Purpose

This report covers my Waitematā Local Board Activities during February 2016 as Deputy Chair of the Finance Committee; Deputy Chair of the Hearings Committee; Lead of the Parks and Open Spaces portfolio; Heritage, Urban Design and Planning portfolio holder; and Local Board representative on the K Road Business Association.

Executive Summary

• Auckland Domain Committee met on 10 February to discuss a temporary alcohol ban for the Lantern Festival (18-22 February) and the WWI Centenary Memorial
• The final Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance Document is ready for publication and will be officially launched by the Local Board in March
• Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square upgrade is now in the advanced detailed design stage with construction expected to start in August 2016 and take 9-12 months
• The Port Future Study Group have released a preliminary long-list of zones for an alternative port site based purely on technical feasibility and met on 19 February to discuss further before further analysis is undertaken
• The Governing Body voted 13-8 to withdraw the out of scope up-zoning proposals advanced by the Unitary Plan committee in December 2015
• Consultation events were held on the Auckland Domain Masterplan on 13 February
• A very successful Myers Park Medley was held on 28 February
• I keep track of resource consent applications as they are received by Council, requesting further information, plans and Assessments of Environmental Effects for applications of interest. Significant applications are referred to the relevant residents’ associations for their input which I then relay to planners as part of the Local Board’s input. Reporting of resource consent applications, planning portfolio input, hearings and decisions in the Local Board area for this month is detailed in the Heritage, Urban Design and Planning section of this report under the headings ‘Planning’: ‘Resource Consents’

Comments

Governing Body Extraordinary Meeting on the ‘Out of Scope’ changes on 24 February 2016

The relevant resolutions of the Governing Body are below.

MOVED by Deputy Mayor PA Hulse, seconded by Cr AM Filipaina:  

That the Governing Body:

a) maintain its current position as set out in the evidence lodged with the Independent Hearings Panel.

b) note that the council has not made any decisions on the zoning maps in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. This decision will be made in August 2016 after considering the recommendations from the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel.

c) note the proposed changes discussed in the council’s evidence respond to guidance from the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel in relation to avoiding spot-zoning or pepper-potting the zoning maps. Remaining strictly within the scope of submissions on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan would not meet the Panel’s guidance.

d) note that the special legislation for the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan passed by the Government allows the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel to recommend changes that are not within the scope of submissions, but balances this by enabling anyone who is prejudiced by the council agreeing to accept the Panel’s recommendations to appeal the council’s decision to the Environment Court.

e) note the concerns expressed by members of the public and community groups about the council’s current position on the zoning maps in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

f) request staff to instruct the council’s lawyers to stress to the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel on 3 March 2016, the importance of considering natural justice and fairness issues when considering the council’s position and that presented by other submitters at the re-zoning hearings.

g) ask the Chief Executive to design an urgent community process, run by an independent working group, to undertake the following:

i) facilitate discussion on residential zoning and provide opportunities for the community to express their views

ii) focus discussion in areas of Auckland where council’s evidence proposes substantial changes to the zoning in the notified plan

iii)        prepare a report to be provided to the Independent Hearings Panel by 31 May 2016, reflecting the range of community views heard by the working group.

h) ask the Chief Executive to direct staff to proactively communicate with residents of areas most affected by proposed ‘out of scope’ changes to inform them of the process that can enable non-submitters to join with submitters who are already part of the Independent Hearings Panel process.

i) direct the Auckland Development Committee to hold two workshops specifically on the zoning maps as soon as practicable after recommendations on changes on the zoning maps are received from the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel on 22 July 2016. These workshops are over-and-above the two full day workshops already planned in August, prior to the council making its decisions on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

A division was called for, voting on which was as follows:

The motion was declared lost by 8 votes to 13. 

The resolution finally adopted was:

Resolution number GB/2016/18

MOVED by Cr D Quax, seconded by Cr CE Fletcher:

That the Governing Body:

a) revoke the Unitary Plan Committee decision of 10 November 2015:

That the Unitary Plan Committee:

a)    confirms the proposed zoning changes as shown on maps under separate cover for the Central and West Auckland geographic areas as Council’s position.

b)    supports the approach to zoning changes which are not directly supported by any submission, but which give effect to the Regional Policy Statement in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (as proposed to be amended by the Council), and which are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

b) revoke the Unitary Plan Committee decision of 24 November 2015:

That the Unitary Plan Committee:

a)    confirms the proposed zoning changes as shown on maps (Attachment C, D and E) for the North and South Auckland geographic areas as Council’s position.

and replace them with:

That the Governing Body:

a) remove from the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan maps the ‘out of scope’ zoning changes made on 10 November 2015, which were not directly supported by any submission, and that this now be confirmed as Auckland Council’s position.

b) remove from the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan maps the ‘out of scope’ zoning changes made on 24 November 2015, which were not directly supported by any submission, and that this now be confirmed as Auckland Council’s position.

That the Governing Body:

c) note that the proposed ‘out of scope’ zoning changes (other than minor changes correcting errors and anomalies) seek to modify the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan in a substantial way.

d) note that the timing of the proposed ‘out of scope’ zoning changes impacts the rights of those potentially affected, where neither submitter or further submitter, and for whom the opportunity to participate in the process is restricted to Environment Court appeal.

e) in the interests of upholding the principle of natural justice and procedural fairness, withdraw that part of its evidence relating to ‘out of scope’ zoning changes (other than minor changes correcting errors and anomalies).

A division was called for, voting on which was as follows:

The motion was declared carried by 13 votes to 8.

CARRIED 

Ellen Melville Hall and Freyberg Square Upgrade

After the December 2015 decision of the City Centre Advisory Board to leave Freyberg Lane open to traffic, despite very strong public feedback in favour of closing the lane, the project team are now in the detailed design stage. The Metropolis Building body corporate decided that the four Phoenix Palms in front of the building will remain. upgrade is now in the advanced detailed design stage . The extended consultation period has pushed out the timeline so that construction will now start in August 2016 and take 9-12 months.

Port Future Study

The Port Future Study is a collaborative study of the Auckland Council. the study comprises two groups – a wider reference group of Aucklanders with a direct interest in the port and a Consensus Working Group (CWG) selected by the reference group from within their number. The CWG have agreed to an objective and study scope and meet regularly. The CWG appointed a consortium of consultants in November 2015. As part of their ongoing process, the consultants have drawn up a long list of zones that are technically feasible for providing a port in the upper North Island. They are also developing a set of detailed criteria that will be used to analyse the suitability of these locations. The CWG are closely involved in the long list and criteria development. As can be seen in the map below, the long list of zones is very high-level and is a broad assessment of areas where a port might feasibly be located. At this stage the assessment is based only on the site’s physical capacity for port services, such as navigability, depth, and distance from primary transport routes. The options have not yet been analysed against any detailed criteria other than technical feasibility and no final decisions have been made. The CWG met with the Reference Group on 19 February to get members’ input on the long list of zones and criteria before a more thorough analysis is undertaken.

Portfolio Report: Parks & Open Spaces

Portfolio Responsibilities

Decision-making for and oversight of local parks and public council open spaces, including beaches, coastal walkways, reserves, sports fields, playgrounds, non-road reserve plazas and boat ramps. This includes location and naming of new parks, design and maintenance of park facilities and settings, and supporting community events and planting programmes in parks. Landowner consent delegation in respect of local parks and open spaces. Regulatory and policy oversight of local dog management. Advocacy to achieve local priorities relating to parks network development and input into the management and use of regional parks located within the local area.

Weona Coastal Walkway Construction

The walkway, which will connect the Meola Reef to Lemington Reserve and ultimately to Point Resolution Taurarua in Parnell. The link from Lemington Reserve is underway with a clearance through bush completed and footings being constructed for a small bridge.

Avian Botulism outbreak at Western Springs lakeside

A number of sick and dead waterfowl have been found by the Western Springs lakeside. This appears to be due to Botulism that is exacerbated by breeding grounds for bacteria that large amounts of rotting bread that has been uneaten by the ducks provide. Budget has been made available to increase lake checks to daily these have already started.

City Parks are working with the NZ Bird Charitable Trust to assist with training and providing staff with the skills to recognise birds in the early stages of the disease to ensure they are removed as early as possible and treated. Additional barley straw is being sourced and will be added near the inflow to the lake as soon as City Parks can find a supplier. The filter pond near the zoo has silted up over the years and is becoming stagnant, we will be looking at options to improve flows through this area as a longer term measure to try to reduce the breeding ground for the bacteria.

Volunteer Animal Pest Control Programme: rodents and possums

Update from Sarah Peters, Volunteer and Biodiversity Coordinator, 25^th February, 2016.

One of the regular bi-annual animal pest control training sessions was held on Saturday 13^th February in the Auckland Domain. This session resulted in several new recruits for both the Domain and other parks and reserves in the pest control programme.

 Urban Design

Earthquake Prone Buildings Guidance Book

The Earthquake Prone Buildings guidance is in final form and will soon be officially launched by the Waitematā Local Board.

In the wake of the devastating Canterbury earthquakes in 2011, the national spotlight has been on reducing the risks to the public from buildings that are earthquake prone, meaning they are not strong enough to withstand a moderate earthquake.  As a result the Central Government has revised its Earthquake Prone Buildings policy, and a bill to amend the Building Act 2004 is currently going through Parliament.  Insurance Companies have also been tightening their standards to reduce their exposure to future claims.  Auckland Council has its own Earthquake Prone, Dangerous, and Insanitary Buildings Policy and launched some interim guidance in early 2013 to help the public understand basic seismic concepts.  This guidance builds upon that interim guidance and offers a simplified version of the denser, more technical guidance on offer from the NZ Government and NZ Society of Earthquake Engineering.  It uses flowcharts, diagrams, and illustrations throughout to deliver detailed information about the assessment and retrofit design of unreinforced masonry buildings, focussing on Auckland’s seismic demands.  An entirely new component of the guidance is the indicative costing models for both detailed assessment and retrofit, derived from data collected by an engineering firm that has been involved in hundreds of retrofits across Auckland.

Beyond the stricter timeframes for earthquake prone buildings, buildings must also be strengthened when there is a change of use. This is especially relevant for the Waitematā Local Board area, where a growing population is moving into new and converted apartments.  As the historical core of Auckland city, Waitematā is also home to the majority of Auckland’s unreinforced masonry buildings, many which are treasured by the public for their heritage value.  It’s my hope that this guidance helps to demystify further the process and terminology around earthquake prone buildings and seismic assessment, and in so doing helps the owners of earthquake prone buildings feel more confident about getting on with the work their building needs.  By supporting these owners with solid and accessible technical information, we can ensure that our communities hold on to more of the historic buildings that make them distinctive and appealing places to live, work, and visit.

Many thanks go to Tanya Sorrell of Auckland Council Heritage; consultants Peter Liu and Dmytro Dizhur of EQStruc; and the Council working working group, including Patrick Cummuskey from Building Control, Trina Thompson from the Waitematā Local Board office, Bryan Pooley from Heritage, Kevin Walsh (formerly of Auckland Council Property), and Cathy McIntosh from Auckland Council Communications.

Report-back from the Expression of Interest Process for the Adaptive Re-Use of Heritage Toilets Project

There has been significant interest, on the back of good media coverage, in the proposal to find adaptive re-uses for the now-decommissioned Sturdee Street/Market Place, Custom Street and Wellesley Street public toilets. After a low return of expressions of interest, the team have reverted to a preferred supplier approach with Talisman Consultants. The projects can be completed within the next twelve months but this will be a watching brief.

Planning

Resource Consents

The portfolio request information on resource consent applications of interest as a matter of course. The Local Board can have input into the decision on public notification of a resource consent application but not into the substantive matters of the application. The input of the Local Board is not binding on the commissioner making the decision. Nonetheless, on some significant applications we will include substantive comments along with our views on notification.

• R/LUC/2016/128, 82-84 Kelmarna Avenue, Herne Bay. Removal of an existing single level classroom and replacing it with a new two-storey classroom building. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/119, 6B/9 Victoria Street East, Auckland Central. Demolition of internal walls of scheduled building. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/43, 5 Renall Street, Ponsonby. Category A scheduled building in the Renall Street Conservation Area. Internal alterations to install a shower and remove plaster ceiling in the main hall area. I read the plans and AEE closely but the work is very minor and will have no impact on the outside of the building so we did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/234, 204-208 Jervois Road, Herne Bay. Extended opening hours for an established restaurant. We asked for full notification of this application.
• R/LUC/2016/54, 38 Pollen Street, Grey Lynn. Converting space into a food court and restaurant. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2015/5318, 41 Marine Parade, Herne Bay. Additions and alterations to existing dwelling in Conservation Area. We asked for limited notification to residents of nearby properties because of importance of Conservation Area.
• R/VCC/2006/6066/1, 15 Fleet Street, Eden Terrace. The stage 2 apartment have 8 units in total, which means converting the parking unit into an additional Unit 8. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2015/5061, 19 Stratford Street, Parnell. New dwelling. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/293, 2 Wanganui Avenue, Herne Bay. additions and alterations at 2 Wanganui Avenue, Ponsonby. The site is within a Conservation Area C under the District Plan and Historic Heritage Extent of Place [rcp/dp] – 2516, Ardmore Road, Wanganui Avenue, Albany Road and Trinity Street Historic Heritage Area under the PAUP. The proposal involves the following: removal of chimney (replica proposed); basement carport in front façade for 2 vehicles; rear extension. We asked for limited notification to residents of nearby properties because of importance of Conservation Area.
• R/VCC/2015/895/1, 29 Hepburn Street, Freemans Bay. s127 Additions and Alterations to existing dwelling. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/TRC/2016/288, 36 Collingwood Street, Freemans Bay. Application for removal of 2x small street trees for a new crossing. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/319, 160 Grafton Limited, Grafton. Redevelopment of building to create two additional levels, and add-on commercial car park. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/295, 46-50 Upper Queen Street, Newton. Development of site for new building containing residential and commercial units. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/325, 15A Richard Street, Westmere. A ‘pop top’ extension to an existing dwelling. There is some infringement of height in relation to boundary planning rules. Written consent is provided from the neighbours. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/363, 72 Greys Avenue, City Centre. The application is for earthworks associated with sanitary sewer drainage works within Myers Park adjacent to a consented adjoining development site at 26 Poynton Terrace (currently under construction). The works in Myers Park involve the replacement of an existing lamp hole with a manhole and connecting this with the development at 26 Poynton Terrace via a proposed sanitary sewage line. Consent matters include earthworks of less than 50m² or 5m³ within an archaeological site. Overall the proposal is a discretionary activity. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/REG/2016/366, 131 Beach Road, Auckland Central. The application is for the construction of a non-permanent student accommodation building. The proposed building will have the same building platform, floor area ratio and height as the building previously consented on this site in 2014, and it will be a 19 storey student accommodation building with a total of 285 student rooms and 1752 m² of common facilities including lobby spaces. Consent matters include: exceeding the basic floor area ratio and maximum floor area ratio, bedrooms not meeting outlook space requirements, no loading space provided, exceeding maximum height, decontamination and short term land disturbance for removal of contaminated material. Overall the proposal is a non-complying activity. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/406, 210 Quay Street, Auckland Central. The application is for the establishment of container/ retail outlet (to be known as “Fish and Ships”) to be located in the south –western corner of the Eastern Viaduct for two periods per annum, 26 weeks per annum and each period will have a maximum duration of 3 months and for a period of five years. The container is 17.39m² in area, with dimensions of 6.0251m in length by 2.8742m with a height of 2.87m. Consent is required for a new building within Precinct 2, Viaduct Harbour Precinct and associated signage.  Overall the proposal is a restricted controlled activity. We asked for full notification given the prominence of the site and public interest in it.
• R/LUC/2016/319, 160 Grafton Road, Grafton. Redevelopment of building to create two additional levels, and add on commercial car park. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/365, 6-8 Upper Queen Street, City Centre. The proposal involves the demolition of the existing building at 8 Upper Queen Street. Consent is required as a controlled activity for the demolition and as a restricted discretionary activity for works in the dripline of trees that overhang the site, located on the adjoining property (Symonds Street Cemetery). The demolition involves no land disturbance and is to slab level only. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/LUC/2016/454, 33 Arnold Street, Grey Lynn. The proposal is to remove the existing dwelling that has the Pre 1944 Building Demolition Control under the PAUP. The site is zoned Residential 6a and they are proposing a new dwelling on the site. It has been sent to the heritage team for assessment. We did not have input into the notification decision.
• R/TRC/2016/448, 64-68 Great North Road, Grey Lynn. Trimming of dead crown wood from one scheduled English Oak tree at the Giltrap Porsche site. I requested the arborist’s report and reviewed it before allowing this to proceed on a non-notified basis.
• R/LUC/2016/476, 34 Albany Road, Herne Bay. The proposal is for external additions and alterations to an existing dwelling in the residential 1 zone and Conservation Area: Ardmore Road, Wanganui Avenue, Albany Road & part Trinity Street, Ponsonby. The proposal includes removal of the existing picket fence in the front yard to a new picket fence atop a masonry wall across half of the street facing boundary. The new pool proposed in the rear yard is associated with additional impermeable paving. The proposal also includes the establishment of new paved areas and retaining across the site. We asked for limited notification of the new fence to the surrounding properties as it may affect the coherence of the heritage streetscape.
• R/LUC/2016/100, 16 Grosvenor Street, Grey Lynn. After a s92 further information request, it was found that the proposal for additions and alterations to the existing dwelling at infringes the maximum permitted height for the zone. The main concern from heritage were the proposed materials which have now been noted in the revised plans. We are awaiting the heritage memo before having input into notification.
• R/LUC/2016/547, 121-125 The Strand, Parnell. Internal fit-out to a scheduled building, retail activity, one window sign. A proposal to establish a retail tenancy for “Huckleberry Farms” in the heritage listed building with interior definition. No structural alterations are proposed. One window sign is proposed. A total shortfall of 4 parking spaces for the site. We did not have input in to the notification decision.

Resource consent matters of significance this month

Decision: 1 Kelmarna Road, Herne Bay (The Gables) APPROVED as an SHA

‘The Gables’ on the corner of Kelmarna and Jervois Roads

The penultimate Tranche 9 of the Special Housing Area (SHA) application approval process  was announced on February 11. Among the SHAs approved was the venerable local pub, The Gables, on the corner of Jervois and Kelmarna Roads in Herne Bay. This means that the application is not subject to the usual notification, consultation or appeal processes to which resource consents are usually.

The Waitematā Local Board has generally been very supportive of the need for Auckland to intensify, and SHAs with most proposals supported, but the Herne Bay pub site was the first (and only) SHA proposal to go before the Governing body for support that we as the Local Board formally and unapologetically opposed with considered detailed reasoning. The prior, fully canvassed, similar proposal Environment Court decision against, and current outstanding opposing submissions still before the Unitary Plan Panel were the primary reasons.

The Local Board’s detailed reasons for opposition were that:

1. It failed to meet the lack of controversy criteria for an SHA.
2. The site has a significant litigation history. A very similar application was declined by Auckland City Council in 2006. That decision was appealed in 2007 based on a revised proposal for a 300m² hospitality unit and a 142m² retail unit fronting Jervois unit; 925m² of offices in nine units, five with frontage to Kelmarna and four facing to the western boundary; four apartments at 1st and 2nd floor on Jervois, four townhouses with access from Kelmarna and/or Jervois; 56 basement carparks; on Jervois Rd: three-level on corner, to 12.5m height, retail shops, tavern and four residential units above; on Kelmarna Ave: a three-level office building, ten terraced units (four residential and six commercial) with two levels to maximum height of 8m (matching surrounding Residential zone). The proposal was rejected by the Environment Court due to concerns with the combined effect of bulk and location of proposed buildings. In the words of Judge McElrea (KRJR Properties v ACC: ENV-2007-AKL-000663 (Decision No. A 088/2008), ‘the dominance of the development produced by the high level of site coverage, the lack of buffer yards on the northern and eastern boundaries, the loss of direct sunlight to residential properties in Kelmarna Avenue, and the lack of meaningful landscaping on most boundaries,’ [119] and ‘[i]n another context this development might be admirable. In this location it seems out of place with considerable detrimental effects.’ [59] These very same concerns are triggered by the, almost identical, current SHA proposal.
3. This SHA application is substantially similar to the rejected 2007 proposal, although with almost 30% greater height, which would only be permissible under proposed zoning changes under the PAUP.
4. Zoning has not yet been settled under the Unitary Plan and there are seventeen submissions against increased height and density in the area and at the specific site.
5. There is a proven record of considerable community opposition to further development of the site that would be thwarted by the SHA process. This opposition is reflected in Unitary Plan submissions and the history of litigation.

Unfortunately, our considered and thoroughly-researched local views were disregarded and the Governing Body, on a very close vote, narrowly supported this proposal proceeding to the Minister who approved it.

Regulatory

Alcohol Ban Review

Meetings / Events Attended / Appearances

2 February:

• Local Board workshop
  • Confidential session on Tranche 10 of Special Housing Area
  • Auckland Transport briefing on cycleway proposals

9 February:

• Local Board Business Meeting

10 February:

• Auckland Domain Committee meeting

11 February:

• Local Board Workshop
  • Inorganics/Illegal Dumping
  • Update on City Centre Integration projects
  • Auckland Domain Masterplan
• K Rd Public Realm Improvement community reference group

13 February:

• Auckland Domain Master Plan Information Day

15 February:

• Appearance on the Paul Henry Show

16 February:

• Local Board Workshop
  • ATEED Economic Development
  • Ellen Melville and Freyberg Square Update
  • Adaptive Re-Use of Heritage Toilets

23 February:

• Bi-monthly Board Report
• Local Board Performance Report
• NZTA/AT Protection of Route for second harbour crossing

24 February:

• Grey Lynn/Arch Hill ‘Have Your Say’ Annual Plan consultation meeting

25 February:

• New office blessing
• BID Policy Review meeting with BID leaders
• Finance Committee
• Parnell ‘Have Your Say’ Annual Plan consultation meeting

27 February:

• Rose Pruning Day at Symonds Street Cemetery

28 February:

• Myers Park Medley