR for PAUP Activity Table 2 - Industrial Zones
40%
Light Industry
35%
Heavy Industry
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Workspace Ratio,
m2
120
140
160
180
200
per employee
The floorspace utilisation patterns within the Auckland local board areas were analysed to
provide an understanding of the difference in intensity of land use across Auckland. We have
used the same groups (Local Board Group) defined in subsection 4.1.1 above.
Seen in Table 3-4, generally the WSR were lowest for urban Local Board Groups and highest
in PAUP Activity Table 2. The rural Local Board Groups had an average WSR of around 60m2
per employee for commercial zones and over 140m2 per employee for industrial zones.
These areas, located on the edge of the region are away from the central city and northern
areas and as such have the spatial capacity to cater to lower density activities.
In contrast, the Urban Central and Urban North areas had a much lower average WSR in both
commercial zones (Activity table 1) and industrial zones (Activity table 2). The average WSR
for Urban Central and North were around 40m2 per employee for commercial zones and
90m2 per employee for industrial zones. These results show that floorspace in these areas is
used more intensively than in the other Local Board areas. This is likely to be related to the
higher land rents and prices in these Local Board Groups, making activities which require
greater floorplans more expensive to operate.
The commercial zones (Activity table 1) in the Urban West and Urban South areas had a
similar average WSR to the rural areas (around 60m2 per employee), whereas the average
WSR of the industrial zones (Activity table 2) in these areas was around 110m2 per
employee.
98
Table 3-4: Average WSR by PAUP Activity Table and Local Board Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Local Board Group
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
Urban Central
42
Urban North
39
82
94
Urban South
62
107
Urban West
54
127
Rural North
66
172
Rural South*
58
144
Table 3-5 shows the average WSR for each Local Board geographic area and each of the
commercial zones covered by PAUP Activity Table 1. Generally the average WSR,
Was lowest in the Urban Central Local Board Group (more established urban
developments , and spatial limitations generating a smaller WSR),
Tended to be highest in the lower order centre zones (Neighbourhood and Local),
and,
Was not consistent in the non-centre zones (Mixed Use, General Business and
Business Park). The WSR tended to vary across the Local Board Groups, for example
the General Business zone had a wide range of different WSR, from as little as 22m2
to as much as 68m2. The WSR for the Business park zone was the lowest relative to
any of the other zones.
Table 3-5: Average WSR for PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial Zones - Local Board
Group
Local Board Group
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhood
centre
Mixed Use
General Business
Business Park
Urban Central
36
43
38
63
47
68
Urban North
32
51
35
70
79
22
21
Urban South
49
77
43
90
75
55
51
Urban West
11
70
47
77
68
45
Rural North
72
69
79
44
34
Rural South*
51
51
74
63
62
Table 3-6 shows the average WSR for each Local Board geographic area and each of the
industrial zones covered by PAUP Activity Table 2. Generally the average WSR,
Was lowest in Urban Central area, at under 80m2 per employee for Light Industry
zone,
Was highest in Heavy Industry zone, which tend to be greater than 90m2 per
employee, and
In the Light Industry zone was highest in the rural local board areas, at around 150m2
per employee.
99
Table 3-6: Average WSR for PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial Zones - Local Board
Group
Local Board Group
Heavy Industry
Light Industry
Urban Central
96
76
Urban North
83
95
Urban South
132
98
Urban West
86
147
Rural North
172
Rural South*
145
3.1.3
Stage 3.1 Findings

To understand whether the PAUP provisions meet the needs of the economy we must
translate our employment forecasts into demand for land. The findings from this section
provide us with empirical data on land use (FAR) and floorspace utilisation (WSR) which can
be used in the following steps to understand the needs for PAUP provisions by zone.
The results show that land is used more intensively in some locations mores than others.
This affects the rate at which employment in each business sector may translate into land or
floorspace requirements in each location and PAUP zone.
The empirical data on current land use intensity, floorspace to land area ratio, shows the
following key results,
At the regional level, land use intensity (FAR) tends to be higher in the commercial
zones (Activity Table 1) relative to industrial zones (Activity Table 2). The utilisation
of land is greater in the commercial zones at around 0.50 compared to 0.40 in the
industrial zones,
As would be expected the land use intensity is highest for the more central (older)
areas. The Urban Central area has an average FAR of 0.66 in the Commercial zones
and 0.43 in the industrial zones. The observed higher utilisation in Urban Central
area is likely to be driven by the higher land values (and rents), which mean that
businesses must utilise land more intensely in this area,
The Urban North, Urban South and Urban West have similar FAR for both
commercial (approximately 0.40) and industrial (approximately 0.30) zones,
The Rural North and Rural South have the lowest land use intensity, and have similar
FAR for both commercial (approximately 0.25) and industrial (approximately 0.15)
zones,
The land use intensity of the commercial centres zone tends to increases with the
scale of the centres (i.e. Metropolitan > Town > Local > Neighbourhood),
In the commercial non-centre zones (Mixed Use, General Business and Business
Park) there tends to vary significantly across Auckland, from as little as 0.11 to as
much as 0.69, and
100
The land use intensity for the Light Industry and Heavy Industry zone was similar
across the urban local board group areas (0.30 to 0.40). The key difference is the
low land use intensity in the rural area (0.15).
The empirical data on current floorspace intensity, employment per square metre of
floorspace, shows the following key results,
At the regional level the floorspace intensity (WSR) in the commercial zones (Activity
Table 1) was 56m2 per employee. The floorspace in industrial zones (Activity Table
2) was utilised less intensively, with median WSR of 101m2 per employee,
Generally the WSR was lowest for urban Local Board Groups and highest in PAUP
Activity Table 2.
The Urban Central and Urban North areas had a much lower average WSR in both
commercial zones (Activity table 1) and industrial zones (Activity table 2). The
average WSR for Urban Central and North were around 40m2 per employee for
commercial zones and 90m2 per employee for industrial zones. These results show
that floorspace in these areas are used more intensively than in the other Local
Board group areas. This is likely to be related to the higher land rents and prices in
these Local Board Groups, making activities which require greater floorplans more
expensive to operate.
In contrast, the rural Local Board Groups had an average WSR of around 60m2 per
employee for commercial and over 140m2 per employee for industrial,
The commercial zones (Activity table 1) in the Urban West and Urban South areas
had a similar average WSR to the rural areas (around 60m2 per employee). While
the WRS for industrial zones (Activity table 2) in these areas was around 110m2 per
employee,
The WSR tended to decrease with scale of the commercial centre zones (i.e.
Metropolitan < Town < Local/Neighbourhood), that is floorspace is used more
intensively in larger scale centres.
The intensity of floorspace use in the non-centre commercial zones (Mixed Use,
General Business and Business Park) was not consistent. The WSR tended to vary
across the Local Board Groups, for example the General Business zone had a wide
range of different WSR, from as little as 22m2 to as much as 68m2. The WSR for the
Business park zone was the lowest relative to any of the other zones.
The intensity of floorspace use in the industrial zones was lowest in the Heavy
Industry zone (114m2 per employee). While Light Industry had a WSR of
approximately 90m2 per employee. However, the Light Industry zone in the rural
local board group areas, had the lowest intensity at around 150m2 per employee.
The FAR and the WSR are used in the following section to convert demand in terms of
employment to demand in terms of zoned land area.
101
3.2
Stage 3.2 Land use Demand by Sector and Zone

In this stage we combined the PAUP activity employment forecasts (Stage 1.2) with the land
use intensity results (Stage 3.1) to establish the demand for land by zone and location in
Auckland.
We note that there are two key assumptions in the following analysis, that land and
floorspace intensity (utilisation) remains constant over the forecast period and that all of the
future growth in employment generates need for new floorspace (and land).
By and large we consider both land and floorspace utilisation rates are not fixed. Broadly, in
a growing city like Auckland, the rates of utilisation tend to increase over time as the city
intensifies. These changes in intensity can be driven by either increasing the scale of built
form on business land or more efficient use of the existing floorspace within those buildings.
These assumptions have two important consequences;
1. The future growth in employment could require less land than is currently observed
in Auckland. In other words, the vacant land could be used more efficiently in the
future. This means that the amount of land required/demanded could be less than
what is estimated in this study.
2. Existing land (and floorspace) could accommodate more employment and economic
activity than is currently observed. The amount of economic activity within existing
buildings and land could increase in the future. This means that some of the growth
in employment may be accommodated in existing areas. This means that some of
the employment growth may not manifest as demand for vacant land (or
floorspace).
These aspects are important and the processes are real, however we have not modelled the
potential implications of the possible changes in land and floorspace utilisation. We suggest
that changes in utilisation rates may result in less demand for land (and floorspace) and that
the estimates in this study should be viewed as conservative, as they are likely to
overestimate the need for new zoned land.
Notwithstanding the consequences, we consider that is prudent for the Council to zone
more land than is needed (in absolute terms) to ensure that the economy is not
unnecessarily constrained by land shortages, or price rises as land becomes more scarce
overtime.
We note that the demand modelling has incorporated changes in floorspace use efficiency
(in new developments). Generally, WSR in commercial areas have been decreasing over the
past two decades, with businesses utilising space more efficiently. Some researchers
suggest that the decrease over the past two decades could be as large as 1.5% per annum.87
In this study we have assumed that the WSR for commercial zones decreases by 0.5% per
annum, while the industrial WSR has been assumed to remain constant at the current level.
87
CBRE (2012) NZ Office Worker Space Average.
102
3.2.1
Allocation of PAUP Activity Employment Growth to PAUP Zones

The allocation of employment growth was based on the relative ease by which each PAUP
Activity type can be undertaken in each zone. Table 1-2 each PAUP Activity type and how
readily enabled each PAUP Activity type is in each zone (i.e. the activity status).
First, the employment growth in any of the PAUP Activity types that is only readily enabled in
one of the activity tables, was fully allocated to that activity table. For example, the
supermarkets PAUP Activity types are only readily enabled in PAUP Activity Table 1,
specifically supermarkets are enabled in commercial zones and not enabled in industrial
zones (see Table 1-2). So it is reasonable to assume that the growth in employment in these
PAUP Activity types will be focused on commercial zones.
Second, there are some PAUP Activity types (there are 21) that can occur in both commercial
and industrial zones. In Table 1-2, these PAUP Activity types are generally enabled for both
PAUP Activity Table 1 and Table 2. In these cases the employment growth could be located
in either commercial or industrial zones. The employment growth for these PAUP Activity
types was allocated between the zones based on the activity status and a set of weights
(see Table 3-7). The weights used in this study imitate the relative restrictiveness of each
activity status, a weight closer to 1 is more enabled (i.e. Permitted is given a weight of 1) and
closer to zero is more restricted (i.e. Non-Complying Activity is given a weight of 0).
Table 3-7: Activity Status Weights

Activity Status
P
Permitted
C
Controlled
RD Restricted Discretionary
D Discretionary
NC Non-Complying Activity
Pr Prohibited
'Weights'
1.00
0.90
0.75
0.50
1.0
The weights have been applied to each PAUP Activity and zone. We then used these to
allocate a proportion of the employment growth to each zone. For example, the PAUP
Activity Storage and lock-up facilities are more enabled (Permitted) in industrial zones than
commercial zones (mainly Discretionary). In this case the weights suggest an allocation of
70% to industrial zones and 30% to commercial zones.
3.2.2
Geographical Spread of Employment Growth

The next step was to establish the geographic spread of the future employment growth. In
this stage of the study we have allocated growth according to a projection of the existing
economic structure. This projection model assumes that growth is distributed pro rata
across Auckland according to the existing structure of employment.
This distribution assumes that the economy will be focused on existing areas of activity. We
note that this projection is a simple estimation method for understanding the distribution of
103
growth. While there are alternative methods for forecasting the geographic spread of
demand growth, the known methods require substantial amounts of time, which means they
could not be utilised in this study. Although the projection method has been selected as the
core analytical framework for this study, it is important to recognize that alternative
methodologies do exist, such as,
Optimization models88 mathematical models based on constraints (i.e. supply)

and/or assumed relationships (such as attractiveness in Gravity models).
Regression Models89 statistical techniques to establish the relationship between
variables that describe the characteristics of land (and floorspace) and the
probability of use to accommodate growth (logistic type regressions).
Agent based models90 models of business decision process, using known
behaviour such as profit maximisation or cost minimisation (partial equilibrium
models).
Biological models91 these models simulate growth patterns observed in nature,
which can be useful for understanding economic behaviour (Cellular Automata or
Neural Network).
Although Market Economics has developed and applied these other methods in different
circumstances, the constraints on time and data92 associated with this project means it is not
possible to apply these more complex methods.
We consider that the simple projection based model is the most pragmatic method
available.
However, we note that the projection does not take into account the supply or capacity for
growth in an area. We consider that some economic sectors are able to locate in many
places within Auckland and that a simple projection - pro rata distribution does not capture
this fact. We believe that demand for additional commercial and industrial zoned land could
be accommodated in other areas across Auckland. For example, the pro rata distribution
suggests that while there may be demand for additional industrial zoned land in the Urban
Central (the Isthmus) area. However, in reality this local demand is unable to be met, and
should be viewed as a regional demand with much of this demand being satisfied by land
that is or will be available in other areas.
3.2.3
Forecast Demand for Land by Zone

The model produces results for every year between 2013 and 2041. Given that the purpose
of this study to understand the implications of suggested zonings in the PAUP and the goals
88
For example see Market Economics (2013) Auckland Business Futures Model.
For example see Yeoman (2013) Melbourne Employment and Population Forecasts: Growth Allocation Model
90
For example see Benson Au-Yeung, Tan Yigitcanlar, Severine Mayere (2009) Brisbane Urban Growth Model:
Integrated Sustainable Urban and Infrastructure Management in Brisbane.
91
For example see Market Economics (ongoing FoRST project) Sustainable Pathways Two Land Use Change
92
Note that the capacity data was only available towards the end of this project (in March 2016). This fact
restricted the potential use of the data.
89
104
set out in the PAUP and the Auckland Plan, we only provide results to 2026 (horizon of the
PAUP) and 2041 (the horizon of the Auckland Plan).
We also consider that the hectares per annum and floorspace per annum metrics are the
best method for understanding demand. While there are other possible metrics that could
be drawn from the model, such as total cumulative demand, we consider that the inclusion
of these metrics would result in an information overload and not add significantly to
understanding the situation.
Growth Forecasts 2026 horizon of the PAUP
Annual demand for commercial and industrial zoned land by 2026 is expected to range
between 120 (Medium) to 150 (High) hectares per annum (see Table 3-8). The majority of
demand for land is expected to be located in industrial zones, with annual demand between
64 (Medium) to 82 (High) hectares per annum. Commercial zones are expected to attract
additional demand for land of 53 (Medium) to 67 (High) hectares per annum.
In terms of geographic location the following could occur,
Commercial Zones: The majority of demand for commercial land could be directed
towards Urban Central, Urban North and Urban South Local Board Groups, with
combined land demand ranging between 39 (Medium) to 49 (High) hectares per
annum. There could also be little growth in the rural and Urban West areas, with
combined land demand ranging between 11 (Medium) to 14 (High) hectares per
annum. The previous Auckland council business study did not measure demand
according to zone, so it is not possible to compare the results to this previous work.93
Industrial Zones: The majority of demand for industrial land could be directed
towards Southern areas of Auckland (Urban and Rural), with more than half of the
total land demand being expected to locate in these areas (demand between 33
(Medium) to 43 (High) hectares per annum). There could also be strong demand for
land in Urban Central and Urban North, with combined land demand ranging
between 19 (Medium) to 25 (High) hectares per annum. We note that the
forecasted demand for industrial land ranges from 61 (Medium) to 79 (High)
hectares per annum. This is higher than the annual rate of vacant land take-up
observed in Auckland over the past five years.94 The previous Auckland Council
business study suggested a demand for industrially zoned land to sit at
approximately 50 ha per annum.95
93
Nunns .P (2014) PAUP Business Growth: Analysis of projected floorspace demand and modelled plan-enabled
capacity.
94
CBRE (2014) report suggests annual take-up of industrial land did not exceed 60 ha between 2009 and 2013.
95
See pg. 13 Table 1 of Nunns .P (2014).
105
Table 3-8: Land Demand PAUP Activity Table 1, 2 to 2026 hectares per annum
Local Board
Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
Medium Growth - Land Demand (ha p.a.)

Urban Central
17
Urban North
11
12
8
Urban South
12
31
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
51
61
High Growth - Land Demand (ha p.a.)

Urban Central
21
15
Urban North
13
10
40
Urban South
15
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
63
79
As seen in Table 3-9, land demand per annum under the medium and high growth scenarios
shows that in the:
Mixed Use Zone: The forecasts show high demand for this land type in Urban
Central area (10 - 12 ha p.a.).
Metropolitan and Town Centre Zones: The Metropolitan zone recorded a land
demand per annum of approximately 2-3 hectares across Urban North, South and
West zones. The Town Centre Zone also recorded land demand of 3-4 ha across
Urban Central, North and South Local Board Groups.
Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre, General Business and Business Park Zones:
These zones recorded low land demand per annum across all Local Board Groups
(generally around 1 ha p.a.). The highest demand for land was recorded in the
Urban North General Business zone, with less than 3 hectare per annum recorded.
106
Table 3-9: Land Demand PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial Zones to 2026
hectares per annum
Local Board
Group
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhoo
d centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park

Urban Central
10
Urban North
Urban South
Urban West
0
1
Rural North
Rural South
Total
10
18
1
1

Urban Central
12
Urban North
Urban South
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
13
22
10
Table 3-10 shows the average annual demand for land for each Local Board geographic area
and each of the industrial zones covered by PAUP Activity Table 2. As seen in the table,
The majority of land demand in the industrial zones is forecasted to be located in

Light Industry zone, with land demand ranging between 46 (Medium) to 59 (High)
hectares per annum.
The Light Industry zone demand is expected to be greatest in the Urban South,
where 23 (Medium) to 29 (High) hectares are required per annum. This area
accounts for nearly 50% of all land demanded for the Light Industry zone.
The land demanded for Heavy Industry is highest in the Urban South (approx. 10 ha
p.a.) and in the Urban Central (approx. 5ha p.a.), accounting for 56% and 34% of the
Heavy Industrial land demand respectively. The remaining Local Board Groups
recorded demand of less than 2 hectares per annum.
107
Table 3-10: Land Demand PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial Zones to 2026 hectares
per annum
Local Board
Group
Heavy Industry Light Industry

Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
23
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
2
15
46

Urban Central
Urban North
10
Urban South
11
29
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
3
20
59
The following table provides the demand forecasts by zone and Local Board Group for
floorspace. We do not provide detailed commentary on this table. However, we consider
that it is valuable to present demand using this metric, specifcialy for the commercial zones
where
floorspace
can
be
provided
by
building
more
intensively.
108
Table 3-11: Floorspace Demand PAUP Activity Table 1 and 2 to 2026 (000 m2) per annum
Local Board
Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhoo
d centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park Heavy Industry Light Industry
Medium Growth - Floorspace Demand (000 p.a.)

Urban Central
109
50
18
67
18
32
Urban North
37
25
11
24
Urban South
46
79
13
14
26
53
Urban West
22
22
12
17
Rural North
Rural South
Total
226
181
43
49
15
89
16
49
2
2
132
High Growth - Floorspace Demand (000 p.a.)

Urban Central
136
64
23
84
23
42
Urban North
46
32
14
12
10
31
Urban South
57
101
16
18
11
33
68
Urban West
28
28
16
21
Rural North
Rural South
Total
10
284
232
62
19
11
112
20
54
109
3
3
63
169
Growth Forecasts 2041 horizon of the Auckland Plan

Based on the results of our economic growth modelling, the annual demand for commercial
and industrial zoned land by 2041 is expected to decrease compared with the period to
2026. The demand range is projected to sit between 100 (Medium) to 130 (High) hectares
per annum (see Table 3-12). The majority of the demand for land is expected to be located
in industrial zones (demand ranges between 54ha and 74 hectares per annum Med to
High). The commercial zones are expected to attract additional demand for land which is
estimated between 47ha and 62ha per annum (medium to high).
In terms of geographic location;
Commercial Zones: The majority of demand for commercial land would be directed
towards Urban Central, Urban North and Urban South, with combined land demand
ranging between 32 (Medium) and 42 (High) hectares per annum. There would be
very little growth in the rural and Urban West areas, with combined land demand
ranging between 9 (Medium) to 12 (High) hectares per annum.
Industrial Zones: The majority of demand for industrial land would be directed
towards Southern areas of Auckland (Urban and Rural), with more than half of the
total land demand being expected to locate in these areas (demand between 27
(Medium) to 36 (High) hectares per annum). There would also be strong demand for
land in the Urban Central and Urban North, with combined land demand ranging
between 17 (Medium) to 22 (High) hectares per annum.
Table 3-12: Land Demand PAUP Activity Table 1, 2 to 2041 hectares per annum
Local Board
Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial

Urban Central
14
10
Urban North
Urban South
10
27
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
41
52

Urban Central
18
Urban North
11
13
9
Urban South
13
36
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
54
70
110
As seen in Table 3-13, the land demand per annum under the medium and high growth
scenarios shows that in the:
Mixed Use Zone: High demand in the Urban Central areas (8 - 10 ha p.a.).
Metropolitan and Town Centre Zones: The Metropolitan zone recorded a land
demand per annum of approximately 2 hectares across the Urban North, South and
West zones. The Town Centre Zone also recorded land demand of 2-3 hectares
across the Urban Central, North and South Local Board Groups.
Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre, General Business and Business Park Zones:
These zones recorded low land demand per annum across all Local Board Groups
(generally under 1 ha p.a.). The highest demand for land was recorded in the Urban
North General Business, with less than 3 hectare per annum recorded in this zone.
Table 3-13: Land Demand PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial Zones to 2041
hectares per annum
Local Board
Group
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhoo
d centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park

Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
0
1
14
1
1

Urban Central
10
Urban North
Urban South
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
11
19
111
Table 3-14 shows the average annual demand for land in each Local Board geographic area
and each of the industrial zones covered by the PAUP Activity Table 2. As seen in the table,
The majority of land demand in industrial zones is forecast to be located in the Light
Industry zone, demand ranging between 39 (Medium) and 53 (High) hectares per
annum.
The Light Industry zone demand is expected to be greatest in the Urban South,
(between 19 ha and 26 ha per annum). This accounts for nearly 50% of all Light
Industry zoned land demanded.
Land demanded for Heavy Industry is highest in the Urban South (approx. 9 ha p.a.)
and in the Urban Central (approx. 5ha p.a.) areas, accounting for 56% and 34% of the
heavy industrial land demand respectively. The remaining Local Board Groups
recorded demand of less than 2 hectares per annum.
Table 3-14: Land Demand PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial Zones to 2041 hectares
per annum
Local Board
Group
Heavy Industry Light Industry

Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
19
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
2
13
39

Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
10
26
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
2
17
53
112
Table 3-15: Floorspace Demand PAUP Activity Table 1 and 2 to 2041 (000 m2) per annum
Local Board
Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhoo
d centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park Heavy Industry Light Industry
Medium Growth - Floorspace Demand (000 p.a.)

Urban Central
89
43
15
55
15
27
Urban North
30
21
21
Urban South
37
67
11
11
22
45
Urban West
18
18
10
14
Rural North
Rural South
Total
185
153
35
40
12
73
13
42
2
2
112
High Growth - Floorspace Demand (000 p.a.)

Urban Central
117
57
20
72
20
37
Urban North
40
29
12
10
28
Urban South
49
90
14
15
10
29
61
Urban West
24
25
13
19
Rural North
Rural South
Total
243
207
53
16
10
96
17
46
113
3
3
56
151
3.2.4
Stage 3.2 Findings

This section has drawn on the employment forecasts from Stage 1 and the empirical data on
land use and floorspace utilisation to understand the needs for PAUP provisions by zone.
The results provide a range of estimates of demand per annum in terms of land and
floorspace. The model indicates that at the regional level,
Demand for commercial and industrial zoned land by 2026 is expected to range
between 112 ha (Medium) and 142 ha (High) per annum (see Table 3-8).
The majority of the demand for land is expected to be located in industrial zones,
with annual demand between 61 ha (Medium) and 79 ha (High) per annum.
However, commercial zones are expected to attract demand for land of 51 ha
(Medium) to 63 ha (High) per annum.
The results for the individual commercial and industrial PAUP zones indicates that,
The majority of land demand is forecasted to be located in Light Industry zone, with
demand ranging between 46 ha (Medium) and 59 ha (High) per annum.
Following Industrial land demand are Mixed Use Zone, with forecasts showing high
demand for this zone ranging between 18 ha (Medium) and 22 ha (High) per annum.
Land demanded for Heavy Industry is also significant, with demand ranging between
15 ha (Medium) and 20 ha (High) per annum.
The Metropolitan Centre, Town Centre and General Business zones have moderate
demand growth ranging from 8 to 13 hectares per annum.
The Local Centre, Neighbourhood Centre, and Business Park zones recorded low
growth in land demand per annum (generally less than 5 ha p.a.).
In terms of geographic locations the results indicate that,
Most of the growth in demand for land will be focused on southern areas of
Auckland (Urban South and Rural South). The results suggest that approximately
45% of demand could be located in these areas (over 50 ha p.a.).
The Urban Central could be expected to attract a large share of demand
(approximately 25%).
The Urban North and Urban West are both expected to draw considerable demand,
with the Urban North more focused on commercial and the Urban West more
focused on industrial land.
We do not provide a summary of the results for the Growth Forecasts 2041 horizon of the
Auckland Plan. However the results are generally similar to the 2026 findings, but with a
lower demand per annum for all of the areas and zones for the period 2026 to 2041. The
biggest decline in growth is expected in the Light Industry zone, which will see demand for
land drop by 7 ha p.a. in the lead up to 2041 compared with the lead up to 2026.
These results provide an understanding of the potential needs of the economy in terms of
land requirements for each commercial and industrial PAUP zone. While the results answer
part of the IHPs question, assessment of the supply of land is required in order to answer
114
the question, Does the PAUP provide for sufficient land to meet foreseeable business
growth to 2041.
3.3
Stage 3.3 Land use PAUP Capacity by Sector and Zone

To understand the potential supply of business zoned land we must model development
capacity enabled by the PAUP zones, other Precincts and the Future Urban Zone (FUZ).
Development capacity of the PAUP zones and the FUZ have been modelled and assessed by
Auckland Council. In this study we rely on these models to provide key metrics. Before
presenting results from the Council models, a brief description of the key aspects of the
methods used by the Council is provided below.
Auckland Councils Capacity for Growth (CfG) model estimates capacity within each PAUP
zone across Auckland.96 The model identified existing vacant sites and sites where building
coverage appears unusually low (vacant potential), then establishes a range of estimates of
capacity. The CfG model provides an estimate of Theoretical, Contemporary and
Modified capacity.
In summary,
The CfG estimates enabled capacity using the Maximum Theoretical scenario,
which is a measure of the potential development that is theoretically possible as a
result of the urban form rules in each zone (i.e. theoretically three dimensional
ziggurats that could be constructed).
The CfG also provides a capacity measure termed the Contemporary scenario. The
Contemporary scenario makes assumptions about the level of likely up-take within
each zone relative to what the market has delivered in `functionally similar'
locations. For each zone type in each location, it estimates the capacity that could
occur if the sites were developed to the same level as the market has already
delivered in similar and proximate zones/locations. The Contemporary scenario can
be viewed as ex post scenario, which implicitly assumes new PAUP urban form rules
will have no effect on the market outcomes (i.e. intensity of development remains
unchanged, as if the PAUP did not exist).
Using a hypothetical example we can explain the difference between Maximum Theoretical
and Contemporary scenarios. For example, the urban form rules in the PAUP zoning may
increase the allowable construction from five floors (legacy plan) to ten floors (PAUP). The
enabled capacity would be defined as a building of 10 floors, because this could in theory
be developed. However, in similar locations the current market conditions (supply and
demand) tend to result in owners building only three floors, owing to past dynamics such as
market demand and acceptability (this an example of the ex post Contemporary scenario).
In contrast, the future market conditions and the increased flexibility enabled by the PAUP is
likely to result in owners of buildings developing to a higher intensity of say five floors (this is
96
Auckland Council (2015) Proposed Zones (Adopted December).
115
an example of the ex ante scenario). The 2013 CfGS had an ex ante scenario called the
Modified theoretical, due to time constraints it was not possible for this scenario to be
reproduced in the 2015 CfG model.
We are aware that the residential development modelling for the PAUP has incorporated
another measure of capacity, referred to as feasible capacity.97 The feasible capacity uses
an additional financial restraint test to establish whether the development of a site would be
viable in terms of a business proposition (i.e. requirement for a return). The modelling of
feasibility in residential development can be established by testing a small range of potential
development options (less than 20 options). Even with this small number of options the
modelling of feasibility of residential zones has been a protracted and passionately argued
process which has taken a better part of a year and is still not accomplished.98
Like residential developments, the estimation of feasible capacity for commercial and
industrial land is complex and problematic, only more so. This is because there are
numerous diverse development options and/or uses that could occur on any given piece of
business land. These numerous development options and final uses can have very different
development costs and rents (returns) that result in vast numbers of potential outcomes,
each of which would need to be tested. We consider that while modelling feasibility of
business land development may be theoretically possible, in practice the application of such
a model to all properties in Auckland would be an intractable problem.99
In addition, the rate at which the measures of feasibility change over time is impossible to
predict with any certainty, as feasibility relates to underlying economic conditions. This
means that tomorrows feasibility has the potential to be very different to todays. Projecting
that with any certainty over 15 or 30 years is impossible.
Therefore, we consider the Contemporary scenario is a useful proxy for the minimum level
of commercial feasibility. This scenario relies on market outcomes in similar locations that
have proven to be feasible under past market conditions. So the use of these similar
locations indirectly incorporates the past market realties and actual development economics
associated with developing business land.
For these two reasons we have relied on the Cotemporary capacity measure from the CfG
model as the minimum measure of current supply. The results from the CfG are displayed in
the following section.
We note CfG Contemporary scenario models development potential on vacant and vacant
potential parcels in business areas which excludes,
97
Auckland Council Developable Capacity (ACDC) model.

As of late February 2016 the ACDC model was still being developed/debated subject to expert conferencing
concurrent to this report.
99
Given the large number of alternative development options available and the large number of properties in the
commercial and industrial zones this modelling would take a substantial amount of time and effort to solve and
add little in terms of understanding.
98
116
Minor business areas, isolated business parcels (corner shops and other spot
zonings).
PAUP Precincts, which includes special areas or structure plans.
Parcels in business areas that do not have vacant or vacant potential are not
modelled in the Contemporary scenario.
Future Urban Zone, that provides for greenfield land for business development.
The minor business areas include 794 hectares of PAUP business zoned, which is
approximately 9% of the total business land provide in Auckland. Of the minor business
areas most land is in industrial (483 hectares) and commercial zones (311 hectares). The
minor business areas have not been modelled in the CfGS in the past. In this study we
provided a high level estimate of the potential capacity in these minor business areas.
The PAUP precincts include 83 hectares of land that is business zoned. There are also a
number of precincts that may be likely to have business zones, although none has been
provided in the PAUP. There are 108 hectares of business precinct and 9,990 hectares of
comprehensive precinct that could include some business zone. These areas were not
modelled in the CfGS as there was insufficient time to assess each precinct to establish a
robust set of urban form rules and many precincts do not yet have rules (future frameworks
are to be developed). In this study we provided a high level estimate of the potential
capacity in these business zoned areas of precincts, however we have not attempted to
estimate the capacity in the other parts of the precincts.
The CfG model scenario does not model development potential on parcels without vacant
or vacant potential in the business areas. This means that the majority (54%) of business
land is assumed to have no development potential, regardless of how permissive the PAUP
rules are. For example, the Westpac building in Takapuna on the corner Lake and Huron road
has 100% coverage in terms of building footprint and two levels (see Figure 3-11 below,
building with Westpac logo on the roof). There is no noteworthy portion of vacant land, i.e.
no Vacant Potential. Therefore, this parcel would not be modelled in the CfGS Contemporary
scenario. However there may be development potential on this parcel in terms of greater
height enabled by the PAUP (i.e. building up), however redevelopment would be required.
The PAUP rules has been developed to encourage intensification on existing, we note that
the CfGS does not attempt to model this increased intensification.
117
Figure 3-11: Example of non-modelled Business Land
Finally, the FUZ is a significant area of greenfield land (the size of Hamilton) on the edge of
the current urban boundary. This land has been marked for urban development in the
future during and after the horizon of the PAUP. The capacity enabled in the FUZ was not
modelled in the CfG, because the zoning has not been specified in detail. However, Auckland
Council has released a strategy to provide broad understanding of timing and scale of
development expected in the FUZ.100 Based on outcomes from this strategy, we provide an
estimate of the capacity that could be enabled in the FUZ, this is used to understand some of
the potential supply out to 2041 horizon of the Auckland Plan.
However, we note that in the future (approx. 2026) a new Unitary Plan is likely to be
developed. This new plan may include rule and zone changes that will enable other
supply. For this reason the FUZ should not be viewed as the only new source of supply after
2026.
In the subsections which follow we provide summary results for the following,
100
CfGS potentially developable Business Land (for business areas),

CfGS potentially developable floorspace (for business areas),
Potential capacity in the minor business areas (estimate of developable land and
floorspace),
Potential capacity in the PAUP Precincts (estimate of developable land and
floorspace), and
Potential capacity in the Future Urban Zone (estimate of developable land and
floorspace).
Auckland Council (2015) Future Urban Land Supply Strategy (Adopted Nov).
118
Finally, we note that the authors of this report received the CfG model data from the
Auckland Council relatively recently101 and as such we have had minimal time to examine the
results. We report the results in this study, however there has been no ability for us to
examine the workings of the CfG or how the model incorporates the latest PAUP zoning
rules.
3.3.1
CfG Model Developable Business Land

The CfG estimates the overall availability of commercial and industrial land for the main
business areas, by PAUP zone and Local Board Group. In this study we present summary
results from the CfG for two types of developable business land, Vacant and Vacant
Potential.
The following definitions are provided in the CfG model technical report,
Vacant Land: land that is on parcels that are wholly vacant (i.e. there are no
buildings located on the parcel)There are two distinct types of vacant business
parcels, the first being a business zoned parcel that is an empty lot and the second
being a business parcel that while it has no buildings located on it is currently used
for other purposes.102
Vacant Potential Land: is land that has an unusually large vacant area or percent
vacant area, when compared to other parcels of similar generalised zoning within a
similar location.103 The vacant potential land (on these parcels) is equal to a
proportion of the parcel that does not have an existing structure, i.e. excludes land
in the parcel that has an existing building. Figure 3-12 illustrates the Vacant Potential
in the CfGS with the area being shown by A, i.e. the parcel land area less the
existing building footprint. However the parcel must also have an unusually large
vacant area, the area B in the diagram depicts an area that is not considered to be
Vacant Potential.
Figure 3-12: Illustration of Vacant Potential in CfG
We note that neither of these measures includes potential redevelopment of properties that
are fully covered104 with existing buildings. It is likely that for some properties the PAUP
101
CfGS results used in this study were supplied by Auckland Council on the 3rd of March 2016.
pg. 81, Balderston, K. et al. (2014).
103
pg. 86, Balderston, K. et al. (2014).
104
i.e. neither vacant or vacant potential land.
102
119
rules will enable greater intensity of use, e.g. an increased height envelope or coverage. The
enabled increase in intensity may encourage redevelopment of properties that have existing
buildings that cover the majority105 of the land. The CfG does not model this type of
redevelopment.
This type of (re)development can be illustrated by the following hypothetical example. A
property which has a building that covers almost the entire land area, i.e. building footprint
of almost 100%. This property would not be modelled in the CfG as it has neither, Vacant or
Vacant Potential (no vacant land potentially useable for additional business activity).
However, the new PAUP zone rules could allow the owner of this property to build additional
levels on the property. In some cases, given an increase in enabled development potential
the market may choose to demolish the existing building to allow development upwards.
For example, in the Town Centre zone less than 30% is Vacant or Vacant Potential. This
means that the CfG only models the potential development in a small part of this zone (i.e.
30%). The majority of the Town Centre (70%) is not modelled, and as such has no estimate
of development potential. If one is to rely solely on the results from the CfG you would be
implicitly assuming that most of the Town Centre zone is locked up and cannot be developed
(regardless of any increase in development potential enabled by the PAUP). We note that
this same issue is likely to be apparent in most centre zones.
Vacant Land
The potential supply of business land in terms of vacant land across the PAUP zones and
Auckland is outlined first. As seen in Table 3-16, the vacant business land is distributed
across the city, and;
105
There was 344 hectares of commercially zoned vacant land and 1,047 hectares of
industrial zoned land that is vacant in Auckland.
Industrial zones have the greatest amount of vacant land, with most of the land
being located in Urban South (332 ha) and Rural South (402 ha). These two areas
have over half (53%) of all vacant land across all of Aucklands PAUP business zones.
The Urban North and Urban South have the most vacant commercially zoned land,
with 90ha and 111ha respectively. Together these areas represent 58% of the total
vacant land in commercial zones.
Specifically more than the current average area.
120
Table 3-16: Vacant Land by PAUP Activity Tables and Local Board Group
Local Board Group (hectares)

Urban Central
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
63
82
Urban North
90
101
Urban South
111
332
Urban West
52
75
Rural North
19
56
Rural South
Total
402
344
1,047
Source: Auckland Council (2016) Capacity for Growth Study Business Areas
121
Table 3-17 shows the quantity of vacant land by commercial zones as seen in PAUP Activity
Table 1. The patterns of vacant land in commercial zones generally showed that in,
Metropolitan Centre Zones: There are significant areas of vacant land, with 69
hectares of vacant land across these urban areas.
Town Centre and Local Centre zones: Showed greater variance in vacant land across
the Local Board Groups. The amount of vacant land in the urban areas ranged from
4 hectares (Urban West) to as much as 45 hectares (Urban South) across these
commercial zones.
Neighbourhood Centre: There is less than 3 ha of vacant land in this zone in all of
Auckland. However, this is driven by the fact that only a quarter (27%) of the
Neighbourhood Centre zone land is modelled in the CfG, i.e. the majority (73%) of
this zone is in minor business areas.
Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park zones: Mixed Use and General
Business Zones had the highest levels of vacant land in the Urban Central (38 ha),
Urban North (31 ha), Urban South (42 ha) and Urban West (26 ha). The Urban North
Area also has a substantial area of vacant land in Business Park Zones (17 ha).
122
Table 3-17: Vacant Land by PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial zones
Metropolitan
centre
Urban Central
Town centre
Neighbourhood
centre
Local centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park
14
33
Urban North
20
17
23
17
Urban South
24
13
32
37
Urban West
22
11
14
Rural North
Rural South
Total
50
54
92
57
69
123
18
Seen in Table 3-18 vacant industrial zoned land within PAUP Activity Table 2 was,
In almost all Local Board Groups (excluding Urban Central) highest in the Light
Industry zone. Overall across Auckland the Light Industry zone had 572 hectares of
vacant land, making up over 55% of vacant land in industrial zones.
Highest in the Urban South for both Heavy Industry (94 ha) and Light Industry (238
ha). The Urban South in regard to Light Industry vacant land represented 42% of
vacant land across all of Auckland.
Lowest in the Rural North for both Heavy Industry (0 ha) and Light Industry (56 ha).
The Rural South had a substantial area of Heavy Industry zone vacant land (71% of
total supply).
Table 3-18: Vacant Land by PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial zones
Heavy Industry
Urban Central
Light Industry
34
47
Urban North
97
Urban South
94
238
Urban West
69
Rural North
Rural South
Total
56
337
65
475
572
Vacant Potential Land

The potential supply of business land in terms of vacant potential land across the PAUP
zones and Auckland is outlined in the following tables. As seen in Table 3-19, the vacant
potential business land is distributed across the city, and;
There was 472 ha of commercially zoned vacant potential land and 1,730 ha of
industrial zoned land that is vacant potential in Auckland.
Industrial zones have the greatest amount of vacant potential land, with most of the
land being located in Urban South (899 ha). This area alone has over 41% of all
vacant potential land across all of Aucklands PAUP business zones.
The Urban Central and Urban North have the most vacant potential commercially
zoned land, with 138 ha and 119 ha respectively. Together these areas represent
55% of the total vacant potential land in commercial zones.
124
Table 3-19: Vacant Potential Land by PAUP Activity Tables and Local Board Group

Urban Central
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
138
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
227
Urban North
119
214
Urban South
100
899
Urban West
66
194
Rural North
24
66
Rural South
Total
25
131
472
1,730
Table 3-20 shows the quantity of vacant potential land by commercial zones as seen in PAUP
Activity Table 1. The patterns of vacant potential land in Commercial zones generally
showed that,
Metropolitan Centre Zones: There are significant areas of vacant potential land in
the Metropolitan zone, with 100 hectares of vacant potential land across the urban
areas.
Town Centre and Local Centre zones: Showed greater variance in vacant potential
across the Local Board Groups. The amount of vacant potential land in the urban
areas ranged from 7 ha (Urban West) to as much as 26 hectares (Urban North)
across these commercial zones.
Neighbourhood Centre: There is less than 12 ha of vacant potential land in this zone
in all of Auckland. However, as noted above this result is driven by the fact that only
a quarter (27%) of the neighbourhood centre zoned land is modelled in the CfG, i.e.
the majority (73%) of this zone is in minor business areas.
Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park zones: Mixed Use and General
Business Zones had the highest levels of vacant potential land in the Urban Central
(94 ha), Urban North (50 ha), Urban South (48 ha) and Urban West (29 ha). The
Urban Central and Urban North areas also has a substantial area of vacant potential
land in Business Park Zones, at 10 ha and 13 ha respectively.
125
Table 3-20: Vacant Potential Land by PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial zones
Metropolitan
centre
Town centre
Neighbourhood
centre
Local centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park
Urban Central
13
13
88
10
Urban North
29
12
14
31
19
13
Urban South
29
19
36
13
Urban West
29
26
Rural North
Rural South
Total
55
38
12
194
49
100
126
23
Seen in Table 3-21 vacant potential land in industrial zones within PAUP Activity Table 2 was,
In almost all Local Board Groups (excluding Urban Central) the Light Industry zone
had the most vacant potential land. Overall across Auckland the Light Industry zone
had 1,322 ha of vacant potential land, making up over 75% of vacant potential land
in industrial zones.
Highest in the Urban South for both Heavy Industry (238 ha) and Light Industry (662
ha). The Urban South in regard to Light Industry vacant land represented 50% of
vacant potential land across all of Auckland.
Lowest in the Rural North for both Heavy Industry (0 ha) and Light Industry (66 ha).
Table 3-21: Vacant Potential Land by PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial zones
Heavy Industry
Light Industry
140
87
Urban North
212
Urban South
238
662
30
164
Urban Central
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Total
408
66
131
1,322
3.3.2
CfG Theoretically Business Floorspace

Before we discuss the results from the CfG potential development scenarios, it is important
to understand two key issues relating to the PAUP zones. The first is that the PAUP rules
enable a large amount of floorspace to be developed. In theory the zoning rules could
enable land owners to develop vast amounts of floorspace. However, given the demand and
supply constraints it is very unlikely that the enabled capacity will be developed in the
horizon of the PAUP (2026) or the Auckland Plan (2041).
The second point, is that the PAUP zones and rules have been modified during the course of
the hearings on business zones. The previous CfGS 2013 modelled the older PAUP zones and
rules, which was used by experts in hearing, in Topics 051-054 Centre Zones, Business Park
and Industry zones, Business activities and Business controls. In contrast, the CfG 2016 used
in this study was developed using the most recent zoning rules and the geographic extent as
set out in the 2015.106
We have not attempted to classify or understand all the nuances of the changes in rules and
zone geographies between the PAUP in 2013 and the current position. However, we
106
Auckland Council (2015) Proposed Zones (Adopted December).
127
consider that it is valuable for the IHP to understand that the changes between 2013 and
2015 have significantly increased Maximum Theoretical development beyond the levels
presented in the hearing on Topics 051-054.
In this section, we briefly provide top line comparisons of the enabled Maximum Theoretical
floorspace in the commercial and industrial zones that could be developed as a result of the
PAUP 2013 and 2015.
Figure 3-13 shows that the amount of commercial floorspace that could be built as a result
of the PAUP rules, in Auckland there was an increase from 38.5 million m2 in 2013 to 44.7
million m2 in 2015, which is equivalent to 16% increase. Most of the increase has been
located in the Urban Central (up 41%) and the rural Local Board Group areas (North up 155%
and South up 47%).
Figure 3-13: Maximum Theoretical Floorspace - Commercial Zones PAUP 2013 to

2015
50,000
Urban Central
Urban West
Urban North
Rural North
45,000
1,900
2,579
Floorspace (000 m2)
40,000
35,000
30,000
Urban South
Rural South
1,491
1,013
7,096
7,732
11,168
25,000
10,248
20,000
15,000
10,272
9,768
10,000
5,000
8,272
11,680
PAUP 2013*
PAUP 2015**
Source: *Balderston, K. and Fredrickson, C. (2014). Capacity for growth study 2013
**Auckland Council (2016) Capacity for Growth Study Business Areas
Figure 3-14 shows that the amount of industrial floorspace that could be built as a result of
the PAUP rules, in Auckland there was an increase from 181.6 million m2 in 2013 to 213.7
million m2 in 2015 which is equivalent to an 18% increase. Most of the increase has been
located in the Urban Central (up 20%) and North Shore (up 31%).
128
Figure 3-14: Maximum Theoretical Floorspace Industrial Zones PAUP 2013 to

2015
250,000
Urban Central
Urban West
Urban North
Rural North
Floorspace (000 m2)
200,000
150,000
20,701
6,586
20,591
Urban South
Rural South
23,909
6,929
23,189
94,632
100,000
50,000
81,507
20,917
27,502
31,265
37,570
PAUP 2013*
PAUP 2015**
Source: *Balderston, K. and Fredrickson, C. (2014). Capacity for growth study 2013
**Auckland Council (2016) Capacity for Growth Study Business Areas
The PAUP zones and rules enable a substantial amount of floorspace to be built, well in
excess of any needs or demands of the market in the planning horizons (2026 or 2041). The
changes to the PAUP zones and rules since 2013 (and the Topics 051-054 hearings) have
increased the amount of enabled floorspace even further.
However, we consider enabled Maximum Theoretical floorspace is so vast that the market
will not choose to develop to this level of intensity in the planning horizons. In our view it is
better for the IHP to consider the level of potential development in the areas based on the
existing levels of development (Contemporary scenario), and a forward looking assessment
that factors in increases in intensity of development (ex ante scenario).
3.3.3
CfG Potential Business Floorspace

In this study we have relied on the Cotemporary scenario from the CfG to establish the
realistic minimum level of floorspace development that could be achieved by the market
over the planning horizons of the PAUP (2026) and Auckland Plan (2041).
The Contemporary scenario can be viewed as the minimum level of development potential
that the PAUP enables. We consider that the development level in this scenario represents
the range of developments that were feasible under past market conditions (supply and
demand). This scenario is an ex post projection, i.e. how much development would the
market choose in the future if past market conditions (supply and demand) continue into the
future?
While we can be confident that the Contemporary scenario is unlikely to eventuate, it still
provides a relevant base line for understanding the least amount of potential development
that could occur in Auckland.
129
Table 3-22 shows that the potential floorspace by Local Board Group by APUP Activity Table
1 and 2 was generally,
Much lower in commercially zoned activities across all Local Board Groups. The
Urban Central, South and North had the highest level of potential commercial
floorspace, with over 600,000 m2 of floorspace potential. This was followed by the
Urban West with just over 230,000 m2 of floorspace potential. In total the PAUP
commercial zones allow around 2.7 million m2 of floorspace in Auckland.
Much higher for industrial zones, with an overall potential industrial floorspace of
6.0 million m2 in Auckland. Large areas of industrial zoned floorspace being
potentially available in the Urban South (3.2 million m2) and Urban Central (1.2
million m2) areas. The Urban North and South also have more than half a million
square metres of floorspace in the industrial zones.
Table 3-22: Contemporary Scenario Potential Floorspace (000 m2) by PAUP Activity
Zone and Local Board Group
Local Board Group (000 m )

Urban Central
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
947
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
1,184
Urban North
753
677
Urban South
638
3,206
Urban West
234
672
Rural North
109
158
Rural South
Total
67
136
2,747
6,033
130
Table 3-23 shows potential floorspace for each Local Board Group by Commercial Zone
found in the PAUP Table 1. The table shows that broadly;
Metropolitan Centre Zones: Had the highest overall potential commercial

floorspace, (766,000 m2). The largest proportion of potential floorspace is located in
the Urban South Local Board Group, while the smallest portion is in the Urban
Central area.
Town Centre Zones: Also had significant potential with 478,000 m2 of floorspace
capacity. The largest proportion of potential floorspace is located in the Urban
Central (152,000 m2) and Urban South (147,000 m2), while the smallest portion is in
the Urban West and the rural areas.
Local Centre Zones: Overall potential floorspace in the Local Centre zone was higher
in the Urban Central and Urban North Local Board Areas.
Neighbourhood Centre: There is less than 23,000 m2 of potential floorspace in this
zone in all of Auckland. However, as noted above this results is driven by the fact
that only a quarter (27%) of the Neighbourhood Centre zone land is modelled in the
CfG, i.e. the majority (73%) of this zone is in minor business areas.
Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park Zones: The potential floorspace
within these activity zones is concentrated in the Urban areas - Central (652,000 m2),
North (386,000 m2) and South (189,000 m2) account for over 88% of the total. There
is a small amount of potential floorspace in the Urban West and the rural areas
(138,000 m2).
131
Table 3-23: Contemporary Scenario Potential Floorspace (000 m2) PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial zones
Metropolitan
centre
Urban Central
Town centre
Neighbourhood
centre
Local centre
General
Business
Mixed Use
Business Park
94
152
46
469
110
73
Urban North
208
123
35
147
96
143
Urban South
296
147
126
63
Urban West
167
15
12
25
13
Rural North
28
27
14
32
Rural South
Total
12
10
10
32
478
134
23
785
345
766
132
217
Table 3-24 shows the potential floorspace available for floorspace development in industrial
PAUP Activity Table 2. Potential industrial floorspace across Auckland demonstrated these
characteristics,
Overall there is less potential floorspace enabled for Heavy Industry zone activities
(1.7 million m2) compared to Light Industry zone activities (4.3 million m2).
Capacity is concentrated in the Urban South Local Board Group, Heavy Industry zone
capacity of 0.9 million m2 and Light Industry zone capacity of 2.3 million m2
floorspace.
The Urban North, Central and West all have significant amounts of floorspace
potential in the Light Industry zone (over 0.5 million m2 in each).
There is limited floorspace potential in the rural areas (less than 0.2 million m2).
Table 3-24: Contemporary Scenario Potential Floorspace (000 m2) PAUP Activity
Table 2 Industrial zones

Urban Central
Heavy Industry
Light Industry
598
586
Urban North
10
667
Urban South
945
2,261
Urban West
133
539
Rural North
158
Rural South
Total
136
1,686
4,347
3.3.4
Minor Business Areas

The minor business areas include 794 hectares of PAUP business zoned land (see Table 3-25),
which is approximately 9% of the total business land provided in all of Auckland. Of the
minor business areas most land is in industrial (483 hectares) and commercial (311 hectares)
zones. It is clear that there is likely to be some development potential in these areas. To
provide a full picture of the total provision of business land in the PAUP we consider that an
estimate needs to be included for these areas.
133
Table 3-25: Minor Business Areas Land by PAUP Activity Tables and Local Board
Group

Urban Central
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
29
Urban North
142
Urban South
52
449
Urban West
12
Rural North
17
26
Rural South
Total
60
311
483
While the minor business areas have not been modelled in the CfG in the past, we provide a
high level estimate of the development potential. To establish this estimate, we have
assumed the proportion of vacant and vacant potential land in the minor business areas is
the same as that observed in the CfG results (by zone and Local Board Group). This provides
a broad estimate of vacant and potential vacant land, of 138 ha in commercial zones and 236
ha in industrial zones.
To develop an estimate of the development potential in the minor business areas we have
taken the rates of development intensity from the CfG for the Contemporary scenario, by
zone and Local Board Group, and converted the vacant and vacant potential estimates into
potential floorspace.
Table 3-26 shows the potential developable floorspace in the minor business areas,
assuming that the Contemporary scenario development pattern occurs in these areas. In
total the minor business areas could allow additional floorspace of 351,000 m2 in the
commercial zones and 591,000 m2 in the industrial zones. The additional development
potential for the minor business areas is equivalent to 17% of the CfG development potential
in the commercial zones and 11% of the CfG industrial zones (shown in Table 3-22).
Table 3-26: Minor Business Areas Potential Floorspace (000 m2) by PAUP Activity
Zone and Local Board Group Contemporary Scenario*

Urban Central
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
29
Urban North
208
Urban South
46
561
Urban West
Rural North
20
Rural South
Total
40
351
23
591
134
When assessed individually these business areas are minor, however when taken
collectively they represent a significant proportion of business land in the PAUP. The
estimates presented in this study, suggest that minor business areas could collectively
provide an additional 10% to 20% of potential developable floorspace in Auckland.
3.3.5
PAUP Precincts
Due to complexity and limited time, the CfG did not model the effects of the PAUP precincts.
These areas were not modelled in the CfG as there was insufficient time or information to
assess each precinct to establish a robust set of urban form rules. The exclusion of the
precincts from the CfG creates two limitations,
First, there is some PAUP business land that falls within precincts. The precincts
either add or remove rules from the PAUP zones. These changes to the operation of
a zone can either increase or decrease the potential use or development. This
means that the CfG may under/over-estimate development potential in an area.
Second, there are a number of precincts that currently have no PAUP business
zones. In some of these precincts it is likely that there will be some provision of
business zoning. Specifically, there are business precincts and comprehensive
precincts that have no underlying business zoned land in the PAUP.
While we are unable to quantify the effect of the first limitation, it is possible to estimate the
scale of the second.
We have drawn from the available data (precinct description table and GIS layer of spatial
extents) to establish the potential scale of the precincts that are expected to have some
business land.
In total, there are 18 business precincts with a land area of 108 hectares that could be
expected to include some business land. There are also 43 comprehensive precincts with a
combined land area of 9,990 hectares that could include some business zoned land.
While it is likely that the bulk of the land in these precincts will have non-business zoning it is
also true that there is likely to be some level of business land provided that has not been
included in the PAUP underlying zoning.
In this study we provide a high level estimate of the potential scale of the business land in
these precincts, however we have not attempted to estimate the development potential in
the precincts. To provide some indication of the scale of the business land in these precincts
we have applied the same ratio of business land to other zones that are observed in the
PAUP (i.e. 1.7% of Auckland land is business land). If the ratio of business land is maintained
in these precincts then we could expect 173 ha of additional business land.
3.3.6
Future Urban Zone

As part of the PAUP process Auckland Council has produced a strategy for the FUZ termed
the Future Urban Land Supply Strategy (FULSS). The overall intent of the FULSS is to provide
135
greater clarity and certainty to land owners in Auckland including householders, iwi,
developers, infrastructural providers (such as electricity, water) and council about when land
will be ready for urban development and where this future development will unfold
overtime. The FULSS identifies a 30 year sequential release of future urban land and seeks to
assist in the continued supply of greenfield land for development.107
The FULSS highlights 11,000 hectares of rural land that has been identified for future
urbanisation (the FUZ see Figure 3-15 below). This area could potentially accommodate
110,000 dwellings and 50,500 jobs. As seen in Figure 3-15, each of the FUZ areas has been
identified to extend beyond the metropolitan limit.
107
This Strategy deals exclusively with Greenfield land, outside the 2010 Metropolitan Urban Limit, which is
identified as future urban zone in the PAUP. Standalone areas identified in Map 1 are not included in this Strategy
with the exception of Hingaia. Dairy Flat, south of Bawden Road, Postman Road (Dairy Flat) and Puhinui, while
not zoned future urban in the notified PAUP, have been included in the Strategy for the purposes of prudent
planning. Changes to the PAUP regarding the extent of the Rural Urban Boundary, after the PAUP process is
complete, will be reflected in an updated Strategy.
136
Figure 3-15: Future Urban Zones outside the 2010 Metropolitan Limit
In this study we have allocated each of the FUZ areas to a Local Board Group area, allowing
an extension of the analysis of land use, employment and the demand for and supply of land
to these areas. We did this to better understand the spatial spread of development across
Auckland as it is now and as it occurs in future (consistent with the previous sections). Table
3-27 shows the assignment of FUZ areas to Local Board Groups.
137
Table 3-27: FUZ Areas by Local Board Group

FUZ areas
Local Board
Group
Takanini
Urban South
Opaheke-Drury-Karaka
Urban South
Paerata-Pukekohe
Rural South
Kumeu-Huapai-Riverhead
Rural North
Whenuapai-Redhills
Silverdale-Dairy FlatWainui
Urban West
Warkworth
Rural North
Standalone
Rural South
Rural North
The FULSS provides a high level overview of potentially commercial and industrial zoned land
across FUZ. As a high level overview, the FULSS does not include land use provisions for
lower order centre zones i.e. smaller centres, Mixed Use, General Business and Business Park
Zones. These types of zones may be included in the planning process at a later stage and will
unfold overtime as the land is developed. The FULSS provides estimates of industrial zone
capacity in terms of land (hectares), see Table 3-28.
Table 3-28: FULSS Industrial Land in FUZ Areas hectares

FUZ areas
Land (ha)
Takanini
190
Paerata-Pukekohe
288
101
Whenuapai-Redhills
305
Warkworth
115
Standalone
Total
45
327
1,370
The FULSS provides estimates of commercial zone capacity in terms of employment, which is
estimated based on the number of centres expected.108 Table 3-29 shows employment by
type of centre zone that is envisaged in the FULSS for each FUZ area.
108
See footnotes 109, 110 and 111 for details or refer to Appendix 2 of the FULSS.
138
Table 3-29: FULSS Commercial Employment in FUZ Areas by centre zone

FUZ areas
Town centre
Local centre
Takanini
Neighbourhood
centre
600
1,800
1,800
Paerata-Pukekohe
900
600
600
Whenuapai-Redhills
600
2,400
Warkworth
Standalone
Total
900
-
600
3,600
7,200
150
150
In this study we have assumed that the capacity in the FUZ commercial and industrial zones
have the same land use intensity as observed in the Local Board Group areas (see FAR and
WSR as displayed in Table 3-1 to Table 3-6).
In Table 3-30 the level of FUZ business land in each Local Board Group is presented for each
PAUP Activity Table. The FUZ allows for,
A significant area of land zoned for industrial activities (Activity Table 2). The FULSS
suggests that one third of the industrial land could be located in the Urban South
and West (approx. 495 ha). While the remaining 875 hectares could be located in
the Rural North and South.
The FULSS suggests that 220 hectares of commercial zone (Activity Table 1) land
could be provided in the Rural North and South. There may also be another 75
hectares of commercial zone land in Urban South and West.
Table 3-30: FUZ Land by PAUP Activity Table and Local Board Group hectares
Local Board Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
-
65
190
Urban West
10
305
Rural North
177
543
Rural South
Total
41
333
293
1,370
The FULSS also provides information about the potential range of commercial zones
provided in each part of the FUZ. The FULSS identifies the broad areas in the FUZ that may
have Town Centre,109 Local Centre,110 and Neighbourhood Centre111 zones (see Appendix 2 of
the FULSS).
109
The FULSS suggests four additional Town centres, two in Opaheke-Dury-Karaka and one in both PaeretaPukekohe and Silverdale-Dairy Flat-Wainui.
139
Within the FUZ,
Local Centre zones are expected to provide the largest area of commercial land,
representing 76% of all FUZ commercial land. The Rural North had the largest area
of local centre activities with 223 hectares. The Rural North has been identified as a
core residential and industrial growth area within the FULSS, with local centres
providing core commercial services to the people who will live and work there in
future.
Town centres have also been identified within the FULSS, with overall 60 hectares of
commercial land being identified in the FUZ. The highest levels of Town Centre
activity zoned vacant land are identified in the Urban South, which represents over
half of all the identified Town Centre zone in the FUZ.
The FUZ also identifies capacity for a Neighbourhood centre zone in Rural North.
The FULSS does not provide for other commercial zones, such as Mixed Use, General
Business and Business Park zones (or Metropolitan Centre). However, these zones
may well be included in the FUZ as the planning for these areas advances.
Table 3-31: FUZ Land by PAUP Activity Table 1 Commercial zones
Local Board Group
Town centre
Local centre
Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
33
Urban West
Neighbourhood
centre
-
33
10
Rural North
20
148
Rural South
Total
33
61
223
9
9
The FULSS identifies industrial land, however there is no information about the potential
spilt of this land between Light Industry zone and Heavy Industry zone. We have assumed
that industrial land indicated in the FULSS is all Light Industry zone (see Table 3-32). The
Rural Local Board Areas are expected to have the largest area of industrial land (over 875
ha). In addition, the FUZ in the Urban South and Urban West could be expected to provide
nearly 500 ha of Light Industry zone land.
No additional industrial land is provided in the Urban Central or Urban North areas.
110
The FULSS also suggests twelve new Local centres, with one additional Local centre in each of the areas
Takanini, Paereta-Pukekohe, Kumeu-Huapai-Riverhead, Whenuapai-Redhills and Warkworth. The
Opaheke-Dury-Karaka area could include three new Local centres and Silverdale-Dairy Flat-Wainui could
include four.
111
The FULSS includes one Neighbourhood centre in Warkworth.
140
Table 3-32: FUZ Land by PAUP Activity Table 2 Industrial zones

Local Board
Group
Light Industry
Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
190
Urban West
305
Rural North
543
Rural South
Total
1,370
333
Total potential business floorspace that could be developed in the FUZ exceeds 3.2 million
m2. Most of the additional floorspace is located in the Light Industry zone (2.6 million m2).
The majority of the Commercial zone floorspace is expected to be located in the Rural North
(nearly half).
Table 3-33: FUZ Floorspace by PAUP Activity Table 1 and 2
Local Board Group
Activity
Table 1
Commercial
Activity
Table 2
Industrial
Town centre
Local centre
Neighbourhood
centre
Light Industry
Urban Central
Urban North
102
451
28
962
Urban South
241
451
139
Urban West
28
962
Rural North
326
780
65
250
Rural South
Total
77
360
46
31
672
2,552
249
411
12
780
12
2,552
360
Note: Assumes that employment in FULSS has the same workspace ratio as existing activity in the current zones
3.3.7
Stage 3.3 Findings

This section has drawn on the land supply information from the CfG, which estimates the
land capacity of minor business areas, PAUP precincts and the FULSS to understand the
supply of land and floorspace.
The CfG, estimates minor business areas and PAUP precincts provide information about
potential supply that is facilitated by the PAUP rules and zones (supply over the horizon of
the PAUP, i.e. 2026). The FULSS provides information about potential additional supply (in
the FUZ) that could be enabled after 2026. However, we note that in the future (approx.
2026) a new Unitary Plan will be developed. This new plan may include changes to rules and
zones that will potentially enable other new supply. For this reason the FUZ should not be
viewed as the only new source of supply after 2026.
141
In summary, the CfG assessment of capacity under the revised PAUP zones indicates that,
There are 344 hectares of commercial zone land and 1,047 hectares of industrial
zone land vacant in Auckland.
There are 472 hectares of commercial zone land and 1,730 hectares of industrial
zone land that have vacant potential in Auckland.
The changes made in PAUP zones and rules between 2013 and 2015 has generated a
significant increase in overall capacity (approx. 16%). The 2013 CfGS results
presented in Topic 051-054, have been superseded by the results in the 2016 CfG
presented in this report. The scale of enabled capacity is vast and is unlikely to be
developed by the market in the planning horizon.
The development scenario (Contemporary) provides a more realistic assessment of
the achievable development in Auckland. This scenario indicates that PAUP
commercial zones allow 2.7 million m2 of floorspace to be potentially developed in
Auckland. While the industrial zones allow around 6.0 million m2 of potentially
developable floorspace in Auckland.
The CfG model does not model 9% of business land that is in minor business areas. The
estimates of the development potential in the minor business areas suggests that the PAUP
business zones could collectively provide an additional 10% to 20% of the potential
developable floorspace.
Due to limited time and the complexity of the situation, the CfG did not model the precincts.
In some instances the precincts are likely to include some additional provision for business
land (beyond the underlying PAUP zones). We estimate that the precincts could include an
additional 173 ha of business land, which is not included in the PAUP zones.
The results from the FULSS for commercial and industrial PAUP zones indicates that,
3.4
A significant area of land zoned for industrial activities (Activity Table 2). The FULSS
suggests that one third of the industrial land could be located in the Urban South
and West (approx. 495 ha). While the remaining 875 hectares could be located in
the Rural North and South.
The FULSS suggest that 220 hectares of commercial zoned (Activity Table 1) land
could be provided in the Rural North and South. There may also be another 75
hectares of commercial zoned land in the Urban South and West.
Stage 3.4 Land use PAUP Outlook by Zone

This stage compares the demand for each PAUP zone (Stage 3.2) with the floorspace
capacity within each zone (Stage 3.3). It identifies in which zones anticipated demand
exceeds supply or where surplus supply exists.
The results from the survey of Light Industry zones in Stage 2.1 have been used to account
for non-industrial activities that occur in this zone. For example, the survey indicated that
approximately 20% of Light Industry zoned land is used for non-industrial uses (retail, office,
142
services, other) so we have assumed that 80% of the Light Industry zone land will be
available for industrial use. When comparing future demand for Light Industry zone land
with the supply, a proportion of land has been removed to account for these non-industrial
uses.
In this stage of the assessment, we graphical illustrate the number of years worth of
potential floorspace (commercial zones) and land (industrial zones) for each PAUP zone and
Local Board Group left as enabled by the PAUP zoning. In the following figures total
development potential (from Stage 3.3) is graphed alongside demand (from Stage 3.2) to
establish whether the PAUP zoning by locations is sufficient.
The outlook assessment for the commercial zones has been undertaken using floorspace
demand and potential development. This is because development in commercial zones is
more closely related to the built form that can be developed on a property rather than land
area. In contrast the outlook assessment for industrial zones has been undertaken using
land area demand and Vacant/Vacant Potential. This is because development in the
industrial zones is more closely related to the land area.
3.4.1
Outlook 2026 Business Land and Floorspace

In the following graphs we compare the forecasted demand (medium and high) with the
potentially developable floorspace or land (based on the Contemporary development
scenario and 20% of Maximum Theoretical development), to understand the relationship by
zone type and Local Board Group area during the horizon of the PAUP (2026). The results
are assembled according to zone, with commercial zones first and then the industrial zones.
In brief, for both the commercial and industrial zones the range of demand is depicted by
the,
Medium Growth forecast, as represented by the blue line.

High Growth forecasts, as represented by the orange line.
The graphs of the commercial zones show the potential development of floorspace using the
two CfG scenarios,112
Contemporary, as represented by the grey dotted line.

20% of Theoretical, as represented by the green dotted line.
The graphs of the industrial zones show the Vacant and Vacant Potential land,
PAUP 2013, as represented by the dark blue dotted line.

PAUP 2015, as represented by the yellow line.
PAUP 2015 modified for non-industrial uses, grey dotted line.
In summary, if the two demand lines (blue and orange lines) do not crossover/exceed the
scenarios (dotted grey and green lines) or Vacant/Vacant Potential (yellow and grey dotted
112
Note, we have included an estimate for the business land in the minor business areas as described in 3.3.4.
143
line) then it is likely that there will be sufficient supply of land for the zone for the horizon of
the PAUP (i.e. no shortage by 2026).
In the cases that the demand lines crossover/exceeds the Contemporary line (grey dotted
line), then there may be a situation where the market would need to develop to a higher
intensity than has been observed in the past. This does not mean that there is a shortage,
but rather that past market operations will not be sufficient to meet the needs of the
market.
In the cases that the demand lines crossover/exceeds the 20% Theoretical line (green dotted
line), then there may be a situation where the market would need to develop to a
significantly higher intensity than has been observed in the past. This does not mean that
there is a shortfall, but rather that current market operations may not be sufficient to meet
the needs of the market in this zone/location.
However, we note that demand in these situations could shift, and be satisfied in a number
of other ways which includes,
(Re)development could occur in the existing zone on properties that are

underutilised (i.e. build up),113
Development could increase beyond the 20% of total the Theoretical level. The
PAUP enables a substantial development potential beyond the levels shown in the
scenario and graphs depicted in the following section (generally the PAUP enables
80% more development than is shown in the following graphs),
Shift to a different zone in the same location where there is available development
potential,
Shift to another location where there is available development potential, or
Intensification of use in existing buildings.
We consider that these different alternatives could meet some of the demands of the
market as shown in this study.
113
The CfGS2015 does not model development potential on approximately 50% of the zoned business land.
144
Metropolitan Centre Zone

Figure 3-16 shows that in most areas the demand for floorspace in the Metropolitan Centre
zones does not exceed the level of development suggested by the Contemporary scenario,
i.e. neither the orange or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line.
This result indicates that there is unlikely to be a capacity shortage in the Metropolitan zone,
even if we assume that the market is frozen at the current levels of development intensity.
However, we note that the Urban West graph shows that the High Growth forecast (orange)
exceeds the Cotemporary scenario (grey dotted line). This indicates that if growth is high in
this area that the market may be required to develop at a higher intensity than has been
observed in the past. Given the level of additional potential development enabled in this
zone we do not consider that this area would experience a shortage in the horizon of the
PAUP.
Figure 3-16: Metropolitan Centre Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
400
Urban Central
Urban North
600
20% of Theoretical
500
300
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
350
250
200
150
100
400
300
Contemporary
200
High
Growth
100
50
0
2013
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Urban South
900
800
800
700
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
Urban West
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
900
Medium
Growth
600
500
400
300
200
100
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
145
Town Centre Zone

Figure 3-17 shows that in most areas the demand for floorspace in the Town Centre zones
exceeds the level of development suggested by the Contemporary scenario, i.e. the orange
or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. This result indicates that in the Town Centre zone,
the market will not be satisfied by historic levels of development intensity.
However, in all cases demand does not exceed the 20% of total Theoretical scenario (green
dotted line). This indicates that if development intensity increases from historic rates the
market could be expected to satisfy demand.
We note that Urban Central graph shows that the High Growth forecast (orange) exceeds the
Contemporary scenario relatively soon (grey dotted line). This indicates that if growth is high
in this area that the market may be required to develop at a higher intensity than has been
observed in the past. Note the vast development potential (95%) beyond the grey line.
Given the level of PAUP development potential enabled in this zone we do not consider that
this area would experience a shortage in the horizon of the PAUP.
Figure 3-17: Town Centre Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
Urban North
Town Centre Zone
450
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
500
400
300
200
100
Urban South
Town Centre Zone
400
700
350
600
300
250
200
150
100
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Urban West
Town Centre Zone
350
100
80
60
40
20
0
2013
400
300
200
2016
2021
2021
2026
2016
2021
Rural North
Rural South
Town Centre Zone
80
2026
70
200
150
100
50
2016
Medium
Growth
Town Centre Zone
250
0
2013
High
Growth
Contemporary
0
2013
2026
300
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
120
500
Floorspace (000 m2)
140
20% of Theoretical
100
50
0
2013
Town Centre Zone
800
Floorspace (000 m2)
600
60
50
40
30
20
10
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
146
2026
Local Centre Zone

Figure 3-18 shows that in most urban areas (except Urban North) the demand for floorspace
in the Local Centre zones exceeds the level of development suggested by the Contemporary
scenario, i.e. the orange or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. This result indicates that
in the Local Centre zone, the market will not be satisfied by current levels of development
intensity and will seek to intensify. However, in these areas the demand does not exceed
the 20% of the total Theoretical scenario (green dotted line). This indicates that if
development intensity increases from historic rates the market could be expected to satisfy
demand as there are no constraints imposed by the PAUP on development (in terms of
capacity).
We note that Urban Central graph shows that the demand forecasts come close to the 20%
of Theoretical capacity scenario (green dotted line) by 2026. This indicates that if growth is
high in this area that the market may be required to develop at a significantly higher
intensity than has been observed in the past. However, as the name suggests, the 20% of
theoretical capacity implies there is still 80% of capacity available above the green dotted
line. Given the level of PAUP development potential enabled in this zone we do not consider
that this area would experience a shortage in the horizon of the PAUP.
The demand in the rural areas for this zone is unlikely to exceed the level of potential
development suggested by the Contemporary scenario.
147
Figure 3-18: Local Centre Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
140
Urban North
Local Centre Zone
100
Urban South
Local Centre Zone
80
90
120
60
40
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
20
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Urban West
80
60
2016
2021
40
High
Growth
30
20
0
2013
2026
Medium
Growth
Contemporary
2016
2021
2026
Rural South
Local Centre Zone
50
Local Centre Zone
45
50
60
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
50
Rural North
Local Centre Zone
70
50
40
30
20
40
40
30
20
35
30
25
20
15
10
10
10
0
2013
60
10
10
Floorspace (000 m2)
0
2013
20% of Theoretical
70
80
100
Local Centre Zone
5
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
148
2026
Neighbourhood Centre Zone

in the Neighbourhood Centre zones exceeds the level of development suggested by either
scenario, i.e. the orange or blue line exceeds both the grey dotted and green dotted line.
This result indicates that in the Neighbourhood Centre zone, the market will not be satisfied
by historic levels of development intensity.
In this zone the 20% of total Theoretical development lies below the current development
intensity line (contemporary scenario). Given the level of PAUP development potential
enabled in this zone we consider that this area would experience a shortage in the horizon of
the PAUP. The results do indicate that this zone will need to be monitored closely in the
urban areas through resource consents and other mechanisms utilised to ensure the market
continues to provide sufficient capacity to meet growth needs as and when required.
The demand in the Rural North areas for this zone are unlikely to exceed the level of
potential development suggested by the Contemporary scenario, i.e. neither the orange or
blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. However in the Rural South demand exceeds the
contemporary development line between 2021 and 2026. This result indicates that while
there is unlikely to be a shortage in the rural areas for neighbourhood centre zones, it will
pay for Council to monitor progress in the southern rural areas.
Figure 3-19: Neighbourhood Centre Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
50
Urban North
35
45
Urban South
45
25
20
15
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
30
25
20
15
10
10
5
5
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
60
2016
2021
12
10
8
6
4
15
Contemporary
10
35
20% of Theoretical
2026
40
30
20
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
30
25
20
15
10
5
2
2021
Medium
Growth
20
Rural South
10
2016
25
0
2013
2026
50
14
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
16
0
2013
30
Rural North
Urban West
18
35
Floorspace (000 m2)
0
2013
High
Growth
40
30
40
35
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
149
2026
Mixed Use Zone

Figure 3-20 shows that in most areas (except Urban North) the demand for floorspace in the
Mixed Use zones exceeds the level of development suggested by the Contemporary
scenario, i.e. the orange or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line by or before 2026. This
result indicates that in the Mixed Use zone, the market will not be satisfied by historic levels
of development intensity. However, in all areas (other than Urban Central) demand does not
exceed the 20% of total Theoretical scenario (green dotted line). This indicates that if
development intensity increases from historic rates the market could be expected to satisfy
demand.
We note that the Urban Central graph shows that the demand forecasts exceed the 20% of
Theoretical scenario (green dotted line). This indicates that the market may be required to
develop at a much higher intensity than has been observed in the past. However, given
there is some 80% capacity above the green dotted line, we do not consider that this area
would experience a shortage in the horizon of the PAUP.
Figure 3-20: Mixed Use Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential Development
Urban North
Urban South
Mixed Use Zone
Mixed Use Zone
Mixed Use Zone
300
20% of Theoretical
400
1000
250
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
450
800
600
400
Floorspace (000 m2)
1200
Urban Central
200
150
100
200
350
300
250
200
High
Growth
150 Contemporary
100
50
Medium
Growth
50
0
2013
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Urban West
180
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Rural North
Mixed Use Zone
60
90
80
60
40
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
100
40
30
20
10
20
0
2013
2026
Mixed Use Zone
80
50
120
2021
Rural South
Mixed Use Zone
160
140
2016
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
150
2026
General Business Zone

in the General Business zones sits below the Contemporary scenario, i.e. the orange or blue
line does not exceed the grey dotted line. This result indicates that in the General Business
zone, the market will be satisfied by historic levels of development intensity. In addition, in
the areas where it gets close to or exceeds the contemporary scenario there is significant
capacity before the 20% of total theoretical capacity is exceeded.
The demand in the rural areas for this zone is unlikely to exceed the level of potential
development suggested by the Contemporary scenario. This result indicates that there is
unlikely to be a shortage in the rural areas for Local Centre zone, even if we assume that the
market is frozen at the historic levels of development intensity.
Figure 3-21: General Business Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban North
Urban South
500
20% of Theoretical
250
400
120
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
300
450
140
100
80
60
40
Floorspace (000 m2)
160
Urban Central
350
300
250
200
150
100
20
250
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Contemporary
High Growth
2016
2021
0
2013
Medium
Growth
2026
2016
2021
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
80
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
100
50
200
150
100
50
180
70
160
60
140
50
40
30
20
10
0
2013
150
50
Floorspace (000 m2)
0
2013
200
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2026
120
100
80
60
40
20
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
151
2026
Business Park Zone

Figure 3-22 shows that demand for floorspace in the Business Park zones does not exceed
the level of development suggested by the Contemporary scenario, i.e. neither the orange or
blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. This result indicates that there is unlikely to be a
shortage in the Business Park zone, even if we assume that the market is frozen at the
historic levels of development intensity.
Figure 3-22: Business Park Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban North
Urban Central
140
Business Park
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
20% of Theoretical
350
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2013
Business Park
400
300
250
200
150
Contemporary
100
High Growth
50
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
Medium
2016
2021 Growth 2026
152
Heavy Industry Zone

Figure 3-23 shows that demand for land in the Heavy Industry zone does not exceed the
level of vacant or vacant potential suggested by the CfG, i.e. neither the orange or blue line
exceeds the yellow line. This result indicates that there is unlikely to be a shortage in the
Heavy Industry zone, even if we assume that the market is frozen at the historic levels of
development intensity.
It is important to note that Councils position in the PAUP has shifted between 2013 and
2015. In most areas this has meant an increase in the amount of heavy Industrial land
capacity, except in the Urban North Zone. Changes in this area have seen capacity drop very
close to the high demand growth position by 2026.
This will require Council to monitor growth and the uptake of industrial land to ensure land
capacity constraints do not unduly impact the market.
Figure 3-23: Heavy Industry Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
200
Urban North
Heavy Industry Zone
180
Vacant and Vacant Potential (2013)

10
160
140
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
Heavy Industry Zone
12
120
100
80
60
40
8
6

4
High Growth
Medium
Growth
20
0
2013
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Urban South
40
400
35
350
30
300
250
200
150
15
10
5
2021
2026
Heavy Industry Zone
20
50
2016
2026
25
100
0
2013
2021
Urban West
Heavy Industry Zone
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
450
2016
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
153
Light Industry Zone

Figure 3-24 shows that in most areas the demand for land in the Light Industry zone does not
exceed the available vacant or vacant potential, i.e. neither the orange or blue line exceeds
the grey or yellow line. This result indicates that there is unlikely to be a shortage in the
Light Industry zone, even if we assume that the market is frozen at the historic levels of
development intensity and that a portion of the land is not available for industrial activities
(as was observed in the primary research).
It is important to note the increase in the amount of vacant and vacant potential land made
available in the Urban South area (up from 692ha to 1,055ha). This is important given the
long lead times to identify and bring industrial land to market.
Figure 3-24: Light Industry Zone Outlook to 2026: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
Urban North
Light Industry Zone
350
140
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
Vacant/Vacant Potential
(2015)
1000
Vacant/Vacant Potential (2015) less non-ind
100
80
60
40
250
200
150
100
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Urban West
Light Industry Zone
160
800
Vacant/Vacant Potential (2013)

600
High
Growth
400
200
50
20
250
Light Industry Zone
1200
300
120
0
2013
Urban South
Light Industry Zone
Land (hectares)
160
2016
2021
0
2013
2026
Medium
Growth
2016
2021
Rural North
Rural South
Light Industry Zone
Light Industry Zone
250
2026
140
200
150
100
Land (hectares)
120
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
200
100
80
60
150
100
40
50
50
20
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
0
2013
2016
2021
154
2026
3.4.2
Outlook 2041 Business Land and Floorspace

In the following graphs we compare the forecast demand (medium and high) with the
potentially developable floorspace or land (based on the Contemporary and 20% of
Theoretical), to understand the potential match by zone type and Local Board Group area
during the horizon of the Auckland Plan (2041).
We do not repeat the summary description of the graphing technique the reader should
refer back to 3.4.1 for details. The main difference between the graphs presented in this
section and the previous section is that the time period is extended by 15 years and we have
included the development potential in the FUZ.
155

The FULSS does not discuss whether the FUZ will include provision for Metropolitan Centre
zone. In the following graphs no new Metropolitan Centre zone has been added, i.e. only
PAUP zoned land was included.
Figure 3-25 shows that in most areas the demand for floorspace in the Metropolitan Centre
zones exceeds the level of potential development suggested in the scenario, i.e. the orange
or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line before 2041. This result indicates that there would
be shortages in the Metropolitan zone, if the market was frozen at the historic levels of
However, in this zone the 20% of Theoretical development enables significantly more
capacity than the current development intensity yields. A relatively small shift in the
development intensity (above current level) will accommodate all growth in the foreseeable
future.
Therefore, we do not consider that this area would experience a shortage in the horizon of
the Auckland Plan (2041). It is likely that the market will develop more intensively in the
future.
Figure 3-25: Metropolitan Centre Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
400
Urban Central
Urban North
600
20% of Theoretical
500
300
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
350
250
200
150
100
400
High Growth
300
Contemporary
200
Medium
Growth
100
50
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
0
2013
2041
Urban South
900
800
800
700
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2013
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
Urban West
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
900
2016
600
500
400
300
200
100
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
156
157
Town Centre Zone

Figure 3-26 shows that in most areas the demand for floorspace in the Town Centre zones
or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. This result indicates that in the Town Centre zone,
the market will not be satisfied by historic levels of development intensity.
However, in most cases the demand does not exceed the 20% of Theoretical scenario (green
dotted line). This indicates that if development intensity increases from historic rates the
market could be expected to satisfy demand.
The FUZ adds development potential in the Town Centre zone in the Urban South, Urban
West, Rural South and Rural North. This has alleviated development potential constraints,
for example see Rural South in Figure 3-17 above.
We note that Urban Central graph shows that the High Growth forecast (orange) getting
close to the 20% of Theoretical scenario (green dotted line). This indicates that if growth is
high in this area that the market may be required to develop at a significantly higher
intensity than has been observed in the past. However, given the level of PAUP
development potential enabled in this zone, and the length of time it takes to approach even
20% of theoretical development potential, we do not consider that this area would
experience a shortage in the horizon of the Auckland Plan.
Figure 3-26: Town Centre Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
Urban North
450
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
500
400
300
200
100
Urban South
Town Centre Zone
400
700
350
600
300
250
200
150
100
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
0
2013
2041
Urban West
350
100
80
60
40
20
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
Medium
Growth
200
0
2013
2041
80
2031
2036 2041
Town Centre Zone
70
250
200
150
100
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036
2016 2021 2026
Rural South
Town Centre Zone
50
2016
High Growth
Contemporary
300
300
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
400
Rural North
Town Centre Zone
120
0
2013
500
Floorspace (000 m2)
140
20% of Theoretical
100
50
0
2013
Town Centre Zone
800
Floorspace (000 m2)
600
Town Centre Zone
60
50
40
30
20
10
2041
0
2013
2016 2021 2026
2031
2036 2041
158
Local Centre Zone

Figure 3-27 shows that in most urban areas (except the Urban South) the demand for
floorspace in the Local Centre zones exceeds the level of development suggested by the
Contemporary scenario, i.e. the orange or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. This result
indicates that in the Town Centre zone, the market will not be satisfied by historic levels of
development intensity. However, in all areas other than the Urban Central area, demand
does not exceed the 20% of total Theoretical scenario (green dotted line). This indicates that
if development intensity increases from historic rates the market could be expected to
satisfy demand.
We note that Urban Central graph shows that the demand forecasts exceed the 20% of
Theoretical scenario (green dotted line) between 2026 and 2036. This indicates that growth
will require the market to develop at a significantly higher intensity than has been observed
in the past. This is an area that Council will need to monitor carefully in the medium term to
ensure that capacity constraints do not generate undue impacts on the economy and that
demand can be met.
The demand in the rural areas for this zone are unlikely to exceed the level of potential
unlikely to be a shortage in the rural areas for Local Centre zone, even if we assume that the
159
Figure 3-27: Local Centre Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
250
Urban North
Local Centre Zone
100
Urban South
Local Centre Zone
120
90
100
50
Floorspace (000 m2)
150
Contemporary
100
80
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
200
Local Centre Zone
70
60
50
40
30
20
20% of Theoretical
80
60
High Growth
40
Medium
Growth
20
10
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
0
2013
2041
Urban West
80
350
2026
2031
2036
0
2013 2016
2041
50
40
30
20
80
250
200
150
100
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013 2016
2026 2031 2036
2041
Local Centre Zone
70
50
10
2021
Rural South
Local Centre Zone
300
60
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
2021
Rural North
Local Centre Zone
70
0
2013
2016
Floorspace (000 m2)
0
2013
60
50
40
30
20
10
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013 2016
2021
2026 2031 2036
160
2041

The FULSS provides very little guidance on the provision for Neighbourhood Centre zone in
the FUZ. The FULSS only discusses one new Neighbourhood Centre in the Rural North of the
FUZ. We consider that as the FUZ is developed that there could be additional Neighbourhood
Centre zone land provided, specifically adding to the Urban South, Urban West, Rural South
and Rural North.
Figure 3-28 shows that in all urban areas the demand for floorspace in the Neighbourhood
Centre zones exceeds the level of development suggested by either scenario, i.e. the orange
or blue line exceeds both the grey dotted and green dotted line. This result indicates that in
the Neighbourhood Centre zone, the market will not be satisfied by historic levels of
The degree to which demand exceeds supply within this centre type means that Council will
need to evaluate the manner in which it anticipates the market meeting Neighbourhood
Centre type demands either through rezoning via the APU or allowing neighbourhood
centres to develop in-line with development over time. We note that many of the demands
will be able to be met via the increased capacity provided at other centres in the hierarchy,
including identified growth corridors or via the establishment of small shops/convenience
retail.
Figure 3-28: Neighbourhood Centre Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
Urban North
70
50
40
30
20
50
40
30
20
10
10
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
60
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
25
20
15
10
2026
2031
30
20
Contemporary
20% of Theoretical
2036
2041
35
2021
2026 2031 2036
2041
30
40
30
20
0
2013
2016
Rural South
10
2021
Medium
Growth
40
0
2013
2041
50
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
30
2016
50
Rural North
Urban West
0
2013
High
Growth
60
10
0
2013
2041
70
Floorspace (000 m2)
60
35
80
60
70
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
80
Urban South
Floorspace (000 m2)
90
25
20
15
10
5
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013
2016
2021
2026 2031 2036
161
2041
Mixed Use Zone

The FULSS does not discuss whether the FUZ will include provision for Mixed Use zone. In the
following graphs no new Mixed Use zone has been added, i.e. only PAUP zoned land was
included. We consider that as the FUZ is developed that there could be additional Mix Use
zone land provided.
Figure 3-29 shows that in most areas the demand for floorspace in the Mixed Use zone
or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line before 2041. This result indicates that in the Mixed
Use zone, the market will not be satisfied by historic levels of development intensity.
However, we note the new Mixed Use zones tend to be up-zoning of existing areas. These
up-zoned areas do not tend to have limited vacant or vacant potential land which means
that most of the parcels are not modelled in the CfG Contemporary scenario. In this zone the
Contemporary scenario is less useful as an indicator of development potential because it
ignores the up-zoning effect on most parcels. We consider that the 20% of total Theoretical
capacity scenario is a better metric of development potential for this zone (green dotted
line). The 20% of total Theoretical indicates that if development intensity increases from
historic rates the market could be expected to satisfy demand.
We note that in the Urban Central area, the demand forecasts exceed the 20% of total
Theoretical capacity scenario (green dotted line) between 2026 and 2031. This indicates that
the market may be required to develop at a significantly higher intensity than has been
observed in the past in order to satisfy demand.
However, given the total level of PAUP development potential enabled in this zone we do
not consider that these areas would experience a shortage in the horizon of the Auckland
Plan.
162
Figure 3-29: Mixed Use Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential Development
2500
Urban Central
Urban North
Urban South
Mixed Use Zone
Mixed Use Zone
Mixed Use Zone
300
450
20% of Theoretical
400
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
1500
1000
Floorspace (000 m2)
250
2000
200
150
100
500
350
300
High
Growth
250
200
150 Contemporary
Medium
Growth
100
50
50
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041
180
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
0
2013
2041
2021 2026 2031
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Mixed Use Zone
Mixed Use Zone
Mixed Use Zone
60
90
160
100
80
60
40
Floorspace (000 m2)
120
Floorspace (000 m2)
140
40
30
20
10
20
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041
2036
2041
2036
2041
80
50
Floorspace (000 m2)
2016
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
2031 2036 2041
0
2013
2016
2021 2026 2031
163

The FULSS does not discuss whether the FUZ will include provision for General Business
zone. In the following graphs no new General Business zone has been added, i.e. only PAUP
zoned land was included. We consider that as the FUZ is developed that there could be
additional General Business zone land provided.
Figure 3-30 shows that in the Urban South an Urban West areas the demand for floorspace
in the General Business zone exceeds the level of development suggested by the
Contemporary scenario, i.e. the orange or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line.
This result indicates that the market will not be satisfied by historic levels of development
intensity. However, in these areas the demand does not exceed the 20% of total Theoretical
capacity scenario (green dotted line). This indicates that if development intensity increases
from historic rates the market could be expected to satisfy demand.
The demand in the rural areas for this zone are unlikely to exceed the level of potential
unlikely to be a shortage in the rural areas for General Business zone, even if we assume that
the market is frozen at the historic levels of development intensity.
Figure 3-30: General Business Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban North
Urban South
500
20% of Theoretical
250
400
120
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
300
450
140
100
80
60
40
Floorspace (000 m2)
160
Urban Central
350
300
250
200
150
100
20
0
2013
Urban West
100
High Growth
Contemporary
50
80
50
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
Medium
Growth
180
70
160
60
140
50
40
30
20
10
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041
0
2013
2016
2021 2026 2031
2036
2041
Rural South
Floorspace (000 m2)
100
Floorspace (000 m2)
150
2016
0
2013
Rural North
200
Floorspace (000 m2)
150
50
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041
250
200
120
100
80
60
40
20
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013
2016
2021 2026 2031
2036
164
2041
Business Park Zone

The FULSS does not discuss whether the FUZ will include provision for Business Park zone. In
the following graphs no new Business Park zone has been added, i.e. only PAUP zoned land
was included. We consider that as the FUZ is developed that there could be additional
Business Park zone land provided.
Figure 3-31 shows in Urban North the demand for floorspace in the Business Park zone does
not exceed the level of development suggested by the Contemporary scenario, i.e. neither
the orange or blue line exceeds the grey dotted line. This result indicates that there is
unlikely to be a shortage in the Business Park zone, even if we assume that the market is
frozen at the historic levels of development intensity.
The Urban Central graph suggests that a high growth forecast could exceed the development
potential in the scenarios. This indicates that the market may be required to develop at a
much higher intensity than has been observed in the past. However, demand growth falls
well short of the 20% of total theoretical capacity.
Therefore, based on the level of PAUP development potential enabled we do not consider
that these areas would experience a shortage in the horizon of the Auckland Plan.
Figure 3-31: Business Park Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
120
350
100
300
80
60
40
20% of Theoretical
250
200
150
Contemporary
100
High Growth
20
0
2013 2016 2021
Business Park
400
Floorspace (000 m2)
Floorspace (000 m2)
140
Urban North
Business Park
50
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013
Medium
Growth
2016
2021 2026 2031 2036
2041
165
Heavy Industry Zone

The FULSS does not discuss how the industrial land in the FUZ will be distributed to Heavy
Industry zone or Light Industry zone. As is stated in 3.3.6 we have not allocated additional
FUZ land to the Heavy Industry zone, i.e. only PAUP zoned land was included. We consider
that as the FUZ is developed that there could be additional Heavy Industry zone land
provided.
Figure 3-32 shows that demand for land in the Heavy Industry zone in the Urban Central and
Urban South areas does not exceed the level of vacant or vacant potential suggested by the
CfG, i.e. neither the orange or blue line exceeds the yellow line. This result indicates that
there is unlikely to be a shortage in the Heavy Industry zone, even if we assume that the
However, the results for Urban North and Urban West suggest that available land in these
areas may be exhausted by 2041. We note that the reader should observe that these two
areas are very small relative to Urban South. While there may be a shortage in these areas,
they could easily be accommodated within Urban South. We consider that the shortfall in
these areas is only a minor issue, which would have little effect on the Auckland economy.
Figure 3-32: Heavy Industry Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban Central
200
Urban North
Heavy Industry Zone
180

10
160
140
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
Heavy Industry Zone
12
120
100
80
60
40
High Growth
6 Vacant and Vacant
Potential (2015)
4
Medium
Growth
20
0
2013 2016 2021
2026
2031
2036
0
2013
2041
Urban South
45
400
40
350
35
300
250
200
150
15
5
2026
2031
2036
2041
Heavy Industry Zone
20
10
2021
2041
25
50
2016
2036
30
100
0
2013
2031
Urban West
Heavy Industry Zone
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
450
2016 2021 2026
0
2013
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
166
Light Industry Zone

Figure 3-33 shows that in most areas the demand for land in the Light Industry zone does not
exceed the available vacant or vacant potential by 2041, i.e. neither the orange or blue line
exceeds the grey yellow line. This result indicates that there is unlikely to be a shortage in
the Light Industry zone, even if we assume that the market is frozen at the historic levels of
development intensity and that a portion of the land is not available for industrial activities
(as was observed in the primary research).
However, we can expect the level of demand for Light Industry zone in the Urban Central
area to exceed the available potential developable area by 2041. We consider that the
constraints in the Auckland Isthmus may force demand outward to other areas. However,
given the level of vacant and vacant potential in other areas this constraint is unlikely to
result in a negative effect on the Auckland economy. We note that the inclusion of land
zoned for industrial activities in the FUZ has been taken into consideration.
Figure 3-33: Light Industry Zone Outlook to 2041: Demand and Potential
Development
Urban North
Urban South
Light Industry Zone
Light Industry Zone
350
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
200
150
100
1400
300
1200
250
1000
Land (hectares)
250
Urban Central
Light Industry Zone
200
150
100
800
600
400
50
50
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041
600
0
2013
200
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
0
2013
2041
2016
2021 2026 2031
2036
Urban West
Rural North
Rural South
Light Industry Zone
Light Industry Zone
Light Industry Zone
800
600
Vacant/Vacant Potential (2015)
700
500
2041
500 Vacant/Vacant Potential (2013)
200
Land (hectares)
300
Land (hectares)
Land (hectares)
600
400
500
400
300
400 Vacant/Vacant Potential (2015)
less non-ind
300
200
200
100
0
2013 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041
0
2013
High
Growth
100
100
2016
2021
2026
2031
2036
2041
0
2013
Medium Growth
2016
2021 2026 2031
2036
167
2041
3.5
Stage 3 Findings
Finally, we restate the IHPs questions and then discuss the results to provide an answer to
the questions.
IHP - Question
In light of the above (Stages 1 and 2), how do the PAUP provisions meet the projected
To understand whether the PAUP provisions meet the needs of the economy we have
assessed demand and supply at two key points of time, the horizon of the PAUP (2026) and
the horizon of the Auckland Plan (2041).
The horizon of the PAUP was analysed by comparing the medium and high economic
forecasts to 2026 and the supply provided in the PAUP zones (as estimated by the CfG and
the minor business areas). This assessment provides an understanding of whether the PAUP
zones provide sufficient supply for the horizon of the PAUP, i.e. until 2026. The results
indicate the following,
Generally, there is sufficient vacant and vacant potential land in the industrial zones
to accommodate expected demand, with most areas having over 13 years of land
available under both the medium or high growth forecasts (i.e. enough supply until
after 2026). In detail, there is a longer term supply (over decade and half), across
most of the Local Board Groups for Light Industry zone and Heavy Industry zone.
However, we note that this assessment did not delve into the nature of land
available (in terms of scale or fragmentation) or extent to which each economic
sector demands large scale parcels.114
Generally, there is sufficient development potential in the commercial zones to
accommodate expected demand. In most cases the forecasted demand can be
accommodated even if the market is assumed to be frozen at historic levels of
development intensity (i.e. Contemporary scenario).
There are some instances where demand exceeds the historic level of development
intensity. In these cases the market will need to increase development intensity
beyond historic levels (mostly in Urban Central and across Auckland in the
Neighbourhood Centre zone). However, the increase in development intensity is
well below the vast amounts of enabled development provided by the PAUP rules
(generally less than 20% of the PAUP enabled development).
The rules in the PAUP provide sufficient development potential to meet most needs
of the market, but the physical constraints in terms of vacant and vacant potential
land mean that the intensity of land use (built form) will have to increase from
historic levels (i.e. increased height and/or coverage envelopes).
114
See Section 5 of Nunns, .P (2014) PAUP Business Growth: Analysis of projected floorspace demand and
168
This study has also assessed the demand and supply of commercial and industrial land over
the horizon of the Auckland Plan. This assessment compared the medium and high
economic forecasts to 2041 and the supply provided in the PAUP zones and the FUZ (as
suggested by the FULSS). This assessment provides an understanding of whether the PAUP
zones and the FUZ provide enough development potential to accommodate demand for the
horizon of the Auckland Plan, i.e. until 2041. The results indicate in most zones and locations
demand for commercial space and industrial land by 2041 is not expected to exceed
development potential in the PAUP and FUZ. We do not present a detailed summary of the
results for the long run assessment in this part of our findings.
169
Further/Other Analysis
We note that while every best effort has been made to address the questions posed by the
IHP, the study may highlight areas that the IHP may like further information. For example,
1. Retail Assessment: much of the focus of this report is on the Light Industry zone. It
may be that the IHP requires more detail on other aspects of business land demand
(i.e. retail). We consider that the work undertaken by Ms Fairgray and others on
retail should be viewed as the most detailed available information on this topic.
However, following rezoning capacities will have changed. It is possible to isolate
retail capacity from commercial and report on this separately, if required.
2. Case studies of Light Industry Business areas: another example is the level of detail
presented in the Light Industry survey. This study (at 190 pages) did not attempt to
undertake case studies or maps of each individual Light Industry zone business area.
However, while this was not required to answer the IHPs questions we consider that
it may be useful for the panel. As such we are currently developing a booklet of
maps.
3. Parcel Size Distribution: we also note that in a previous report by Mr Nunns there
was an analysis of parcel size. Mr Nunns report states that It is important to
understand the size distribution of vacant parcels. Some activities, such as
warehousing or large-format retail, may require large sites to operate efficiently. In
addition, large parcels may also be more feasible to develop for smaller-scale
activities due to economies of scale in the development process. Broadly speaking, it
may be the case that large parcels are more market-attractive for development in
some sectors. We agree with this statement, however CfGS information was only
made available in the past few weeks and therefore this type of analysis has not
possible in the timeframes.
4. Detailed Outlook: the panel may wish to have detailed understanding of future
outlook, in terms of demand and supply by particular PAUP Activity types, zones and
business areas. In our view this level of forecasting would not be possible in the
time available (it may not be mathematically tractable). Solving this problem would
require thousands of forecasts, i.e. 9 zones by 50 PAUP Activity types by roughly 440
Business areas which would require 200,000 unique forecasts. Therefore we do not
consider it sensible to undertake this analysis.
In order to deliver timely answers on the IHPs questions, we have not attempted to second
guess further analysis that the panel may wish to undertake or go beyond the scope set out
at the beginning of this assessment. However, as outlined above there are a few areas
where it may be sensible to provide more information requiring further analysis.
170
References
Auckland Council (2015) 051-054 Auckland Council CLOSING REMARKS Annexure A.
Auckland Council (2015) 065 Auckland Council (Jennifer Caldwell) CLOSING STATEMENT.
Auckland Council (2015) 051-054 - Auckland Council Memorandum 2 (Revised Economic
Analysis of Light Industry Zone).
Auckland Council (2015) Future Urban Land Supply Strategy (Adopted Nov).
Auckland Council (2015) Parcel Database.
Auckland Council (2015) Parcel GIS Layer.
Auckland Council (2015) Proposed Zones GIS Layer (Adopted December).
Auckland Council (2015) Rating Property Database.
Auckland Council (2016) Capacity for Growth Model Business Areas.
Auckland Council (2016) PAUP Precinct database.
Balderston, K. and Fredrickson, C. (2014). Capacity for growth study 2013 (Proposed
Auckland Unitary Plan): methodology and assumptions. Auckland Council technical report,
TR2014/009.
Benson Au-Yeung, Tan Yigitcanlar, Severine Mayere (2009) Brisbane Urban Growth Model:
Integrated Sustainable Urban and Infrastructure Management in Brisbane.
Huang, T. (2016) Map Booklet of Outliers in the Light Industry Zone (to come).
Nunns, .P (2014) PAUP Business Growth: Analysis of projected floorspace demand and
Market Economics (2013) Auckland Business Futures Model.
Market Economics (2014) Economic Future Model.
Market Economics (ongoing FoRST project) Sustainable Pathways Two Land Use Change.
PropertyIQ (2014) Floorspace and Use Database.
Statistics New Zealand (2006) Australia and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification
2006.
Statistics New Zealand (2014b) Census 2013.
171
Yeoman Rodney (2013) Melbourne Employment and Population Forecasts: Growth

Allocation Model.
172
Appendix A: Auckland City Economic Future

Model
Introduction
This Appendix provides a summary of the technical specification of the Auckland City
Economic Futures Model (AEFM) developed by Market Economics Limited.
This appendix consists of five sub-sections. The first section provides a general introduction
to the AEFM model, while the second gives a more basic introduction to input-output
modelling. The third section provides mathematical specifications of input-output model
and the fourth section explains derivation of the economic impacts using input-output
model. The final section presents and describes the basic causal structure of the AEFM
model.
1.1 Introduction to the EFM
Underpinning the AEFM is a multi-regional economic input-output model. It is multi-regional
in the sense that it captures economic and environmental implications of development, in
the case of the Auckland Region, within a region itself, the rest of North Island and the rest
of the nation. A key feature of the model is that it can be used to evaluate not only the direct
economic effects of changes in final consumption, but also the associated indirect (i.e.
through supply-chain) and induced (i.e. through consumer spending) economic impacts.
The model is run using scenarios. It then maps the growth path of each scenario, for 48
industries within three different regions, along with households, over 20 years. For each
industry, and households, it identifies major economic indicators (i.e. gross output, value
added and employment) as well as delivered energy requirements (e.g. petrol, diesel),
indicators of other environmental resource requirements and residual generation (e.g. land
use and energy-related air emissions (e.g. CO2, CH4)).
An application of the AEFM typically involves an evaluation of a baseline business as usual
(BAU) scenario. This baseline scenario is developed on the premise that the economy
continues to function in the same way as it has over recent times, with the scenario typically
used as a point of comparison against which alternative development scenarios may be
assessed. It can be noted that the default settings of the AEFM model are that of the BAU
scenario.
All scenarios are established by generating future projections of the value of goods and
services consumed by final demand categories (i.e. household consumption, export
consumption and gross fixed capital formation (GFKF)), over a 20 year period.
173
It is important to note that the AEFM is not a crystal ball; no model can predict the future.
The AEFM simply evaluates economic and environmental impacts under a restricted set of
consumption and supply assumptions formulated as a scenario. Nevertheless, evaluation of
each scenario provides critical insights into the potential economic and environmental
impacts which may exist.
1.2 Input-Output Modelling
An important idea to understand is that the AEFM model is primarily based on a multiregional input-output modelling framework. In this section we provide a brief introduction
to input-output modelling. Readers who are interested in learning more on this modelling
approach can refer to texts such as Richardson (1972), OConnor and Henry (1975) and Miller
and Blair (2009).
In short, input-output modelling begins with a set of data measuring the flows of money or
goods among various sectors or industrial groups of an economy in a given year. These flows
are summarised by an input-output table, which is in essence an array of the purchases
made by each industry (its inputs) and the sales of each industry (its outputs) from and to
each other industry in the total economy. A schematic example of an input-output table is
provided in Appendix A.
With the information provided in an input output table, and some mathematical
manipulation, it is possible to formulate a table that is referred to as the Table of Direct and
Indirect Coefficients. This table constitutes one of the primary tools of input-output analysis.
Each entry in this matrix indicates the total (direct and indirect) output from the row
industry that is required in order to produce one unit of production of the column industry.
A simple Table of Direct and Indirect Resource Requirements for a hypothetical three-sector
economy is provided in Table A.1. This table tells us, for example, that in order to produce
one unit of output in the agriculture sector, 0.23 units of output are required to be produced
(directly and indirectly) from the manufacturing industry.
Table A.1
Table of Direct and Indirect Requirements Coefficients
From
To
Agriculture
Manufacturing
Services
Agriculture
Manufacturing
Services
1.43
0.23
0.11
0.39
1.12
0.56
0.21
0.66
1.24
The type of data provided in Table A.1 can be used to derive very useful information about
an economy. It can indicate how much total production of all intermediate and final goods
would be needed to satisfy any desired pattern of final demands (i.e. goods and services
consumed by households, government, for gross fixed capital formation and for exports). Of
course the input-output framework utilised in constructing the AEFM model contains
significantly more industries than the example provided above (48 industry types by the
174
number of regions). The multi-regional structure enables the model to capture the impacts
of growth within the study area on the wider regional and national economies and vice
versa.
1.3 Calculation of Input-Output Matrices
In order to determine the impacts associated with changes in land use, household
consumption, exports and GFKF various input-output matrices were required. A brief
explanation of these matrices is given below. Steps 1 and 3 are used to generate the Leontief
Inverse Matrix in Step 6, while Steps 2 and 4 similarly generate the Ghosh Inverse Matrix in
Step 7. The Leontief Inverse and Ghosh Inverse matrices are used respectively to derive the
economic impacts of changes in final demand (i.e. household consumption, exports, gross
fixed capital formation) and changes in primary inputs (i.e. land use).
Step 1: Calculate Leontief Technical Coefficients Table A
A Leontief technical coefficients matrix was generated from the multi-regional input-output
table described above. This technical coefficients table records the purchase patterns of
each sector of the economy. Specifically, each technical coefficient, aij, is derived by dividing
each element in the multi-regional input-output table, xij, by its corresponding total gross
input value, Xi. Reference can be made to Appendix A for a further description of the
Leontief technical coefficients (known as the simply the technical coefficients table).
Step 2: Calculate Ghosh Technical Coefficients Table B
A Ghosh technical coefficients matrix was also generated from the multi-regional inputoutput table calculated in Phase 1. This technical coefficients table records the sales patterns
of each sector of the economy. Specifically, each technical coefficient, bij, is derived by
dividing each element in the multi-regional input-output table, xij, by its corresponding total
gross output value, Xi.
Step 3: Calculate the Leontief Matrix (I - A)
The calculation of the Leontief Matrix is simply an intermediate step in the calculation of the
Leontief Inverse Matrix in Step 5. It is derived by subtracting the technical coefficients table
generated in Step 1 from an identity matrix i.e. (I A).
Step 4: Calculate the Ghosh Matrix (I - B)
The calculation of the Ghosh Matrix, like the Leontief Matrix, is simply an intermediate step
in the calculation of the Ghosh Inverse Matrix in Step 6. It is derived by subtracting the
Ghosh technical coefficients table generated in Step 2 from an identity matrix.
Step 5: Calculate Leontief Inverse Matrix (I - A)-1
The Leontief Inverse Matrix is one of the two key input-output matrices generated in the
model. This table shows the direct and indirect requirements needed to produce one
additional unit of final demand in a given sector. In the context of the EFM, the Leontief
175
Inverse Matrix may be applied in conjunction with future projections of final demand
consumption to produce future estimates of gross output and, in turn, growth rates through
time.
Step 6: Calculate Ghosh Inverse Matrix (I - B)-1
The Ghosh Inverse Matrix is the second of the two key input-output matrices generated in
the model. This table shows the direct and indirect requirements needed to produce one
additional unit of primary input in a given sector. In the context of the EFM, the Ghosh
Matrix may be applied in conjunction with the future projections of land use change to
produce future estimates of gross output and, in turn, growth rates through time. These
rates, along with those developed in Step 5, may then be used to determine the economic
impacts associated with given supply and demand pathways.
1.4 Derivation of Impacts
The matrices developed in Steps 1 to 6 can be used to determine future estimates of key
economic aggregates (i.e. value added and employment by sector) given estimates of future
final demand (i.e. given changes in household and/or export consumption) and/or future
primary inputs (i.e. resulting from land use changes). Specifically, this is achieved the
following four equations (note m = n):
X = (I - A)-1 Y,
1.1
Where X is a (m x 1) gross output vector, I is an (m x n) identity matrix, A is a (m x n) Leontief
technical coefficients matrix and Y is a (m x 1) final demand vector. And, by rearrangement:
Y = (I - A) X.
1.2
Similarly,
Xt = P (I - B)-1
1.3
Where Xt is the (1 x n) gross output vector transposed115, B is a (m x n) matrix of Ghosh
technical coefficients and P is a (1 x n) vector of primary inputs. And, by rearrangement:
P = Xt (I - B).
1.4
Equation 1.1 may be used to determine gross output given changes in final demand, while
equation 1.2 may be used to determined final demand given a known level of gross output.
Similarly, equation 1.3 may be used to determine the gross input of a sector given a known
115
Note that in input-output analysis the gross input of a sector must equate with its gross output. Hence, the
terms gross output is used interchangeably with gross input.
176
level of primary inputs, and finally, equation 1.4 may be used to determine primary inputs
from a known level of gross input. Using these equations and future estimates of final
demand and land use changes gross output by sector may be established for each reporting
year. And, in turn, output growth rates, between periods, by industry may then be
determined.
1.5 Model Structure
Figure A.1
How does the AEFM work?
Figure A.1 is a causal diagram depicting how the AEFM produces future estimates of gross
output, employment and value added (VA) by sector for each reporting period. The dynamics
of the model are explained below.
The demand-based drivers of the AEFM are growth rates established for household
consumption, international exports and GFKF. Further details on the demand-based drivers
can be found in the discussion below. The agricultural sectors are subjected to a supplybased drivers where quantity of lands are constrained.
Summing the household consumption, export and GFKF estimates provides an estimate of
the final demand vector, Y, at time n+1. Using Equation 1.1 a demand driven estimate of
gross output by sector, Xi, of the economy may then be derived (labelled gross output (1, all
sectors) [n+1] in Figure A.1). Similarly, a supply driven estimate of gross output (labelled
gross output (2, ag sectors only) [n+1]) for the five key land use sectors may also be
derived. This is achieved by determining the rate of growth in primary inputs by sector
177
(allowing for both land use change and total factor productivity (labelled land use
productivity [n+1])) and applying this to gross output at time [n].
Obviously, gross output (1, all sectors) [n+1] differs from gross output (2, ag sectors only)
[n+1] for the five key land use sectors. In this circumstance, we have adopted the
convention that the land use supply constraints take precedence over demand consumption.
Operationally, this is implemented by adjusting the demand driven estimates of final
demand so as to account for the supply driven interventions and, in turn, to determine a
new (and final) estimate of gross output (labelled gross output (3) [n+1]). Equation 1.3 is
essential in this transformation; it ensures that the forward linkage impacts associated with
changes in land use are appropriately accounted for.
Finally, the growth rate of gross output from time n to n+1 may be determined for each
sector. These rates, along with labour force productivities, are used to project forward
estimates of value added and employment across 48 industries for the 25 year study period.
It is important to note that these estimates incorporate all economic interdependencies not
only between industries within the region (say, if in the North Island), but also rest of North
Island and South Island economies.
It is important to note the following caveats of the AEFM:
Interdependencies. The model assumes that the relative way in which goods and
services are produced in 2007 will hold through time. This means that, in relative
terms, the recipe for how goods and services are produced today, remains constant
across time, as also does the pattern of sales to industry and consumers. This
assumption is reasonable for the short to medium term, say 5 to 10 years, but as we
move further away from the base year it becomes more questionable.
Price changes are not modelled. Although the model captures the impacts of
changes in both supply and demand it is not an equilibrium model, and thus prices
do not adjust as constraints are imposed. By corollary, all dollar values reported are
in constant dollar terms for the financial year ending March 2007.
Assumptions and Data

This section describes the primary data sources and assumptions employed in regards to the
AEFM. This section is separated into two sub-sections: Base Model and Final Demands. The
first sub-section describes the input-output analysis assumptions and data involved in setting
up the primary framework upon which the AEFM is based, along with the assumptions that
allow the data generated by the input-output framework to be transferred into a various
economic indicators. The second section specifies the assumptions and data utilised in the
baseline BAU scenario in regards to the final demand drivers (household, gross fixed capital
and export demand).
2.1 Base Model
178
2.1.1
Input-Output Framework
Assumptions
The input-output framework utilised in the AEFM is derived from a multi-regional input
output table generated for single base year. As described in the above introduction to inputoutput modelling, a primary application of an input-output model is generating coefficients
describing the total production of all intermediate and final goods required to satisfy any
desired pattern of final demands. In the AEFM, the derivation of the base input-output table
and the coefficients relies on four important assumptions:
Homogeneity. This states that each industry in an input-output table produces

only one output. Implicit in this assumption is the notion that all businesses
that constitute an industry use the same product mix in the production of this
one output.
Linearity. This presumes that the ratio of inputs to outputs decreases and
increases in a linear nature. Inherently this assumes that there are constant
returns to scale in production and that the elasticity of substitution between
inputs is zero. This linear assumption is necessary in order to derive the direct
and indirect coefficients.
Constant coefficients. The direct and indirect requirements coefficients are

assumed to stay constant over time. This assumption ignores the effects of
technological change and price occurring over time.
Instantaneous Adjustment. The estimates of industry output generated by the

AEFM are based on static snapshots of future final demand. The model is not
able to represent delays or bottlenecks in the availability of inputs or in the
production of outputs thus assuming in effect instantaneous adjustment.
Data
The base input-output tables utilised in the AEFM are for the year 2006-07. These tables are
derived from the input-output table derived from the latest national input-output table
developed by Market Economics Ltd (M.E). The process in generating these input-output
tables involves creating a national input-output table based on the latest 2006-07 National
Supply and Use Tables published by Statistics New Zealand (SNZ) (Statistics New Zealand,
2012) and then regionalised as per Smith (2015).
2.1.2
Economic, Energy and Emission Indicators
In addition to the assumptions described above, there are assumptions incorporated in the
model that allow for the industry output estimates generated by the model to be translated
into economic and energy indicators. The relevant assumptions and data sources are as
follows:
179
Value added by industry It is assumed that for any given industry and year, the
ratio of value added contribution by that industry ($) to total output by that
industry ($) remains the same as the base year data (2006-07). The base year
data pertaining to value added by industry is derived from the base inputoutput table
Employment by industry Initial estimates of employment are derived for each
industry by multiplying the estimated output for each industry by the
respective industrys base year ratio of employment count (ECs) and modified
employment counts (MECs)116 to total output. These estimates are then
adjusted according to estimated multifactor productivity rate derived base on
the national multifactor produced by Statistics New Zealand along with
agglomeration elasticity study conducted by NZ transport Agency. Base year
data pertaining to employment by industry is derived from Statistics New
Zealands Business Demographic Statistics, Employee Count (ECs) time series.
Delivered Energy and Emissions by industry and households Similar to value
added, it is assumed that for any given industry and year, the ratio of delivered
energy and emissions by that industry to total output by that industry ($)
remains the same as the base year data (2006-07). The base year delivered
energy and emissions data by industry is calculated by updating Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) 2012 Energy End Use Database to
the base year.
2.2 BAU Final Demands

This section sets out the BAU scenario assumptions incorporated within the AEFM model in
regards to the three principal categories of final demand: Households, Gross Fixed Capital
Formation and Exports. As noted above, these constitute the primary demand-based drivers
of the model.
2.2.1
Households
In order to derive estimates of future change in household demands for goods and services,
we rely primarily on projections of future population growth within the Auckland Region, the
rest of the North Island and the South Island. Except as qualified below by the consumption
effect and the population ageing effect, it is assumed that each person within a selected
region consumes a constant mix of goods and services. Thus any population growth for the
region will result in a proportional increase in the amount of goods and services consumed.
As the AEFM model is based on a multi-regional framework, population growth within other
New Zealand Regions or TAs also constitutes part of the household final demand driver. The
116
Modified Employee Counts or MECs are a measure of employment developed by Market Economics Ltd (M.E)
based on Statistics New Zealands (SNZs) Employee Counts (ECs). According to SNZ, the number of ECs is a head
count of all salary and wage earners for a reference period. This includes most employees but does not capture
all working proprietors individuals who pay themselves a salary or wage. The MEC statistics developed by ME
thus include an estimate of the number of working proprietors.
180
estimates of population growth by age sex cohort are derived from Statistics New Zealands
2013-43 Sub-national Population Projections by Age and Sex.
The household consumption effect has been incorporated within the model to account for
the fact that over recent years, households have been consuming more per year. This trend
is thought to be a result of several factors including increases in income through salary
increases, leveraging off house price gains (i.e. debt based borrowing), redirection of income
from savings to disposable income, increases in government transfers and so on. The
baseline setting for the household consumption effect is 1.4 percent per year. In other
words, it is assumed that each person on average consumed 1.4 percent more goods and
services each year.
Population age structure also has important implications for consumption levels and
economic growth. This is because each age group in a population tends to behave
differently, with distinct economic consequences: The young require intensive investment in
education and health, prime-age adults supply labour and savings, and the aged require
health care and retirement income. Therefore when the relative size of each of these groups
in a population changes, so does the relative intensity of these economic behaviours. In
order to account for the implications of changing demographics in the BAU scenario, we
have assigned differing consumption scalars to each population cohort. The value of total
consumption for each person in the 5-9 year age group is, for example assumed to be
approximately 81.5 percent of that of persons in the 40-44 year age group. The scalars are
derived from the NZ Treasurys study on the implications of population ageing (Guest, Bryant
and Scobie, 2003).
2.2.2
Gross Fixed Capital Formation
Future GFKF estimates were generated by applying long-run average growth rates in capital
formation to the base year GFKF estimates by industry, as obtained from the multi-regional
input-output table. The growth rates are determined from statistical time series
(econometric) analysis on the national level data. Selection of the time series technique
applied depends on the underlying dynamic behaviour of the sector output being analysed.
Where historical observations fluctuate around a long-run mean, stationary time series
methods are applied (e.g. the AMRA process). Where historical observations indicate a
consistent upwards or downwards movement, non-stationary time series methods are used
(e.g. Holts method). The data utilised in the time series analysis for GFKF is derived from
Statistics New Zealands National Accounts Gross Fixed Capital Formation by Industry.
Regional growth rates in GFKF by sector are assumed to be consistent with the estimated
national growth rates determined through these methods.
2.2.3
Exports
Like GFKF, future export projections for most sectors are generated by applying the national
long-run average growth rates for export commodities by sector to the 2006-07 international
export estimates obtained from the multi-regional input-output table. Again as with GFKF,
the long run growth rates by export commodity are determined according to econometric
181
analysis and the choice of technique applied depends on the underlying dynamic behaviour
of the sector being analysed. The data utilised in this time series analysis is derived from
Statistics New Zealands Year Ending March Harmonised System data for commodity exports
and Balance of Payments for exports of services. Regional growth rates in exports by sector
are assumed to be consistent with the estimated national growth rates determined through
these methods.
REFERENCES
Guest, R., Bryant, J. and Scobie, G. (2003). Population Ageing in New Zealand: Implications
for Living Standards and the Optimal Rate of Saving. New Zealand Treasury Working Paper
Series 03/10, Wellington.
OConnor, R. and Henry, E.W. (1975) Input-output analysis and its applications, Hafner Press,
New York.
Richardson, H. (1972) Input-Output and Regional Economics, Weidenfeld and Nicolson,
London.
Smith, N., Zhang, Y., Cardwell, R., McDonald, G., Kim, J-H., & Murray, C. (2015). Development
of a Regional Social Accounting Framework for New Zealand, GNS Science Technical Report
(In Press), GNS Science, Lower Hutt.
182
Appendix B: Indicator Codes (Stage 2.1)

Table 1: Floorspace coding
LANDUSE
LANDUSE DESECRIPTION
EDA Code
80
MULTI-USE WITHIN COMMERCIAL
81
RETAIL & TAVERNS
1
1
82
SERVICES - BEAUTY SALON ETC
84
OFFICES
85
COMMERCIAL CAR PARKING
89
COMMERCIAL - VACANT
B1
BUSINESS 1
B2
BUSINESS 2
B3
BUSINESS 3
DB1
DES.BUSINESS 1
DB2
DES.BUSINESS 2
DMWB5
DES.MOTORWAY BUSINESS 5
DMWB6
DES.MOTORWAY BUSINESS 6
FBNC
FLAT BUSH NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE
18
MINERAL EXTRACTION
19
RURAL INDUSTRY - VACANT
70
MULTIPLE USE WITHIN INDUSTRIAL
70
MULTI-USE WITHIN INDUSTRIAL
71
INDUSTRIAL - FOOD, DRINK ETC
72
INDUSTRIAL - TEXTILES, LEATHER
73
INDUSTRIAL - TIMBER PRODUCTS
74
INDUSTRIAL - BLDG PRODUCTS
75
ENGINEERING - METALWORKING
76
INDUSTRIAL - CHEMICAL ETC.
76
INDUSTRIAL - CHEMICAL ETC
77
OTHER INDUSTRIES
78
DEPOTS YARDS ETC
78
DEPOT YARDS ETC
79
VACANT LAND - INDUSTRIES
79
VACANT LAND - INUDUSTRIES
83
WHOLESALE
B4
BUSINESS 4
B5
BUSINESS 5
B6
BUSINESS 6
DB4
DES.BUSINESS 4
DB5
DES.BUSINESS 5
DB6
DES.BUSINESS 6
QRY
QUARRY
183
Table 2: Sector coding predominant use
184
Appendix C: Maps of additional sites

visited in field survey
1. Albany Highway
185
2. Te Atatu
186
3. Rosebank Road
187
4. Otahuhu West
188
5. Ti Rakau Dr
189
Appendix D: Locations of areas covered

by the field survey and date visited
Location
Huapai
Kumeu East
Dairy Flat
Albany
Constellation Drive
Barrys Point
Wairau
Northcote
Birkenhead
Henderson
Lincon Rd
Grafton
Parnell
Lynmall
Hillsborough
Wesley
Mt Wellington
Penrose
Onehunga
Otahuhu
Hingaia
Takanini
Narrow Neck
Howick
Greenmount
Takanini South
Wellsford
Snells
Matakana
Westgate
Favona
Manukau
Papakura
Pukekohe
Ti Rakau Dr
Otahuhu West
Rosebank
Te Atatu
Albany Hwy
Ward code
7601
7601
7601
7602
7602
7603
7603
7603
7603
7604
7604
7605
7607
7605
7606
7607
7607
7608
7609
7608
7609
7609
7611
7612
7612
7603
7610
7611
7612
7601
7601
7601
7604
7611
7611
7612
7613
7610
7611
7606
7604
7602
Ward name
Rodney Ward
Rodney Ward
Rodney Ward
Albany Ward
Albany Ward
North Shore Ward
North Shore Ward
North Shore Ward
North Shore Ward
Waitakere Ward
Whau Ward
Whau Ward
Orakei Ward
Orakei Ward
Manukau Ward
North Shore Ward
Howick Ward
Manukau Ward
Rodney Ward
Rodney Ward
Rodney Ward
Waitakere Ward
Manukau Ward
Manukau Ward
Franklin Ward
Howick Ward
Manukau Ward
Whau Ward
Waitakere Ward
Albany Ward
Date
18-Jan
18-Jan
14-Jan
13-Jan
13-Jan
7-Jan
11-Jan
11-Jan
11-Jan
19-Jan
19-Jan
15-Jan
15-Jan
15-Jan
19-Jan
15-Jan
15-Jan
22-Jan
22-Jan
21-Jan
21-Jan
21-Jan
25-Jan
25-Jan
25-Jan
18-Jan
25-Jan
26-Jan
25-Jan
Not surveyed
Not surveyed
Not surveyed
19-Jan
25-Jan
26-Jan
25-Jan
Not surveyed
16-Feb
16-Feb
15-Feb
15-Feb
15-Feb
Note: Location names are not offical area names, merely used for internal purposes
190

081a Ak CNCL - General - PAUP Business Land - Summary of Land Demand by Activitiy and PAUP Supply - Further Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

081a Ak CNCL - General - PAUP Business Land - Summary of Land Demand by Activitiy and PAUP Supply - Further Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PAUP Business Land

Land Demand by Activity and PAUP Supply

Prepared for: Independent Hearing Panel

Date: March 2016

PAUP Business Land

Independent Hearing Panel

Rodney Yeoman Market Economics

Market Economics Limited

STAGE 1: INDUSTRY GROWTH AND ACTIVITY ............................................20

STAGE 1.1 PROJECT GROWTH BY BUSINESS SECTOR.................................................................... 20

STAGE 1.2 BUSINESS SECTORS TO PAUP ACTIVITY..................................................................... 22

STAGE 2: LIGHT INDUSTRY EXISTING ACTIVITY ..........................................51

STAGE 2.1 EXPLORATORY DATA ANALYSIS OF LIGHT INDUSTRY ..................................................... 52

STAGE 2.2 PRIMARY RESEARCH OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRY ZONE ..................................................... 65

STAGE 3: MARKET OUTCOMES..................................................................85

STAGE 3.1 LAND USE INTENSITY BY SECTOR AND ZONE ............................................................... 85

STAGE 3.4 LAND USE PAUP OUTLOOK BY ZONE..................................................................... 142

STAGE 3 FINDINGS........................................................................................................... 168

FURTHER/OTHER ANALYSIS ....................................................................170

APPENDIX C: MAPS OF ADDITIONAL SITES VISITED IN FIELD SURVEY ..................185

FIGURE 3-12: ILLUSTRATION OF VACANT POTENTIAL IN CFG ...................................................................... 119

Auckland Economic Futures Model

Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel

Capacity for Growth

Capacity for Growth Study

Exploratory Data Analysis

Floor Area Ratio

Future Urban Land Supply Strategy

Future Urban Zone

Gross Floor Area

Independent Hearings Panel

Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan

Statistics New Zealand

Specifically developed sub-grouping of Economic Industry. The Economic

Local Board Group:

A spatial definition based on groupings of Local Boards in Auckland. In this

PAUP Activity Table:

Waitemata, Albert-Eden, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki and Puketapapa Local Board areas.

PAUP Activity type:

The floorspace within a building that is not let by a business.

Parcels of land for which there are there are no buildings.

It is important to note that a large proportion of employment in the Auckland

Most growth in employment is expected in economic sectors that generally prefer to

Industrial activities: This activity accounts for 7% of expected growth in

Offices up to 500m2 GFA per site: Accounts for 5% of expected growth in

See Glossary above for definition.

Healthcare facilities and Hospitals PAUP Activity types accounts for 4% of

Generally, there is sufficient development potential in the commercial zones to

See Glossary above for definition.

Stage 1: Industry Growth and Activity

Stage 1.1 Project growth by business sector

Employment in Auckland is expected to grow by 145,000 (Medium) to 182,000

Market Economics (2014) Economic Future Model.

Table 1-1: Regional Employment Projections by AEFM Industry, 2013-2041

Stage 1.2 Business sectors to PAUP activity

PAUP Activity Tables

Table 1-2: PAUP Activity Status by PAUP Activity and by Zone

Offices up to 100m2 GFA per site

Offices not otherwise provided for

Concordance between PAUP Activity types and Economic sectors

PAUP Activity Description

Horticulture and fruit growing

Sheep, beef cattle and grain farming