Planning Committee Agenda 28 November

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Planning Committee will be held on:
Date: Tuesday, 28 November 2017

Time: 9.30am
Meeting Room: Reception Lounge
Venue: Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland
Planning Committee
OPEN AGENDA
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson Cr Chris Darby

Members Cr Dr Cathy Casey Cr Daniel Newman, JP
Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore IMSB Member Liane Ngamane
Cr Ross Clow Cr Dick Quax
Cr Faanana Efeso Collins Cr Greg Sayers
Cr Linda Cooper, JP Cr Desley Simpson, JP
Cr Alf Filipaina Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP Cr Wayne Walker
IMSB Member Hon Tau Henare Cr John Watson
Cr Richard Hills
Cr Penny Hulse
Cr Mike Lee
(Quorum 11 members)
Kalinda Gopal
Senior Governance Advisor
23 November 2017
Contact Telephone: (09) 367 2442

Email: kalinda.gopal@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy
unless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contact
the relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Responsibilities
This committee guides the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on
land use planning, housing and the appropriate provision of infrastructure and strategic
projects associated with these activities. Key responsibilities include:
Relevant regional strategy and policy

Infrastructure strategy and policy
Unitary Plan
Spatial plans
Plan changes to operative plans
Housing policy and projects
Special Housing Areas
City centre development
Tamaki regeneration
Built heritage
Urban design
Environmental matters relating to the committees responsibilities
Acquisition of property relating to the committees responsibilities and within
approved annual budgets
Activities of the following Council Controlled Organisations:
o Panuku Development Auckland
o Auckland Transport
o Watercare Services Limited
Powers
(i) All powers necessary to perform the committees responsibilities, including:

(a) approval of a submission to an external body
(b) establishment of working parties or steering groups.
(ii) The committee has the powers to perform the responsibilities of another
committee, where it is necessary to make a decision prior to the next meeting of
that other committee.
(iii) The committee does not have:
(a) the power to establish subcommittees
(b) powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself
(section 2).
Exclusion of the public who needs to leave the meeting
Members of the public
All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a
resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the
meeting.
Those who are not members of the public
General principles
Access to confidential information is managed on a need to know basis where access

to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.
Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is
necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.
Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item
and must leave the room for any other confidential items.
In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.
Members of the meeting
The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a
Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee
meeting).
However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of
interest leave the room.
All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who
are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing
orders.
Independent Mori Statutory Board
Members of the Independent Mori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the
committee remain.
Independent Mori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in
order for them to perform their role.
Staff
All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.
Local Board members
Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform
their role may remain. This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a
particular Local Board area.
Council Controlled Organisations
Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for

discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Apologies 7
2 Declaration of Interest 7
3 Confirmation of Minutes 7
4 Petitions 7
5 Public Input 7
6 Local Board Input 7
7 Extraordinary Business 8
8 Notices of Motion 8
9 Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation 9
10 Endorsement of the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan 353
11 Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Private Plan Change Request
from Kings College to rezone land at Mngere and Hospital Road,
Othuhu 389
12 Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) Private Plan Change Request
from Goodman Property Trust 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie 403
13 Auckland Council's quarterly monitoring report on the National Policy
Statement on Urban Development Capacity 425
14 National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity initial
assessment results (Covering report) 455
15 Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings - 28
November 2017 457
16 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
Page 5
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
1 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Declaration of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making
when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external
interest they might have.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
That the Planning Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 7 November 2017,
including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.
4 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
5 Public Input
Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the
Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the
meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion
to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A
maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5)
minutes speaking time for each speaker.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public input had been received.
6 Local Board Input
Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that
Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The
Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical,
give one (1) days notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the
discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing
Orders.
This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the
agenda.
At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.
Page 7
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
7 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as
amended) states:
An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the
public,-
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a
subsequent meeting.
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as
amended) states:
Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local
authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time
when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting;
but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item

except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further
discussion.
8 Notices of Motion
There were no notices of motion.
Page 8
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation

File No.: CP2017/22113
Item 9
Purpose
1. To approve the draft Auckland Plan for formal public consultation.
Executive summary
2. This report seeks approval of the draft Auckland Plan (Attachment B) for formal public
consultation which commences on 28 February 2017.
3. The draft Auckland Plan has been developed over the course of 2017 under the direction of
the Planning Committee.
4. It has been informed through two phases of engagement with our partners and stakeholders.
5. An integrated spatial plan, it sets a 30 year direction and addresses the key issues facing
Auckland and Aucklanders. This is done through six outcomes that integrate social,
economic, environmental and cultural objectives.
6. As a spatial plan, providing direction on Aucklands future development, how and where
communities form and how infrastructure may be provided to support them to prosper, is
critically important to our ability to plan for the future.
7. The draft plan therefore also contains Aucklands Development Strategy which sets out
where and when development is expected to occur and where investment in infrastructure
needs to be made to meet the significant growth that is anticipated.
8. The draft plan includes maps that identify a range of infrastructure investments required
across 30 years. This gives infrastructure funders and providers a basis from which to do
their own planning. The first decade of growth and investment is understandably more
certain than the following two decades. Monitoring actual on-the-ground growth and
development is therefore essential so that informed adjustments can be made as is needed.
9. Measuring progress is fundamental to successful implementation. The draft plan includes 33
measures which will provide an ongoing evidence base for aligning implementation and the
regulatory plans and funding programmes of Auckland Council and other stakeholders.
10. The refreshed Auckland Plan is digital which will enable the plan to reflect updated data and
evidence more easily and therefore remain relevant over time.
11. The digital plan will be the primary platform for formal public consultation.
12. This report also seeks approval of the Draft Auckland Plan: Overview (Attachment D). This
document provides a summary of the draft plan and will be used to support consultation.
13. The Planning Committee has previously agreed to a joint consultation process for the
Auckland Plan and 10-year Budget 2018-28. The consultation document, including specific
questions, will be approved by the Governing Body on 7 February 2018.
14. Public consultation runs from 28 February to 28 March 2018.
Recommendation/s
a) approve the draft Auckland Plan for public consultation, commencing on 28 February
2018, as shown in Attachments B and C of the agenda report.
b) approve the Draft Auckland Plan: Overview document, which will be used to support
consultation, as shown in Attachment D of the agenda report.
Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 9

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
c) recommend to the Governing Body that there is a question for each outcome and for
the Development Strategy in the joint Auckland Plan and 10-year Budget
consultation document.
Item 9
d) thank stakeholders for their involvement and feedback in the development of the
draft Auckland Plan and that this be communicated.
e) extend the existing delegation of authority to the Chair of the Planning Committee,
the Deputy Mayor, the Chair of the Environment and Community Committee, the
Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee, and a member of the Independent
Mori Statutory Board; to review and approve any final changes and corrections to
the draft Auckland Plan for consultation and the Overview document, including visual
material under development as part of the digital Auckland Plan; and to review the
consultation questions prior to approval by the Governing Body.
Comments
Context
15. Auckland Council is legislatively required to develop a spatial plan for Auckland and must
involve stakeholders and partners in its preparation.
16. The first Auckland Plan, adopted in 2012, made a commitment to review the plan after six
years. This decision recognised that whilst the Auckland Plan had a 30-year horizon, rapid
change and growth in Auckland was likely to result in new challenges and opportunities
which would need to be reflected in the plan.
17. In March 2017, the Planning Committee agreed (PLA/2017/30) to refresh the Auckland Plan
as a streamlined spatial plan, and to create a digital platform for the plan.
18. The Planning Committee also agreed to three main stakeholder engagement phases:
a. early engagement with the communities of Auckland
b. engagement with other key partners and stakeholders throughout the preparation and
development of the refreshed plan
c. use of the Special Consultative Procedure for the draft refreshed plan, concurrent with
consultation for the 10-year Budget 2018-28.
19. This report seeks the Planning Committees approval of the draft Auckland Plan (Attachment
B) for the third engagement phase.
Political direction
20. The Planning Committee and local board chairs provided direction to the development of the
refreshed Auckland Plan through a series of workshops during 2017.
21. The workshops canvassed:
challenges and opportunities for Auckland
development of a strategic framework for the refreshed plan
refinement of draft content
how to measure progress against the plan
the prototype of the digital Auckland Plan.
22. Feedback from stakeholder engagement and how this informed development of the draft
plan was also communicated at these workshops.

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Stakeholder engagement
23. Stakeholders and partners have been involved throughout the preparation of the draft plan
and have provided feedback during two main engagement phases.
Item 9
24. During May and June 2017, stakeholders were asked to comment at a high level on a
working model of the refreshed plan. The results of this first phase of engagement were
reported to the Planning Committee on 1 August 2017. There were 924 items of feedback
received from engagement with 86 stakeholders.
25. Overall, stakeholder feedback endorsed the need for a refresh of the Auckland Plan and the
general strategic direction proposed.
26. Housing, transport and a healthy natural environment were seen as fundamental to the
future wellbeing of Auckland. The lack of affordable housing and the negative impact that
has on peoples sense of belonging, employment opportunities, and health and education
outcomes was a shared concern across all groups.
27. This feedback informed the development of the strategic framework which was used as the
basis for engagement during the second phase from July to November 2017. Stakeholders
were asked to consider a proposed set of strategic directions and focus areas.
28. There were 1620 items of feedback received from engagement with 97 stakeholders during
this phase. The results of this engagement were reported to the Planning Committee on 7
November 2017.
Draft Auckland Plan for approval

29. The framework and content of the refreshed Auckland Plan have been informed by:
the current Auckland Plan
emerging issues at a global and local level
research and analysis
strategic work completed since the original plan was adopted
engagement with stakeholders.
30. The refreshed Auckland Plan is a digital plan. However, it is presented to the Planning
Committee for review in a traditional printed format. In this format, there is a range of
contextual information placed at both the front and back of the draft plan. The digital
Auckland Plan will provide access to some of this information directly from the landing page
and from other relevant points across the plan.
31. There is also detailed supporting information for each outcome area and the Development
Strategy. This information will be accessed via a click-through from the relevant high-level
content, balancing greater readability with the need for more explanatory information.
32. The Planning Committee approved content for the Belonging and Participation and
Transport and Access outcomes areas on 7 November 2017. Some changes have been
made to that content following the meeting in response to feedback. For completeness, the
full draft plan is included in Attachment B for approval.
Outcomes
33. All components of the draft Auckland Plan are inter-dependent. Successfully delivering the
plan requires us to make substantial progress towards achieving all outcomes.
34. The plan includes six outcomes that integrate social, economic, environmental and cultural
objectives to set a 30 year strategic direction for Auckland. Each outcome has a set of high
level directions and key focus areas.
35. Attachment A provides a description of the essence of each outcome.

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Development Strategy
36. Auckland is anticipated to grow significantly over the next 30 years. The scale of growth
requires us to work together and ensure we have a clear understanding of where and when
Item 9
investment in planning and infrastructure needs to be made.

37. The draft Development Strategy, a core component of the Auckland Plan, provides this
understanding.
38. Attachment A provides a description of the essence of the development strategy.
Maps
39. As a spatial plan, the legislation requires both text and visual illustration of how Auckland
may develop in the future and how infrastructure may be provided. It also requires the
spatial identification of a range of activities and services, significant recreational and
ecological areas, and environmental constraints on development. Maps illustrating how
Auckland will develop and grow are found at Attachment C, maps 15-28.
40. In addition, there are 14 maps which spatially represent information relevant to the
achievement of the six outcomes in the draft plan. For example, the number of jobs in
advanced industries across Auckland is mapped as a means of illustrating the importance of
developing skills and talent for the changing nature of work.
41. The digital platform of the plan enables interaction with some maps. These are able to
provide multiple views/layers and show increasing detail.
42. Final changes to the maps are underway to reflect feedback from the elected member drop-
in session on 15 November and the Planning Committee workshop on 16 November. These
changes will be incorporated into the digital Auckland Plan for consultation.
Other elements of the draft plan

43. In addition to the outcomes and Development Strategy, the plan also includes a number of
contextual elements, some of which will be accessed directly from the landing page. These
are:
About the Auckland Plan
About Auckland
Te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi
Auckland Plan values
Implementation
Measuring progress
Visual information
44. The digital Auckland Plan will incorporate a range of graphics such as tables, charts, photos,
infographics and other illustrations. These will be designed to aid understanding and
improve accessibility. The visual material will be developed as part of building the website.
Digital Auckland Plan

45. During September and October 2017, a prototype was developed to craft the visual design,
determine technical specifications and carry out user testing for the digital Auckland Plan.
46. The structure of the digital plan, number of digital pages and layers, and links between
content is determined by the draft content of the plan, including maps and graphics.
47. The full website is now under development to support formal consultation which commences
on 28 February 2018.

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Overview of draft Auckland Plan

48. A summary document which provides an overview of the draft Auckland Plan is attached for
the Committees review and approval (Attachment D). This document will be used to support
Item 9
the formal consultation and will be translated into five languages and an easy-read version.
The overview will be available on the Auckland Plan website and in libraries, service centres
and local board offices.
Consultation questions
49. The approach to joint formal consultation on the Auckland Plan and the 10-year Budget
2018-28 was approved by the Finance and Performance Committee on 21 November 2017.
50. The consultation questions for the draft Auckland Plan were discussed at the Planning
Committee workshop on 16 November. There was general support for a question for each
outcome and the Development Strategy based around the key issues. Further work is being
carried out to develop the questions which will be included in the joint consultation
document. The final questions will be approved by the Governing Body on 7 February 2018.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
51. The decision-making responsibilities of local boards include providing early input into
regional strategies policies and plans such as the Auckland Plan.
52. Local boards were involved in, and made a significant contribution to, the refresh of the
Auckland Plan during 2017. This involvement included representation at Planning
Committee workshops, local board cluster workshops and individual board business
meetings and workshops.
53. There were two opportunities for local boards to pass resolutions on the draft plans
development. These resolutions, reported to the Planning Committee on 1 August and 10
October 2017, have been used to inform further refinement of the plan.
54. A memo has been prepared for local boards to advise how their feedback has been
addressed in the draft plan.
Mori impact statement

55. The Auckland Plan and its contribution to Mori well-being will be of interest to Mori. The
plan sets a comprehensive long-term strategy for Aucklands growth and development. The
council provides opportunities for Mori engagement and supports Mori capacity to
participate in decision-making. When making significant decisions in relation to land or a
body of water, the council must take into account the relationship of Mori and their culture
and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and
other taonga.
56. Mori Identity and Wellbeing is one of the six outcomes of the draft Auckland Plan. The
outcome focuses on advancing Mori wellbeing; promoting Mori success, innovation and
enterprise; recognising and providing for te Tiriti o Waitangi outcomes; and showcasing
Aucklands Maori identity and culture. In addition, matters of direct relevance to Mori are
identified and appear throughout the plan, for example in the Homes and Places outcome.
57. Six hui with mana whenua were held over the course of the year. The hui focused on key
challenges and opportunities facing Auckland, and how the plan can best address these.
58. Feedback included the need:
for the plan to protect and advance the social, economic and cultural wellbeing of iwi
for the plan to uphold the Treaty partnership
to protect mana whenua cultural sites and places, harbours and productive soils
to plan for infrastructure to uplift and drive Mori values.

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
59. Engagement with mataawaka was carried out through working with Mori organisations.
These organisations used their networks to provide informed feedback, which has included:
the need to work towards equity in Mori wellbeing in the urban context
Item 9
the importance of Auckland Councils role and leverage in public health policy, planning
and regulation that impacts on Mori wellbeing
the need for dwellings that are healthy and that can cater for multi-generational needs.
60. The Independent Mori Statutory Board provided formal feedback on early drafts of the plan
including the proposed measures. This feedback has been addressed in the finalisation of
the draft plan. A formal response has been prepared for the board.
Implementation
61. Development of the Auckland Plan website will advance during December to February to
meet consultation deadlines.
62. Questions for the Auckland Plan consultation will be approved by the Governing Body on 7
February 2018 as part of the joint consultation document.
63. Formal consultation will run from 28 February to 28 March 2018.
64. Feedback will be considered and the updated Auckland Plan will be reported to the Planning
Committee on 5 June 2018.
Attachments
No. Title Page
A Outcomes and development strategy description 15
B Draft Auckland Plan 19
C Draft Auckland Plan: maps 307
D Draft Auckland Plan: Overview 337
Signatories
Author Denise OShaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice
Authorisers Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research
Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment A

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment A

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment A

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment A

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment B
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment C

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 9
Attachment D

Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Endorsement of the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan

File No.: CP2017/23584
Item 10
Purpose
1. To seek approval of the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan.
Executive summary
2. The purpose of the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan (area plan) is to
provide a planning framework to guide how the area grows and develops over the next 30
years.
3. Area plans are a key mechanism to help implement the outcomes and aspirations of the
Auckland Plan expected at a local level. The Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura corridor is
identified as one of nine Spatial Priority Areas in Auckland Councils Long-term Plan (2015
2025). These spatial priority areas align with the Auckland Plans Development Strategy and
six transformational shifts.
4. The area plan is a non-statutory, spatial plan that was developed collaboratively with the
Arts, Community and Events department and The Southern Initiative team with input from
key internal and external stakeholders including mana whenua on behalf of both the
Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards. It has also been prepared in consultation with the
wider community and their feedback has helped shape the content at every stage in the
development of the document.
5. Initial community engagement on the area plan occurred through various methods and
events from mid-December 2016 through until March 2017. Community feedback then
informed the draft area plan which was the subject of further community engagement during
April-May 2017.
6. During the community engagement periods feedback was received from over 5000
respondents. Comments received during the engagement periods and feedback from
internal council and external stakeholders has also been taken into account to finalise the
area plan.
7. The Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards adopted the final plan at their meetings on the
19th and 25th October respectively. Following consideration by the Planning Committee the
final plan will be produced and published.
Recommendation/s
a) endorse the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan as set out in
Attachment A of the agenda report.
b) delegate authority to the Manager Central and South Planning to approve minor
editorial changes to the plan if necessary prior to publication.
Endorsement of the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan Page 353
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Comments
Background
Item 10
8. The Great South Road Corridor running through Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura is
identified as one of nine Spatial Priority Areas in Auckland Councils Long-term Plan (2015
2025).
9. Five key themes formed the basis for the preparation of the area plan.
protecting our future
love your centre
celebrate the story
make way for the people
a voice for youth.
10. The outcomes in relation to these five themes have a physical or spatial aspect and when
realised will make a transformational contribution to making the area of Manurewa, Takanini
and Papakura and its surrounding areas a great place to live, work and visit. The five
themes were developed and approved for consultation at the joint local board and mana
whenua workshop on 23 November 2016.
11. Feedback has been received in relation to the five themes and more generally about the
future of the Manurewa, Takanini and Papakura centres. The five themes were then used to
inform the draft area plan which was approved for consultation at the Manurewa Local Board
business meeting on 16 March 2017 and at the Papakura Local Board business meeting on
22 March 2017.
Community Engagement
12. The area plan has been prepared in collaboration with the Manurewa and Papakura Local
Boards, Arts, Community and Events department, The Southern Initiative team and other
key internal and external stakeholders including mana whenua. It has also been prepared in
consultation with the wider community and their feedback has helped shape the content at
every stage in the development of the document.
13. For this plan a key focus was to connect with existing community networks and engage
locals who do not usually engage with the council, and to ask them what they want to see in
the Manurewa, Papakura and Takanini areas, now and in the future. In addition to the use
of more conventional consultation and engagement techniques/approaches, a digital
platform Share Your Ideas was launched in partnership with the Manurewa Youth Council
to make it easier for people to contribute to the ideas for making these places better.
14. The development of the area plan has included two community engagement phases initial
engagement from mid-December 2016 through until March 2017 and consultation on a draft
plan from 3 April for a 6 week period until Friday 12 May 2017.
15. Two highlights from the series of engagement events held in relation to the draft area plan
included:
"Streets to Places" event in Papakura. To celebrate the launch of the engagement, the
project team in conjunction with the Papakura Local Board and Papakura Business
Association closed part of Broadway on Saturday 8 April to provide for a fun-filled street
event. The street closure event provided a platform to celebrate Papakura and promote
the potential to make Broadway a permanent shared space for the community.
"Rewa Love our Centre" cultural event in Southmall Shopping Centre, Manurewa was
held on Saturday 6 May. This event gave an opportunity to explore the potential to
revitalise Manurewa, promote the town centre identity and showcase art/culture in the
centre.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
16. In addition a series of targeted stakeholder engagement events were held, including
meetings with the Manurewa and Papakura Business Associations, workshops with the
youth councils and online engagement with youth, meetings with resident and ratepayer
groups, a pacific fono event and a lesson on town planning and place making with
Item 10
approximately 40 students at the Takanini School.
17. Overall, more than 5000 pieces of feedback from members of the community were received
via a mixture of hard copy/online forms and through digital platforms. Based on the analysis
of the feedback collected, the largest ethnic group of respondents was NZ European at
approximately 36 per cent followed by Mori at approximately 30 per cent, with the highest
response received from those aged between15 and 34.
18. The following provides a list of the most common ideas that emerged for the three areas
from the engagement:
a. improve and upgrade use of existing spaces
b. beautify our town centre
c. promotion of heritage in our town centre
d. safety and security
e. community/social hubs
f. introduce more free/affordable initiatives, events and festivals
g. address social issues
h. better roads, cycle ways and transport connections
i. access to the waterfront in respect of Takanini and Papakura.
19. This feedback was then used to further develop the area plan and to work with stakeholders
to prioritise the key actions that responded to the feedback from the community. This will
help to transform the areas over the next 30 years.
Consideration
20. The area plan covers two local board areas, namely Manurewa Local Board and Papakura
Local Board.
21. The Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards guided the development of the area plan. A
number of workshops and meetings have been held with the boards and with mana whenua
during the preparation of the area plan.
22. A joint workshop with mana whenua representatives was held on 23 November 2016 to
discuss the draft themes on which the area plan is based. Following this workshop a
number of changes to the draft themes were made.
23. On 1 March 2017 a joint workshop with both local boards and mana whenua representatives
was held to present an overview of the draft area plan and a summary of the feedback
received to date which had shaped the draft area plan. The draft area plan was then
endorsed for public consultation on 16 March 2017 at the Manurewa Local Board business
meeting and subsequently on 22 March 2017 at the Papakura Local Board business
meeting.
24. On 13 July 2017 a joint workshop with both local boards and mana whenua representatives
was held to provide an opportunity to consider the implications of the feedback received,
provide feedback/ideas on the delivery of the final area plan including an implementation
plan and provide direction on how the area plan and its delivery might shape up.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
25. On 20 September 2017 a joint workshop with both local boards and to which mana whenua
representatives were also invited, was held to work through the project priorities and seek to
finalise the priorities / key projects.
Item 10
26. The local boards both individually and together will play a significant role in realising the area
plans future vision for the three respective centres and the corridor as a whole. The local
boards roles may take many forms depending on the action, from direct investment in public
works to advocating for positive changes.
27. The area plan has been reported to the Manurewa and Papakura Local Boards and was
adopted at their business meetings on the 19th and 25th October respectively. Key actions
within the area plan have been aligned with those in the emerging local board plans. The
two local boards have recommended that the Planning Committee endorse the draft area
plan contained in Attachment A for final release.

28. The process of engagement on the area plan with mana whenua and mataawaka in the
region has been developed in collaboration with The Southern Initiative team and the Arts,
Community and Events department. The project team has been responsive to the requests
of mana whenua in the development of the draft area plan.
29. An initial hui was held with representatives from Ngti Tamater, Ngti Tamaoho, Ngti Te
Ata, and Te Ahiwaru on 14 September 2016. At this hui it was requested that specialist staff
from across the council group be invited to a hui to discuss specific areas of interest (i.e.
water quality, community facilities and transport). The project team acknowledged this
request and set up the hui for 31 October 2016 with the relevant specialist staff present.
Feedback from both of these hui including input sought from Ngi Tai ki Tmaki shaped the
draft themes and subsequently the project priorities on which the draft area plan is based.
30. Mana whenua representatives have been sitting as a partner at the table with local board
members at the workshops. The first joint workshop with mana whenua representatives and
local board members was held on 23 November 2016 at which the draft concepts were
presented. This joint approach continued with all subsequent joint local board workshops (to
which all iwi groups with interest in the area were invited). At each of these an update on
progress and presentation of a summary of the details of the draft area plan were provided.
There is a commitment to continue this approach throughout the implementation stage.
Implementation
31. Area plans are a key mechanism to implement the Auckland Plan and provide a greater
level of detail in terms of outcomes and aspirations expected with a specific area.
32. Working towards achieving the area plans five key themes has required input from across
the council group and beyond. A collaborative and inclusive process to the development of
the area plan will ensure there is a commitment to deliver on the aspirations and actions
once the area plan is adopted. To implement the actions of the area plan will require
commitment from a multitude of parties, including Auckland Council, Council Controlled
Organisations, the local community, landowners, and developers. Ultimately both local
boards will have a key advocacy role to play in driving actions forward.
33. The delivery of the key projects is supported by a project prioritisation schedule. These
projects will help transform Manurewa Takanini and Papakura over the next 30 years. The
plan shows where work will be focussed and will support ongoing alignment between the
Auckland Plan, Long Term Plan, Unitary Plan and projects of other infrastructure investors.
34. The implementation and prioritisation of actions in the area will inform the Long-term Plan
and help to shape the forward work programmes for the council, council controlled
organisations and other key delivery partners. The area plan will be subject to review and
reporting on progress on actions to both local boards and the Planning Committee in
conjunction with key stakeholders and delivery partners.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
35. The recommendation to endorse the Manurewa Takanini Papakura Area Plan is consistent
with the councils policies and strategies and the Auckland Plan.
Item 10
Attachments
No. Title Page
A Manurewa Takanini Papakura Integrated Area Plan 359
Signatories
Author Michael Luong - principal planner
Authorisers John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 10
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Private Plan Change

Request from Kings College to rezone land at Mngere and Hospital
Road, Othuhu
Item 11
File No.: CP2017/24074
Purpose
1. To consider a private plan change request from Kings College to rezone land adjoining
Mngere Road from Special Purpose School to Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings
(THAB) and land adjacent to Hospital Road from THAB and Single House zones to Special
Purpose School in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
Executive summary
2. This report considers a private plan change request (the request) received on 31 October
2017 from Kings College. The request seeks to rezone land adjoining Mngere Road from
Special Purpose School to Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings (THAB) and land
adjacent to Hospital Road from THAB and Single House zones to Special Purpose School.
3. Under clause 25 of Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the
council is required to make a decision that either:
a) adopts the request as if it were a proposed plan made by the Council, which must then be
processed in accordance with the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (clause 25(2)(a)); or
b) accepts the private plan change request, in whole or in part, which then triggers a
requirement to notify the request, or part of the request, under clause 25 (clause
25(2)(b)); or
c) rejects the private plan change request in whole or in part, in reliance on one of the
limited grounds set out in clause 25(4); or
d) decides to deal with the request as if it were an application for a resource consent (clause
25(3)).
4. Given the unique characteristics of the request, and for the more detailed reasons discussed
in this report, it is recommended that the private plan change request is accepted under
clause 25(2)(b) and notified for submissions.
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) - Private Plan Change Request from Kings College to Page 389
rezone land at Mngere and Hospital Road, Othuhu
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
Recommendation/s
a) agree to accept the private plan change request by Kings College for rezoning of
land at Mngere and Hospital Road, Othuhu, included as Attachment A to the
agenda report pursuant to clause 25(2)(b) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Resource
Management Act 1991 for the following reasons:
i) the proposed rezoning of land on Mngere Road to Terrace Housing and
Apartment Buildings is consistent with the Auckland Unitary Plan zoning
purpose which encourages land adjacent to centres and near the public
transport network to be efficiently used for high-density urban living that
increases housing capacity.
ii) the proposed rezoning of land on Hospital Road to Special Purpose School
zone will enable Kings College to use land for educational activities adjacent to
the main campus this loss of land currently zoned Terrace Housing and
Apartment Buildings and Single House is offset by the increased housing
capacity on the Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings land proposed on
Mngere Road.
iii) the rezoning of these parcels of land was not considered through the Unitary
Plan submission and hearing process.
iv) accepting the private plan change request will not create inconsistencies with
the Auckland Plan and Auckland Unitary Plans strategic directions.
v) having regard to relevant case law and the limited grounds for rejection under
clause 25(4), none of the limited grounds for rejection apply to the request and
it is more appropriate to accept the request than adopt it or treat it as a
resource consent application.
b) authorise the Manager Central and South Planning to undertake the required
notification and statutory processes associated with processing the private plan
change request by Kings College for rezoning of land at Mngere and Hospital
Road, Othuhu pursuant to Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991.
Comments
A BACKGROUND
Site and Surrounding Area
5. Kings Colleges land holding comprises of approximately 24.2ha. It has frontages to
Mngere Road, Middlemore Road, Golf Avenue, and Hospital Road. The main entry to the
College is from the southern end of Golf Avenue.
6. Kings College main campus adjoins Othuhu College to the north and the Royal Auckland
Golf Club to the east. Middlemore Hospital is located on Hospital Road, approximately
250m south-east of Kings College. Land use surrounding the site is comprises
predominantly residential with low to medium density suburban housing of one to two
storeys.
7. The main campus contains the school playing fields and main school buildings. The school
buildings are between one and three storeys in height and are grouped together in the
southern extremity of the site.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Private Plan Change Request

8. On 31 October 2017, Kings College lodged the request to rezone two land parcels, one to
the north east of the main campus and the other to the south of the main campus, namely:
Item 11
the Mngere Road land parcel (3.11 ha) located north east of the main school campus
and fronting Mngere Road. This is proposed to be rezoned from Special Purpose
School zone to Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings (THAB); and
the Hospital Road land parcel (1.55ha) adjoining the southern end of Kings College main
campus which is currently owned by the Royal Auckland Golf Club and contains an
existing clubhouse and parking. This is proposed to be rezoned from THAB and Single
House to Special Purpose School Zone.
9. The request is included as Attachment A to the agenda report.
Figure 1: Kings College site and its surroundings and land parcels subject to rezoning
Mangere Road
land parcel subject
to rezoning
Main campus
10. The applicant has provided documentation relating to the following in support of the request
(Attachment B):
Private plan change report with assessment of environmental effects
Section 32 evaluation
Urban design report
Transport report
Infrastructure report
Iwi consultation letter
Ngti Whanaunga response on private plan change
Zoning and location
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
Concept schemes
Certificate of titles
11. The purpose of rezoning the Mngere Road land parcel from Special Purpose School to
THAB is to enable residential development of a density that optimises the efficient use of
land that has become surplus to school requirements. The rezoning of the Hospital Road
land parcel from THAB and Single House to Special Purpose School Zone will enable
various education activities to occur in an integrated and consolidated manner with the
adjacent main campus.
12. Existing zoning of the Mngere Road and Hospital Road land parcels is shown in Figure 2
and the requested zoning is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 2: Existing zones of the Mngere Road and Hospital Road parcels under the
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part)
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Figure 3: Proposed zones of the Mngere Road and Hospital Road parcels under the
proposed Private Plan Change
Item 11
Auckland Plan
13. The Auckland Plan is the councils spatial plan for Auckland and contains a 30-year high
level development strategy for the region. The proposed rezoning will assist in enabling an
increase in housing supply in the Othuhu area and to continue providing a quality education
facility for present and future generations. It would be consistent with the Auckland Plans
strategic directions in relation to an increase in housing supply for Auckland, promoting of a
quality compact urban form and provision of social and community infrastructure for present
and future generations.
Auckland Unitary Plan

14. The Auckland Unitary Plan is the councils primary land-use document prepared under the
RMA. It contains objectives and policies that encourage a quality compact urban form,
higher residential densities and provision of social facilities meeting the needs of people and
communities.
15. The proposed rezoning will provide for approximately 1.56ha of residential zoned land in a
location close to the Othuhu town centre, community facilities and transport nodes. The
rezoning will also enable the efficient use of land for educational purposes meeting the need
of communities. The private plan change will therefore assist in achieving the objectives and
policies of the Auckland Unitary Plan.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
Wastewater
16. Future redevelopment of the Mngere Road site from the existing Special Purpose - School
Zone into a more intensive residential THAB zoning would increase the infrastructure
demand compared with the existing situation. The applicants Engineering Infrastructure
Report indicates that given intensive zoning of THAB and Mixed Use around the proposed
site on Mngere Road, there is unlikely to be fundamental wastewater constraints that will
prevent the rezoning of the site. The availability of wastewater networks in the surrounding
area to service rezoning of the site has been confirmed by Watercare. Watercare have also
confirmed that specific capacity assessments would be undertaken when detailed site
development proposals are submitted.
Water Supply
17. The proposed THAB zoned site can readily be connected to the existing Watercare
reticulation in Mngere Road where watermains are located on both sides of the road. Any
future development of the site will require an extension to the public roading network with
new public watermains installed within the new road reserve.
Stormwater
18. The proposed THAB zoning will likely increase the impervious area on the site from its
current situation. The applicant acknowledges that this will require appropriate stormwater
mitigation measures to be implemented on-site at the resource consent stage, and this has
been confirmed by the councils stormwater specialists.
Transport
19. Transport infrastructure upgrades will be required to manage future vehicle access and
traffic effects associated with the new development on Mngere Road. In-principle,
Auckland Transport has no objection to the proposed zoning and notes that the required
traffic engineering and road safety mitigation measures identified in the submitted Integrated
Traffic Assessment (ITA) will need to be further investigated at the detailed design stage.
B STATUTORY ANALYSIS
Resource Management Act
20. The process for considering private plan change requests is set out in Part 2 of Schedule 1
to the RMA. A request can be made to the appropriate local authority by any person under
clause 21 of Schedule 1.
21. After a request has been lodged, a local authority can request further information under
clause 23, and modify a request under clause 24, but only with the applicants agreement.
22. If an applicant refuses to provide any requested further or additional information, a local
authority that considers it has insufficient information to enable it to consider or approve the
request, may reject the request or decide not to approve the plan change requested under
clause 23(6).
23. Under clause 25, after receiving the request, receiving all required information and modifying
the request (where relevant), the local authority is required to make a decision that either:
a) adopts the request as if it were a proposed plan made by the council, which must then be
25(2)(b)); or
25(3)).
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
24. See Attachment B for the full wording of the clauses that make up Part 2 of Schedule 1 to
the RMA.
Options available to the council
Item 11
25. The next sections of this report assess the various options available to the council under
clause 25. Council staff consider that the applicant has provided sufficient information to
enable the request to be considered, and so do not consider the ground of rejection in
clause 23(6) to be available.
Option 1 - Reject the private plan change request, in whole or in part (clause 25(4))
26. The council has the power to reject a private plan change request, in whole or in part, in
reliance on one of the limited grounds set out in clause 25(4). If the private plan change
request is rejected by the council, the applicant has the ability to appeal that decision to the
Environment Court under clause 27 of Schedule 1.
27. The grounds for rejection under clause 25(4) are as follows:
a) the request or part of the request is frivolous or vexatious; or
b) within the last two years, the substance of the request or part of the request:
i) has been considered and given effect to, or rejected by, the local authority or the
Environment Court; or
ii) has been given effect to by regulations made under section 360A; or
c) the request or part of the request is not in accordance with sound resource management
practice; or
d) the request or part of the request would make the policy statement or plan inconsistent
with Part 5; or
e) in the case of a proposed change to a policy statement or plan, the policy statement or
plan has been operative for less than two years.
Is the request frivolous or vexatious?

28. The private plan change request includes a comprehensive section 32 evaluation and a
planning report containing a detailed assessment of environmental effects covering a wide
range of issues including housing capacity, neighbourhood built character, residential
amenity, transport, infrastructure, ecology and natural resources and cultural values. The
proposal is for a simple rezoning that is consistent with the adjacent zoning pattern.
29. It is therefore recommended that the council cannot reject the private plan change request
on the basis that it is frivolous or vexatious.
Has the substance of the request been considered and given effect to or rejected by the council
within the last two years?
30. These provisions largely seek to discourage repetitive private plan change requests that are
substantially the same, with the associated costs to the council and the community.
31. The requested rezoning was not subject to submissions or hearing during the development
of the Auckland Unitary Plan. The opportunity for Kings College to acquire land on Hospital
Road only arose in 2016 which was after the hearings of the Auckland Unitary Plan.
Therefore the substance of this private plan change request has not been considered within
the last two years.
32. It is therefore recommended that the council not reject the request on the basis of this
ground of rejection.
Has the substance of the request been given effect to by regulations made under section 360A?
33. Section 360A of the RMA relates to regulations amending regional coastal plans pertaining
to aquaculture activities. The substance of this private plan change request or part of the
request does not relate to section 360A of the RMA.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
Is the request in accordance with sound resource management practice?

35. The term sound resource management practice is an often used planning term but is not
defined in the RMA. The High Court in Malory Corporation Limited v Rodney District Council
(CIV-2009-404-005572), where the issue on appeal was determining the correct
interpretation of clause 25(4), considered this term in light of clause 25(4)(c) of Schedule 1
and stated:
the words sound resource management practice should, if they are to be given any
coherent meaning, be tied to the Acts purpose and principles. I agree too with the
Courts observation that the words should be limited to only a coarse scale merits
assessment, and that a private plan change which does not accord with the Acts
purposes and principles will not cross the threshold for acceptance or adoption.
36. The private plan change request includes numerous technical reports which all support the
proposed rezoning. Advice from Auckland Transport has indicated that the proposed THAB
zoning on Mngere Road is generally appropriate due to the proximity of the site to the
Othuhu Town Centre and Mixed Use area along Great South Road and accessibility to
existing public transport. Watercare Services Ltd staff are not in a position to provide
detailed comments on water and wastewater capacity issues until a particular development
proposal is provided, however, no significant concerns have been raised at this stage. The
proposed rezoning does not raise any issues in terms of natural hazards such as flooding.
37. Consultation undertaken with mana whenua to date has not identified any matters that are
unable to be resolved.
38. The applicant has considered the zoning options for both Mngere Road and Hospital Road
land parcels and concluded that the proposed rezoning will increase housing capacity close
to Othuhu Town Centre and enable the expansion of the Kings College campus on the
adjacent land while ensuring that environmental effects of future development proposals are
avoided, minimised or mitigated.
39. The private plan change request is therefore considered to be in accordance with sound
resource management practice and it is therefore recommended that the council not reject
the private plan change
Would the request or part of the request make the policy statement or plan inconsistent with Part 5
of the RMA?
40. Part 5 sets out the role and purpose of planning documents created under the RMA,
including that they must assist a local authority to give effect to the sustainable management
purpose of the RMA. The private plan change request is generally consistent with the
direction provided in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) and as a result, is not
inconsistent with part 5 of the RMA.
41. It is therefore recommended that the council not reject the private plan change request on
the basis that the substance of the request would make the Auckland Unitary Plan
inconsistent with Part 5 of the RMA.
Has the district plan to which the request relates been operative for less than two years?
42. The district plan provisions of the Auckland Unitary Plan relevant to this request were made
operative on 15 November 2016. The provisions have therefore been operative for less than
two years and the council could reject the private plan change request on that basis.
However, case law has suggested that this ground for rejection must be exercised in a
principled manner having regard to the purpose of the RMA. It is important to note that the
wording of clause 25(4) provides that the council may reject a private plan change request if
one of the grounds under clause 25(4) exists.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
43. The proposed rezoning was not subject to the Auckland Unitary Plan hearing process. As
the proposal only relates to zone changes, provisions in the Auckland Unitary Plan that were
made operative in part on 15 November 2016 will not be affected.
Item 11
44. Given the specific circumstances of the request and for reasons previously discussed, it is
therefore recommended that the council not reject the private plan change request on the
basis that the relevant parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan have been operative for less than
two years.
Option 2 - Decide to deal with the request as if it were an application for a resource consent
45. The council can, in some circumstances, decide to deal with a private plan change request
as if it were an application for resource consent. However, in this case, the private plan
change request seeks to rezone two parcels of land and involves a large area of rezoning
along Mngere Road for higher intensification. It is considered that the most appropriate
process for achieving rezoning for higher intensification is through a plan change process.
46. It is therefore recommended that the council not decide to deal with the request as if it were
an application for resource consent.
Option 3 - Adopt the request, or part of the request, as if it were a proposed plan made by
the council itself
47. The council is able to decide to adopt the request and process it as though it were a council-
initiated proposed plan change. A decision to adopt triggers the process set out in Part 1 of
Schedule 1, which would then require the council to consult as required in clauses 3 to 3C of
Part 1.
48. Following consultation, the council would then need to notify the proposed plan change for
submissions and conduct a hearing into submissions, if required. If a request is adopted, all
costs associated with the plan change would rest with the council. It is relevant to note that
the applicant has not requested that the council adopts the private plan change.
49. Given that the applicant has not requested that the council adopts the request and that the
council would need to account for all costs associated with the adopted request, it is
recommended that the council does not decide to adopt the private plan change request.
Option 4 - Accept the private plan change request, in whole or in part, and proceed to notify
the request, or part of the request, under clause 26
50. If the council accepts the request, in whole or in part, it must then notify the request, or part
of the request under clause 26. After the submission period has closed, the council would
need to hold a hearing to consider any submissions, and a decision would then be made by
the council in relation to the request in accordance with Schedule 1 of the RMA. All costs
associated with the request (including notification and any hearing) would rest with the
applicant.
51. This is the only remaining option and is supported on the basis that the request does not
meet the criteria for rejection under clause 25(4) of Schedule 1 to the RMA, having regard to
relevant case law, and it is more appropriate to accept the request than adopt it or treat it as
a resource consent application. In particular:
the rezoning of the Mngere Road land parcel to THAB will not be inconsistent with the
Auckland Unitary Plan zoning purpose which encourages land adjacent to centres and
near the public transport network be efficiently used for high-density urban living that
increases housing capacity.
the rezoning of the Hospital Road land parcel for the Special Purpose School zone will
enable Kings College to use land for educational activities adjacent to the main campus.
While the rezoning would result in land zoned THAB and Single House being used for
non-residential purposes, this loss is offset by the increased housing capacity on the
THAB land proposed on Mngere Road.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
accepting the private plan change request will not create inconsistencies with the
Auckland Plan and Auckland Unitary Plans strategic direction.
52. It is therefore recommended that the council accepts the private plan change request.
C CONCLUSION
53. The private plan change request by Kings College seeks to rezone 3.11ha of land within
Kings College on Mngere Road from Special Purpose School zone to Terrace Housing
and Apartment Buildings (THAB) and 1.55ha of land within the Royal Auckland and Grange
Golf Course from THAB and Single House to Special Purpose School Zone. The plan
change has been supported by comprehensive technical reports.
54. The private plan change, if accepted and if successful, would increase housing capacity
near the Othuhu Town Centre and better enable the use of Kings College land for an
integrated educational campus.
55. Having carefully assessed the request against the relevant matters set out in the RMA and
associated case law, it is recommended that council decides to accept the request and notify
it for submissions. If accepted, a further assessment will take place prior to and during the
course of the subsequent hearing.
Consideration
56. After the lodgement of the request by Kings College on 31 October 2017, the private plan
change documentation was sent to both Mngere-thuhu and tara-Papatoetoe Local
Boards formally seeking their views on the private plan change. On 2 November, comments
were received from tara-Papatoetoe Local Board that the local board has no issues in
relation to the request.
57. The request information has been previously presented to the Mngere-thuhu Local
Board on various occasions and a separate meeting was held with Kings College
representatives. The local boards comments received on 2 November confirm that they
support the request.

58. The applicant advises that consultation has been undertaken with mana whenua groups and
has received feedback from Ngaati Whanaunga Incorporated Society and Ngti Te Ata
Waiohua in conjunction with the development of the private plan change for Kings College.
59. In August 2017 Ngaati Whanaunga gave a response to the applicant stating that they
supported the proposed rezoning. Ngaati Whanaunga have identified some issues that are
important to them including landscape, costal marine area, discharges to the sea and
streams to be considered at the development stage.
60. Ngti Te Ata Waiohua have responded to the applicant and indicated that they wish to be
engaged at the development stage of the sites subject to rezoning under the private plan
change.
61. On 17 April 2017 a number of amendments to the RMA came into force which place an
increased focus on engagement and consultation with iwi authorities as part of various plan-
making processes. This is particularly the case for plan change processes that are initiated
or adopted by a council. In relation to private plan change requests, although engagement
with mana whenua and relevant iwi authorities is encouraged before lodgement under
clause 21, it is not clear whether it is a mandatory requirement under Part 2 of Schedule 1. If
the council accepts a private plan change request for notification, no additional engagement
with iwi or mana whenua is required prior to notification. Iwi authorities and individuals will
be able to make a submission on the plan change once it is publicly notified.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Implementation
62. If the private plan change is accepted for notification, the implementation of this decision will
follow the process set out in clause 26 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. This requires that the
Item 11
private plan change is notified within four months of being accepted, unless this time frame
is waived in accordance with section 37 of the RMA. As previously discussed, the councils
costs associated with processing the private plan change request would be met by the
applicant.
Note: Due to the size and complexity of Attachment A it will be available under separate cover on
the Auckland Council website at the following link:
http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/
Attachments
No. Title Page
A Private Plan Change Request Report (Under Separate Cover)
B Extract from Clause 25 Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) 401
Signatories
Author Nicholas Lau - Planner
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
Attachment B
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 11
Attachment B
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) Private Plan Change

Request from Goodman Property Trust 614-616 Great South Road,
Ellerslie
Item 12
File No.: CP2017/24073
Purpose
1. To consider a private plan change request from Goodman Property Trust to rezone 614-616
Great South Road, Ellerslie from Business Park zone to Mixed Use zone in the Auckland
Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
Executive summary
2. This report considers a private plan change request (the request) received on 5 October
2017 from Goodman Property Trust (Goodman) (Attachment A). The request seeks to
rezone a 3867m site spread across three allotments held in two titles from Business Park to
Mixed Use. The request also seeks the removal of the, 47,000m Gross Floor Area (GFA)
cap from the site (Attachment B).
3. Under clause 25 of Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), the
council is required to make a decision that either:
a) adopts the request as if it were a proposed plan made by the Council, which must then be
25(2)(b)); or
25(3)).
4. Given the unique characteristics of the request, and for the more detailed reasons discussed
in this report, it is recommended that the private plan change request is accepted under
clause 25(2) (b) and notified for submissions.
Recommendation/s
a) agree to accept the private plan change request by Goodman Property Trust for 614-
616 Great South Road, Ellerslie included as Attachment A to the agenda report
pursuant to clause 25(2)(b) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act
1991 (RMA) for the following reasons:
i) the limited extent of the site (3867m) makes development of the site in a manner
that aligns with the Business Park zone objectives and policies very difficult to
achieve.
ii) the presence of the 47,000m Gross Floor Area cap related to the Business Park
zoning of the site makes it extremely difficult to develop the site in a manner that
would ensure the efficient use of physical resources.
iii) the proposed change to Mixed Use zoning for the site aligns better with the
Auckland Unitary Plans regional policy statements objectives and policies and
with sound resource management practice; and
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) Private Plan Change Request from Goodman Property Page 403
Trust 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
iv) the constraints on developing this particular site under the current Business Park
zoning and associated Gross Floor Area cap were not discussed in submissions
or evidence considered by the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings
Panel.
Item 12
v) having regard to relevant case law and the limited grounds for rejection under
clause 25(4), it is more appropriate to accept the request than adopt it or treat it
as a resource consent application.
b) authorise the Manager Central and South Planning to undertake the required
notification and statutory processes associated with processing the private plan
change request by Goodman for 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie pursuant to
Schedule 1 to the RMA.
Comments
A BACKGROUND
Site and Surrounding Area
5. The land to the plan change request is located in a commercial part of Ellerslie on Great
South Road, south west of the Southern Motorway (see Figure 1 below). The site contains
two buildings plus accessways and car parking. The total site area is 3867m spread across
three allotments held in two titles. The applicant Goodman owns the site.
6. Formerly Goodman also owned the Millennium Centre located immediately north-west of the
site at 600-612 Great South Road (see Figure 1). As the applicant has now sold the
Millennium Centre, 614-616 Great South Road is separated from the existing office park and
can no longer be developed as part of the centre. The Millennium Centre itself consists of
seven multi-storey offices, and a multi-storey car park. These buildings are of a much larger
scale and dominate those on the site. The Millennium Centre site also has higher ground
elevation (Attachment C).
Figure 1, Locality map site 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Figure 2 Auckland Unitary Plan zoning of 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie and surrounding area
7. To the north, and bordering the rear boundary of the site is Ellerslie School. Screening from
the school is provided by several well established trees on the Ellerslie School grounds. The
school buildings are all located some distance from the site, towards Kalmia Street. To the
south east of the site is a single storey commercial building, occupied by a Wendys fast
food outlet. Similar lower scale commercial buildings are located at the rear of the Wendys
site and further south along Great South Road. On the opposite side of the road is a three
storey building. The school, the Wendys site and the sites on the opposite side of Great
South Road are all zoned Mixed Use. West along Waiohua Road is Mixed House Urban
zoning.
8. As the site is now separated from the Millennium Business Park, the potential of the size,
configuration and physical disconnection from the larger property, undermine the efficient
development of the site for Business Park purposes.
9. The recent zoning history of the site is:
Formerly under the legacy Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus section) the site had a
Business 4 zone. This allowed for a range of business activities (Attachment D).
Under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) 614-616 Great South Road was
proposed to be zoned Light Industry.
Goodman and the Auckland Council both supported Mixed Use zoning in their evidence
to the Independent Hearings Panel.
The Independent Hearings Panel recommended the site to be Business Park zone. The
Panel did not provide reasons for individual zoning decisions.
The combined sites of 600-612 Great South Road (Millennium Centre) and 614-616
Great South Road, Ellerslie has a Business Park Office GFA cap of 47,000m in the
Auckland Unitary Plan.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Goodman has advised that this cap is in fact exceeded by the existing development on
the Millennium Centre site and there is no remaining GFA for office development on 614-
616 Great South Road. Office development on the site would have a non-complying
activity status.
Item 12
Private Plan Change Request

10. The request was lodged on 5 October 2017 and seeks to rezone land at 614-616 Great
South Road, Ellerslie from Business Park to Mixed Use with a consequential amendment to
remove the Business Park Zone Office GFA Control of 47,000m from the site.
11. The applicant has provided documentation relating to the following in support of the request:
Description of the plan change request;
Strategic framework;
Assessment of environmental effects;
Section 32 evaluation report; and
Consultation.
Auckland Plan
12. The Auckland Plan seeks the development of a quality compact Auckland. A more compact
form of growth will require greater intensification in both new and existing urban areas. The
private plan change aligns with these objectives with Mixed Use Zoning encouraging
residential intensification along transport corridors.
Auckland Unitary Plan

13. The chapter of the Auckland Unitary Plan Regional Policy Statement seeks to:
(5) Enable higher residential intensification: (a) in and around centres; (b) along identified
corridors; and (c) close to public transport, social facilities (including open space) and
employment opportunities.
14. The Business Park zoning encourages the development of a campus like environment.
The 614-616 Great South Road site is comparatively small and not well connected to the
larger Millennium Centre site. This raises concerns in relation to the Business Park zoning
and whether the site can be part of an integrated campus like office development.
15. Development of the 614-616 Great South Road site is also restricted by the Business Park
Office GFA cap. Goodman indicates the GFA cap of 47,000m has already been maximised
by the Millennium Centre which would mean that further office development on this site
would be a non-complying activity (Attachment D).
16. The rezoning of the site from Business Park to Mixed Use would allow for the more efficient
and effective development of the site. The site is located on a main transport corridor and
close to the Ellerslie railway station. The Mixed Use Zoning was considered more
appropriate for this site in Council submissions to the Independent Hearings Panel as it
reflected the existing use and has the ability to support a mix of residential and employment
activities.
Other Plans
17. 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie is located in the Maungakiekie Tmaki Local Board
area and is included under the auspice of the Maungakiekie Tmaki Local Board Plan. A
key outcome for the Local Board Plan is:
working with partners and developers and advocating for a built environment that creates
and strengthens communities, is environmentally friendly, integrates public transport and
facilitates walking and cycling.
18. There are no other planning documents, such as area plans, structure plans related to the
site.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Analysis of Private Plan Change Request

19. The private plan change request for 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie seeks a change of
zoning from Business Park zone to Mixed Use zone. Consequent to the change of zoning
Item 12
the applicant also seeks the removal of the existing Business Park Zone Office Control of
47,000m GFA from the site.
20. The Business Park zone and the Business Park Office GFA Control relates both to the 600-
612 Great South Road, Ellerslie (Millennium Centre) and 614-616 Great South Road,
Ellerslie sites. The Business Park Zone Office GFA Control of 47,000m was based on the
existing GFA of the sites.
21. Goodman has recently advised that the net leasable area of the Millennium Centre is
43,609m. It is commonly accepted that an additional 10 per cent of net leasable area
equates to GFA. Auckland Council calculations based on coverage and floor levels indicate
nearly 50,000m of GFA is currently occupied by the Centre. On this basis, the Millennium
Centre has already exhausted the cap, which affects the sites development potential.
Rezoning and removal of the GFA cap over the site would address this issue.
22. As the Millennium Centre and the site are not well connected there are significant
constraints to establishing an integrated development and meeting the Business Park
objective for a campus style development. The ground level of the Millennium Centre is
also significantly higher than the site. Development as part of the Millennium Centre could
require the site to be raised to match the Millennium Centre and may add cost to any
development. (Attachment C).
Infrastructure
23. Auckland Transport has stated that in-principle it has no objection to the proposed rezoning.
Watercare Services has indicated the wastewater and water networks have serviceability for
potential developments on the site.
Consultation
24. A summary of consultation undertaken was submitted with the private plan request. This
indicated consultation with the neighbours:
Ellerslie School,
620 Great South Road (Wendys restaurant),
381 Great South Road, Ellerslie, and
600-612 Great South Road, the Millennium Centre (owned by the Oyster Group).
25. The applicant has also sought comment from mana whenua and the Maungakiekie Tmaki
Local Board. The response of these organisations is outlined in Attachment A.
Correspondence has been received from the Ellerslie School Board of Trustees stating they
have a neutral view on the proposal at this stage. A letter of support from the Oyster Group
has also been received.
B STATUTORY ANALYSIS
Resource Management Act
26. The process for considering private plan change requests is set out in Part 2 of Schedule 1
to the RMA. A request can be made by any person under clause 21 of Schedule 1 and is
required to include the information set out in clause 22. After a request has been lodged, a
local authority can request further information under clause 23, and modify a request under
clause 24, but only with the applicants agreement.
27. If an applicant refuses to provide any requested further or additional information, a local
authority that considers it has insufficient information to enable it to consider or approve the
request, may reject the request or decide not to approve the plan change requested under
clause 23(6).
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
28. Under clause 25, after receiving the request, receiving all required information and modifying
the request (where relevant), the local authority is required to make a decision to either:
adopts the request as if it were a proposed plan made by the council, which must then be
Item 12

accepts the private plan change request, in whole or in part, which then triggers a
25(2)(b)); or
rejects the private plan change request in whole or in part, in reliance on one of the
decides to deal with the request as if it were an application for a resource consent (clause
25(3)).
. See Attachment E for the full wording of the clauses that make up Part 2 of Schedule 1 to
the RMA.
Options available to the council

29. The next sections of this report assess the various options available to the council under
clause 25. Council staff consider that the applicant has provided sufficient information to
enable the request to be considered, and so do not consider the ground of rejection in
clause 23(6) to be available.
Option 1 - Reject the private plan change request, in whole or in part (clause 25(4))
30. The council has the power to reject a private plan change request, in whole or in part, in
reliance on one of the limited grounds set out in clause 25(4). If the private plan change
request is rejected by the council, the applicant has the ability to appeal that decision to the
Environment Court under clause 27 of Schedule 1.
31. The grounds for rejection under clause 25(4) are as follows:
a) the request or part of the request is frivolous or vexatious; or
b) within the last two years, the substance of the request or part of the request:
i) has been considered and given effect to, or rejected by, the local authority or the
Environment Court; or
ii) has been given effect to by regulations made under section 360A; or
c) the request or part of the request is not in accordance with sound resource management
practice; or
d) the request or part of the request would make the policy statement or plan inconsistent
with Part 5; or
e) in the case of a proposed change to a policy statement or plan, the policy statement or
plan has been operative for less than two years.
Is the request frivolous or vexatious?

32. The private plan change request includes a comprehensive section 32 evaluation report and
a detailed assessment of environmental effects covering a range of issues including storm
water management, wastewater and water, transport and traffic and urban design. The
transport analysis incorporates an Integrated Transport Analysis (ITA) which considers three
different development options for the site. The applicant also provides detailed analysis of
relevant policies including the Auckland Unitary Plan Business Park and Mixed Use zones
objectives and policies.
33. It is therefore recommended that the council cannot reject the private plan change request
on the basis that it is frivolous or vexatious.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Has the substance of the request been considered and given effect to or rejected by the council
within the last two years?
34. This provision largely seeks to discourage repetitive private plan change requests that are
Item 12
substantially the same, with the associated costs to the council and the community.
35. The change to a Mixed Use zoning was considered in evidence by the Independent
Hearings Panel during the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Council in its
evidence to the Independent Hearings Panel supported the rezoning of the 614-616 Great
South Road to Mixed Use with consequential removal of the GFA cap.
However, the Independent Hearings Panel did not hear evidence relating to:
the difficulties of developing the 614-616 Great South Road site with the Business Park
zoning and Business Park Zone Office Control, which would result in any future office
development being a noncomplying activity;
this control means that the site cannot be developed in a way that would allow for the
efficient use and development of natural and physical resources; and
the difficulties of developing the 614-616 Great South Road site as a separate site from
600 -612 Great South Road in relation to Business Park zoning objectives and policies.
Has the substance of the request been given effect to by regulations made under section 360A?
37. Section 360A of the RMA relates to regulations amending regional coastal plans in relation
to aquaculture activities. The substance of the private plan change request does not relate
section 360A of the RMA. It is therefore recommended that the council not reject the request
on the basis of this ground of rejection.
Is the request in accordance with sound resource management practice?

38. The term sound resource management practice is an often used planning term but is not
defined in the RMA. The High Court in Malory Corporation Limited v Rodney District Council
(CIV-2009-404-005572), where the issue on appeal was determining the correct
interpretation of clause 25(4), considered this term in light of clause 25(4)(c) of Schedule 1
and stated:
the words sound resource management practice should, if they are to be given any
coherent meaning, be tied to the Acts purpose and principles. I agree too with the Courts
observation that the words should be limited to only a coarse scale merits assessment, and
that a private plan change which does not accord with the Acts purposes and principles will
not cross the threshold for acceptance or adoption.
39. The private plan change request aligns with the purposes and principles of the RMA 1991.
The change in zoning to Mixed Use at the site and the removal of the Business Park Zone
Office Control cap will allow for the more efficient resource management and sustainable
development of the site.
40. The constraints of size and land configuration (Attachment C) of the 614-616 Great South
Road site do not align well with the Business Park zoning objectives and policies. This does
not encourage sound resource management practice as it is unlikely the landscape and
amenity controls can be achieved on the site. Similarly, the exhausting of the Business Park
Office GFA cap means that office development would require non-complying resource
consent. The proposed Mixed Use zoning provides for residential intensification around
town centres and transport corridors. It also allows for a compatible mix of residential and
employment activities.
41. The private plan change request is therefore considered to be in accordance with sound
resource management practice and it is therefore recommended that the council not reject
the private plan change.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Would the request or part of the request make the policy statement or plan inconsistent with Part 5
of the RMA?
42. Part 5 sets out the role and purpose of planning documents created under the RMA,
Item 12
including that they must assist a local authority to give effect to the sustainable management
purpose of the RMA.
43. The request to re-zone the site Mixed Use and remove the Business Park Office GFA cap
from the site would not make the Auckland Unitary Plan inconsistent with Part 5 of the RMA
1991. The development options for the small (3867m) and disconnected site do not align
with the Business Park zoning objective and policies including the campus style
development. The proposed Mixed Use zoning aligns with the Auckland Unitary Plan
Regional Policy Statements allowing for residential intensification and business around town
centres and centres and transport corridors. The Mixed Use zoning would give effect to the
sustainable management purpose of the RMA. The necessary infrastructure to service the
proposed change of zoning is available and this has been supported by correspondence
received from Watercare Services, Healthy Waters and Auckland Transport.
44. It is therefore recommended that the council not reject the private plan change request on
the basis that the substance of the request would make the Auckland Unitary Plan
inconsistent with Part 5 of the RMA.
Has the district plan to which the request relates been operative for less than two years?
45. The district plan provisions of the Auckland Unitary Plan relevant to this request were made
operative on 15 November 2016. The provisions have therefore been operative for less than
two years and the council could reject the private plan change request on that basis.
However, case law has suggested that this ground for rejection must be exercised in a
principled manner having regard to the purpose of the RMA to promote the sustainable
management of natural and physical resources. It is important to note that the wording of
clause 25(4) provides that the council may reject a private plan change request if one of the
grounds under clause 25(4) exists.
46. Given the specific circumstances of the request, the fact that relevant matters were not
presented to the Independent Hearings Panel and for the reasons listed below,
the size and configuration of the site
the limitations of the Business Park Office GFA and its restrictions on possible office
development
the lack of capacity to provide for an integrated development that meets the Business
Park zones objectives and policies,
It is therefore recommended that the council not reject the private plan change request on
the basis that the relevant parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan have been operative for less
than two years.
Option 2 - Decide to deal with the request as if it were an application for a resource consent
47. The council can, in some circumstances, decide to deal with a private plan change request
as if it were an application for resource consent. However, in this case, the private plan
change request seeks to rezone 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie from Business Park to
Mixed Use and to remove the 47,000m GFA cap from the site. The most appropriate
process for achieving the rezoning from Business Park to Mixed Use and to remove the
47,000m GFA cap from the site is a plan change.
48. It is therefore recommended that the council not decide to deal with the request as if it were
an application for resource consent.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Option 3 - Adopt the request, or part of the request, as if it were a proposed plan made by
the council itself
49. The council is able to decide to adopt the request and process it as though it were a Council-
Item 12
initiated proposed plan change. A decision to adopt triggers the process set out in Part 1 of
Schedule 1, which would then require the council to consult as required in clauses 3 to 3C of
Part 1.
50. Following consultation, the Council would then need to notify the proposed plan change for
submissions and conduct a hearing into submissions, if required. If a request is adopted, all
costs associated with the plan change would rest with the council. It is relevant to note that
the applicant has not requested that the council adopts the private plan change.
51. Given that the applicant has not requested that the council adopts the request and that the
council would need to account for all costs associated with the adopted request, it is not
recommended that the council decide to adopt the private plan change request.
Option 4 - Accept the private plan change request, in whole or in part, and proceed to notify
the request, or part of the request, under clause 26
52. If the council accepts the request, in whole or in part, it must then proceed to notify the
request, or part of the request under clause 26. After the submission period has closed, the
council would need to hold a hearing to consider any submissions, and a decision would
then be made by the council in relation to the request in accordance with Schedule 1 of the
RMA. All costs associated with the request (including notification and any hearing) would
rest with the applicant.
53. This is the only remaining option and is supported on the basis that the request does not
meet the criteria for rejection under clause 25(4) of Schedule 1 to the RMA, having regard to
relevant case law, and it is more appropriate to accept the request than adopt it or treat it as
a resource consent application. In particular:
i) the limited extent of the site (3867m) makes development of the site in a manner that
aligns with Business Park zone objectives and policies hard to achieve;
ii) the presence of the of the 47,000m GFA cap related to the Business Park zoning of the
site makes it difficult to develop the site in a manner that would ensure the efficient use of
physical resources;
iii) the proposed change to Mixed Use zoning for the site at 614-616 Great South Road,
Ellerslie aligns better with the chapter of the Auckland Unitary Plan Regional Policy
Statement: objectives and policies and with sound resource management principles.
54. It is therefore recommended that the council accepts the private plan change request.
C CONCLUSION
55. The Goodman private plan change request for 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie seeks to
rezone 3867m of land from Business Park zone to Mixed Use zone with a consequential
amendment to remove the Business Park Zone Office Control 47,000m cap from the site.
Mixed Use zoning will allow for the efficient use and development of the site and be in
alignment with the strategic direction of the Auckland Unitary Plan.
56. As part of this request the applicant Goodman has undertaken consultation with
neighbouring property owners, mana whenua and the Maungakiekie Tmaki Local Board.
Watercare Services, Auckland Transport and Healthy Waters have indicated that the
existing infrastructure is able to manage the development that would be enabled by the
proposed plan change.
57. Having carefully assessed the request against the relevant matters set out in the RMA and
associated case law, it is recommended that council decide to accept the request and notify
it for submissions. If accepted, a further assessment by council officers would take place
prior to and during the course of the subsequent hearing.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Consideration
Item 12
58. The applicant has sought the views of the Maungakiekie-Tmaki Local Board and provided
the Local Board with the private plan change document. The Maungakiekie-Tmaki Local
Board has indicated that it does not have any issues or comments in regard to the proposed
plan change at this stage.

59. Goodman through their planning consultants has undertaken consultation with mana
whenua. This is outlined in the Consultation Summary (Attachment A). Mana whenua
contacted were: Ngi Tai ki Tmaki; Ngti Maru; Ngti Paoa; Ngti Tamaoho; Ngti
Tamater; Ngti te Ata; Ngaati Whanaunga; Ngti Whatua Orakei; Te kitai Waiohua; Te
Kawerau Maki; Te Patukirikiri; Te Runanga o Ngti Whatua; Ngti Whatua o Kaipara;
WaikatoTainui; and Te Ahiwaru.
60. Ngi Tai ki Tmaki advised they had no further interest in the application;
61. Ngti Whtua o rkei advised they had no comment to make on the application; and
62. Te Runanga o Ngti Whatua supported the proposal.
63. Ngti te Ata have requested that they would like to be further involved in the consultation
process and the Iwi have been contracted by the applicant to prepare a cultural response
report on the private plan change.
64. In the case of Waikato-Tainui a letter was sent to Waikato-Tainui outlining the proposal.
Waikato-Tainui requested that the proposal be assessed against the Waikato-Tainui Iwi
Management Plan and details of consultation with mana whenua is provided. The applicant
has assessed the private plan change against the Waikato-Tainui Iwi Management Plan and
this was provided to Waikato-Tainui. A key aspect of the assessment was consideration of
the ecological impact of the proposal. Waikato Tainui have indicated they have no further
issue with this request but would like to be updated on the progress of the application.
Implementation
65. If the private plan change is accepted for notification, the implementation of this decision will
follow the process set out in clause 26 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. This requires that the
private plan change is notified within four months of being accepted, unless this time frame
is waived in accordance with section 37 of the RMA. As previously discussed, the councils
costs associated with processing the private plan change request would be met by the
applicant.
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Note: Due to the size and complexity of Attachment A it will be available under separate cover on
the Auckland Council website at the following link:
Item 12
Attachments
No. Title Page
A Request For Plan Private Change 614-616 Great South Road, Ellerslie
(Under Separate Cover)
B Business Park Office Control Cap 415
C Site relationship 417
D Auckland Unitary Plan (OiP) Zoning Activity Status 419
E Resource Management Act 1991 421
Signatories
Author Roger Eccles - Planner
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Attachment B
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Attachment C
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Attachment D
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Attachment E
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Attachment E
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 12
Attachment E
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Auckland Council's quarterly monitoring report on the National Policy

Statement on Urban Development Capacity
Item 13
File No.: CP2017/24207
Purpose
1. To receive the first housing monitoring quarterly report required under the National Policy
Statement on Urban Development Capacity.
Executive summary
2. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC) became
operative in 2016. The policy requires quarterly monitoring reports on housing and business
land.
3. The first quarterly report is attached for information. The key findings include:
detached dwellings remain the dominant type of housing consented which makes up
more than half of the total number of dwellings consented
the 12-month consents for attached dwellings have grown by 18 per cent at the end of
the September 2017 compared to the same period in 2016
three quarters of all consented residential dwelling growth is within Aucklands urban area
average residential sale prices have declined in recent months
understanding the distribution of sale prices is important; there is major price variation by
type and location
most residential properties (39 per cent) are sold to individuals that own multiple
properties
average rents vary considerably throughout Auckland and by dwelling type
large amounts of non-residential floor space have been consented
4. Future reports will be provided to the Planning Committee for information.
Recommendation/s
a) receive the first quarterly monitoring report on the National Policy Statement on
Urban Development Capacity.
b) circulate the quarterly monitoring report to all local boards for information.
Comments
5. National Policy Statements are a legislative tool in the Resource Management Act 1991.
They are a means for central government to prescribe objectives and policies for matters of
national significance which all local authorities must implement within their planning
framework.
6. The NPS-UDC came into effect in December 2016. Its purpose is to enable urban
environments to grow and change in response to the changing needs of the communities
and to provide enough space for their populations to live and work.
7. NPS-UDC has four objectives. These are:
Auckland Council's quarterly monitoring report on the National Policy Statement on Urban Page 425
Development Capacity
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
outcomes from planning decisions

evidence and monitoring to support planning decisions
responsive planning
Item 13
coordinated planning evidence and decision-making.

8. Each objective has an associated set of policies.
9. The evidence and monitoring objectives require a robustly developed, comprehensive and
frequently updated evidence base to inform planning decisions.
10. Local authorities are required to monitor a range of housing and land indicators on a
quarterly basis. These include:
prices and rents for housing
residential land and business land by location and type
indicators of housing affordability
building and resource consents
price differentials and price efficiency.
11. Councils are encouraged to publish the results of their monitoring reports.
12. The Quarterly Monitoring Report focuses on the region. However, the data can be analysed
at different scales e.g. the number of residential dwellings consented in town centres, and
RIMU can do further analysis as may be requested.
13. Future quarterly reports will be provided to the Planning Committee for information.
Consideration
14. There has been no engagement with local boards in preparing this report. The report
includes data and information disaggregated to local boards which provides an insight into
the markets of those areas. Further analysis at this scale can be provided on request.

15. There has been no engagement with mana whenua or mataawaka in preparing this report.
16. Vulnerable Mori are extremely sensitive to housing affordability. The report monitors
changes in the housing market and identifies areas that are adversely affected by the
decline in housing affordability.
Implementation
17. There are no directly related implementation actions stemming from this report.
Attachments
No. Title Page
A National Policy Statement Urban Development Capacity Quarterly 427
Monitoring Report
Signatories
Author Chad Hu Growth Analyst, Research and Evaluation
Authorisers Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Item 13
Attachment A
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity initial

assessment results (Covering report)
Item 14
File No.: CP2017/24995
Purpose
1. To receive the preliminary high level results of the housing demand capacity assessment
required under the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity.
Executive Summary
2. This is a late covering report for the above item. The comprehensive agenda report was not
available when the agenda went to print and will be provided prior to the 28 November 2017
Planning Committee meeting.
Recommendations
3. The recommendations will be provided in the comprehensive agenda report.
National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity initial assessment results (Covering Page 455
report)
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings - 28

November 2017
Item 15
File No.: CP2017/24119
Purpose
1. To receive a summary and provide a public record of memos or briefing papers that may
have been distributed to committee members.
Executive summary
2. This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of information
circulated to committee members via memo/briefing or other means, where no decisions are
required.
3. The following information items are attached:
Auckland Councils final submission on the proposed Northland Regional Plan
(Attachment A)
Planning Committee Forward Work Programme (Attachment B)
Schedule of December 2017 Planning Committee workshops (Attachment C)
4. The following workshops/briefings have taken place:
30 October 2017 Auckland Plan Refresh 21 (Attachment D)
1 November 2017 Confidential Ports of Auckland (no attachment)
16 November 2017 Confidential Enhancements Plan Change (no attachment)
5. This document can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:
o at the top of the page, select meeting Planning Committee from the drop-down tab
and click View;
o under Attachments, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled
Extra Attachments.
6. Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about
the items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to
the authors.
Recommendation/s
a) receive the Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings 28
November 2017.
Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings - 28 November 2017 Page 457
Planning Committee
28 November 2017
Attachments
No. Title Page
A Auckland Council's final submission on the proposed Northland Regional
Item 15
Plan (Under Separate Cover)

B Planning Committee Forward Work Programme 28 November 2017
(Under Separate Cover)
C Schedule of December 2017 Planning Committee workshops (Under
Separate Cover)
D Auckland Plan refresh workshop 21 minutes (Under Separate Cover)
Signatories
Author Kalinda Gopal - Senior Governance Advisor
Authoriser Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy
Summary of Planning Committee information memos and briefings - 28 November 2017 Page 458

Planning Committee Agenda 28 November

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Planning Committee Agenda 28 November

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Planning Committee will be held on:

Date: Tuesday, 28 November 2017

Chairperson Cr Chris Darby

Contact Telephone: (09) 367 2442

Relevant regional strategy and policy

o Panuku Development Auckland

o Watercare Services Limited

(i) All powers necessary to perform the committees responsibilities, including:

Members of the public

Those who are not members of the public

Access to confidential information is managed on a need to know basis where access

Members of the meeting

Independent Mori Statutory Board

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

Local Board members

Council Controlled Organisations

Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

That the Planning Committee:

6 Local Board Input

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item

There were no notices of motion.

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 9

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 10

Draft Auckland Plan for approval

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 11

investment in planning and infrastructure needs to be made.

Other elements of the draft plan

Digital Auckland Plan

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 12

Overview of draft Auckland Plan

Mori impact statement

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 13

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 14

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 15

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 16

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 17

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 18

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 19

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 20

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 21

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 22

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 23

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 24

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 25

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 26

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 27

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 28

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 29

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 30

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 31

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 32

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 33

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 34

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 35

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 36

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 37

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 38

Approval of draft Auckland Plan for consultation Page 39