051-054 hrg - auckland council (matthew bonis) - planning

8/20/2019 051-054 Hrg - Auckland Council (Matthew Bonis) - Planning

1/170

Page 1

BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL

IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 and theLocal Government (Auckland Transitional

Provisions) Act 2010

AND

IN THE MATTER of 051 - 054 Centres Zones, Business Parkand Industries Zones, Business Activities andBusiness Controls. Section D3, D3.1 – D3.9,I3.1 – I3.6

STATEMENT OF PRIMARY EVIDENCE OF MATTHEW WILLIAM BONISON BEHALF OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL (PLANNING EVIDENCE TOPIC 051 – 054)

27 July 2015


2/170

Page 2

Index

1 Introduction

2 Code of Conduct

3 Scope of evidence

4 Proposed Amendments outside scope of submissions

5 Summary

6 Part A – Statutory Context

7 Part B – Context to the provisions

8 Part C – Analysis of Submissions

9 Part D - Summary and conclusions

Attachment A Qualifications and relevant past experience

Attachment B Recommended Provisions and Spatial extent of recommendedIdentified Growth Corridors

Spatial extent of other Corridors considered

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 My full name is Matthew William Bonis. I am an Associate at Planz Consultants in

Christchurch. I have held this position since 2009.

1.2 I hold a Bachelor of Regional Planning degree, and have been employed in the practise of

Planning and Resource Management for some 16 years. I am a full member of the New

Zealand Planning Institute.

1.3 I assisted in the preparation of the notified provisions for Chapter B3.1 Commercial and

Industrial Growth (‘Topic 013 - Section B3.1’), and the commercial and business zones

(‘Topic 051 – 054‘) since early 2012.


3/170

Page 3

1.4 I have the qualifications and experience set out in my evidence-in-chief on Topic 013 (B3.1

Commercial and Industrial Growth) dated 8 December 2014.

1.5 Full details of my qualifications and relevant past experience are in Attachment A to thisevidence.

1.6 Auckland Council (‘the Council’) engaged me to assist in the preparation of the Proposed

Auckland Unitary Plan (‘PAUP’). My role in this hearing is to respond to submissions

received and to provide planning evidence in relation to the District Plan provisions for:

(a) Commercial activity strategy and implementation

(b) Role and function of centres

(c) Identified Growth Corridor overlay

1.7 I am relatively familiar with the centres network and industrial zonings of Auckland. I have

undertaken numerous site visits to the centres network and surrounds since 2012, including

all of the prospective Identified Growth Corridors.

Explanation of terms and coding used in the report

Commercial Zonings - Centre zonings (excluding city centre), mixed use, generalbusiness and business park zones.

IGC - Identified Growth Corridors

Industrial zonings - Light Industry zone and heavy industry zone

RMA – Resource Management Act (1991)

2. CODE OF CONDUCT

2.1 I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the

Environment Court Practice Note and that I agree to comply with it. I confirm that I have

considered all the material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the

opinions that I express, and that this evidence is within my area of expertise, except where

I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person.


4/170

Page 4

3. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE

3.1 I am providing planning evidence in relation to Centres Zones, Mixed Use and General

Business Zones, Business Activities and Business Controls (Section D3, D3.1 – D3.9, I3.1

– I3.6).

3.2 In considering the submissions and Section B3.1 provisions I have been assisted by the

following expert views:

Ms Susan Fairgray (Auckland Council) – Economics

Mr Kevin Wong-Toi (Interplan Limited) – Transport

Mr Greg Akehurst (Market Economics) – Retail and Office Economics

Mr Jeremy Wyatt (Auckland Council) – Planner

Ms Jarette Wickham (Auckland Council) - Planner

3.3 There are some 3276 submission points from 540 Submissions to the Section D3, D3.1 –

D3.9, I3.1 – I3.6 provisions of the PAUP. The majority of submissions received do not

challenge the strategic direction of the provisions. A number of specific submissions

oppose the extent to which the PAUP has disenabled specific activities in rationalising the

previous (‘legacy’) zoning regime.

3.4 The submissions seek either further compression or greater relaxation as to the extent by

which Auckland’s centre network and industrial zonings accommodate and provide for

commercial opportunities. The Identified Growth Corridor mechanism as a secondary

preference for commercial enablement also received numerous submissions.

3.5 I attended mediation sessions on 8th to 10th June, and 30th June to 2nd July 2015.

3.6 I have grouped and considered related submissions into topic areas corresponding largely

to the provision challenged.

3.7 In this evidence I support the Council's position on the relevant plan provisions which is

attached to the evidence of Mr Jeremy Wyatt. These are the 'mediated provisions' with

some additional changes that have been proposed through the Council's evidence. I

discuss these in more detail later in this evidence.


5/170

Page 5

4. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF SUBMISSIONS

4.1 I have proposed the following amendments that I do not consider to be within the scope of

submissions;

D:3.4 Town Centres, Zone Description ‘new vehicle crossings’ (paragraph 11.7)

D:3.6 Neighbourhood Centres, Zone Description ‘new development within the zone’

(paragraph 13.5)

I:3.3.2(b) Food and beverage in the General Business Zone (paragraph 32.1).

5. SUMMARY

5.1 This evidence provides a planning analysis of the submissions received on Section D3,

D3.1 – D3.9, I3.1 – I3.6 of the PAUP as they relate to the commercial (office and retail)

aspects of these provisions. Mr Jeremy Wyatt and Mr Ian Munro will be providing the

Planning Assessment for the built form and design aspects. Ms Jarette Wickham considers

the commercial provisions as these relate to the industrial zones.

5.2 The purpose of these Auckland Unitary provisions are to:

Provide clarity as to the function of different centres, their place in the centre hierarchy,

and the appropriate scale and form commensurate with their function;

Support a compact urban form, recognising the role of centres as focal points for

commercial and community activity. More intensive residential development and a

greater mix of activities (Mixed Use Zone) is anticipated around Metropolitan and Town

centres to sustain and support the growth of centres;

To provide some flexibility in the provisions recognising that some commercial activity

beyond centres is appropriate;

Ensure sufficient and appropriate business opportunities are enabled to 2031.

5.3 The overall planning policy direction for the Metropolitan Centres1 is to recognise these

centres in terms of their regional scale, focus for surrounding residential intensification and

1 Albany, Botany, Henderson, Manukau, New Lynn, New Market, Papakura, Sylvia Park, Takapuna, Westgate / Massey North –

Legacy zonings include: Manukau CC Business 3 (City Centre Zone); North Shore CC Takapuna Sub-Regional 3 Zone (Areas


6/170

Page 6

public transport initiatives, and enablement of a wide range of business, community and

social activities. Quality built form is to assist in providing a high level of amenity and

identity to attract further investment and social interaction.

5.4 For Town Centres2

, the operative plan approach as continued under the PAUP is torecognise the importance of these centres in terms of suburban focal points, but with

intensification and growth more reflective of the specific characteristics of each centre. A

wide range of commercial, residential, community and social activities are enabled. A high

quality urban form is sought.

5.5 At a more localised level, Local and Neighbourhood Centres3 respectively have a smaller

scale of zoned area. There is generally an absence of larger scale office and retail present,

particularly in Neighbourhood centres. Local and neighborhood centres have a narrower

range of activities that provide for a mix of convenience retail, dining, small business

services and other activities which support the local community. There is consistency

between the PAUP and the operative provisions in seeking to provide for small scale and

local business activity, and managing the interface with surrounding residential areas.

5.6 For the Mixed Use Zone, the Operative Plan provisions4 seek to provide for residential

intensification, generally within and around metropolitan and town centres which can

benefit from public transport accessibility. Mixed uses include cafes and small scale retail

and office activities in addition to the residential activities enabled. This approach has been

continued under the PAUP.

A, B, C and D), Albany Sub-Regional 3 Zone and Business 11A Zone; Waitakere CC Community Environment (New LynnConcept Plan). Source: Legacy Zone Harmonization Review (2012), page 32.

2 Examples include: Avondale, Browns Bay, Ellerslie, Mangere, Mt Albert, Otahuhu, Panmure, Pt Chevalier, Remuera, Takanini,

Whangaparaoa – Legacy zonings include: Auckland CC (Isthmus) Business 2 zone, Franklin DC Business (General andBusiness Centres zone); Manukau CC Mangere Town Centre and Neighbourhood centre zone; North Shore CC Suburban 2Zone, Business 12 (Miced Use) zone (Areas A, B and C); Papakura DC Commercial 3 zone; Rodney DC Retail Service Zone;Waitakere CC Community Environment, Henderson. Source: Legacy Zone Harmonization Review (2012), page 33.

3 Examples of Local Centres include: Albany Village, Balmoral, Grey Lynn, Kelston, Kingsland, Mangere Esat, Mt Eden, Mt Roskill,

Mt Wellington, Sandringham, Sunnyvale, Titirangi, and Torbay. Legacy zonings include: Auckland CC (Isthmus) Business 1Zone; Franklin DC Village Business Zone and Neighbourhood Centres Zone; Manukau CC Business 1 (Local Shops) andBusiness 2 (Suburban Centres) Zones; North Shore CC Local 1 and Local 1G Zones; Papakura DC Commercial 1 Zone.Source: Legacy Zone Harmonization Review (2012), page 34

4 Legacy zonings include: Auckland CC (Isthmus) 7c and 8c Zones; North Shore CC Business 11C Zones; Auckland CC (Isthmus)

Business 3 and Mixed Use Zones; Franklin DC Motorway Service Zone; Manukau CC Business 4 (Periphery) Zone andManukau Gateway Business Zone; North Shore CC Albany Sub-Regional 5 Zone, Business Special 8 Zone, Business 11Band 1D Zones; Papakura DC Commercial 2 Zone; Rodney DC Special 21 (Silverdale North LFR) Zone. Source: Legacy ZoneHarmonization Review (2012), page 30


7/170

Page 7

5.7 There was no specific large format retail zone within the Operative Plan provisions in a

manner set out by the PAUP General Business Zone. The Service Industrial and the Mixed

Use zones of the Legacy Plans, in addition to some of the lighter industrial zones, provided

for large format retail. A number of these areas remain dominated by such activities. The

respective zone provisions5

provided for medium intensity business, service and lightindustrial activities in appropriate locations without generating adverse effects on the

function of town centres as community focal points.

5.8 Business Parks had a limited representation in the Legacy Plans, predominantly associated

with the North Shore Plan6. The provisions, which are similar to those now included in the

PAUP, sought to provide for comprehensively planned large scale, comprehensive

business developments, typically offices with limited provision of ancillary retail and dining

activities.

5.9 The submissions on Topic 051 – 054 involve issues which are directly related to Part 2 of

the RMA, and in particular section 5 of the RMA. The issues raised in submissions also

correspond to the Council’s functions under section 31 of the RMA.

5.10 Plan provisions managing the distribution of business activity can properly be made in the

context of s74(3), where these seek to: achieve integrated management (s31(1)(a)); and

the control of any actual or potential effects of the use, development and protection of land

and associated physical resources (s31(1)(b)).

5.11 Achieving integrated management of business activity within Auckland is complex, and is

influenced by the following drivers and considerations:

(a) the location and distribution of commercial activity, relative to residential intensification

opportunities and transport initiatives is a key ingredient for vitality and prosperity;

(b) sufficient and diverse industrial activity, is important to provide for employment and

economic growth;

5 Legacy zonings include:Auckland CC (Isthmus) Business 4, Business 5 and Business 5a Zones; Franklin DC Light Industrial and

Tuakau Industrial Services Zones; Manukau CC Business 5 (Mixed) Zone (includes the Oruarangi Road, Waiouru Peninsulaand Favona Special Policy Areas); North Shore CC Business General 9, 9B, 9D and 10 Zones; Papakura DC Commercial 4,Industrial 1 and Industrial 2 Zones; Rodney DC Mixed Business Zone and Special 20 (Mahurangi East Seaside Village Centre)Zone; Waitakere CC Working Environment, Lincoln Working Environment and Lincoln Centre Special Area. Source: LegacyZone Harmonization Review (2012), page 29

6 Legacy Zonings include: Auckland CC (Isthmus) Business 8 Zone; North Shore CC Albany Sub-Regional 6 & 7 Zones, Albany

Business Park 7 Zone, and Business Park 7A, 7B, 7C, 7D, 7E & 7G Zones. Source: Legacy Zone Harmonization Review(2012), page 28


8/170

Page 8

(c) Auckland Plan directives for enduring, vibrant and functioning centres with high levels

of amenity, that form the primary focus for commercial and retail intensification7. The

Auckland Plan also confirmed that there needs to be ongoing provision for planned and

serviced capacity for Group 1 industrial land8;

(d) substantial public investment has been made by Council (including in transportinfrastructure) in the centre network. This investment is intended to provide the platform

for the consolidation of retail activity and new investment;

(e) Auckland has a polycentric centre network. There is also a considerable dispersal of

some types and formats of commercial activity outside of the established centre

network;

(f) significant household and population growth is projected to 2026, with a total 627,800

households and 1.84 million population respectively9 driving both commercial growth

and employment needs;

(g) to 2031, Auckland’s retail sales are projected to increase by $7.1 billion. This equates

to a retail floorspace demand increase of 1.1million m 2. Large format retail accounts for

some 50% of this demand10

.

(h) modelling identifies upper and lower levels of capacity to 2031 for between 1.7million

m2 and 2.0million m2 on non-industrial business zones, with between 1.1 million m 2 and

1.3million m2 of the capacity provided within the centre zones11

.

(i) there is sufficient zoned capacity, at a sub-regional level, to provide for projected retail

floorspace, although it is recognised that some retail types / formats are inappropriate

for or unable to locate in the centres network, and that there are some localised areas

of retail deficit to 2031, including the middle of the North Shore, and central Isthmus)12

;

(j) plan enabled capacity for office-commercial sectors is sufficient to enable capacity

within the centre network and other business zones13

. Office based activities do not

necessarily compete for space with retail, as they can be provided for by building up.

5.12 The district plan provisions that flow from the regional considerations in B3.1 establish: a

centre hierarchy (from City Centre to neighbourhood centre); the provision of Identified

7 Auckland Plan, Strategic Direction Target, page 240. Directive 10.8, page 255

8 Auckland Plan. Strategic Direction Target, page 150.

9 Auckland Business Futures Model. V2012.1.

10 Evidence Fairgray. Paragraph 6.1.

11 Evidence Fairgray. Paragraph 6.7

12 Evidence Fairgray. Paragraph 6.14

13 Evidence RPS 3.1 Nunns. Paragraph 1.9.


9/170

Page 9

Growth Corridors (IGC’s); and provisions that seek to retain the integrity of the industrial

land resource for Industrial activities.

5.13 Centres provide the primary focus for commercial intensification in the region as

established in B3.1. Centres also provide a broader role in fostering a compact urban formthrough supporting residential intensification, transport initiatives, employment

opportunities, and social and community facilities.

5.14 In terms of commercial activities, the district plan approach provides a ‘release valve’ to

provide additional supply side retail capacity. This release valve is through providing

additional flexibility for the establishment of retail activities in a limited number of Identified

Growth Corridors (IGCs). Commercial activities of varying scale and degree are also

enabled in other business areas, as appropriate.

5.15 The broad direction of the provisions are not in dispute. Overall the provisions are to:

(a) Direct commercial activities to centres, at a corresponding scale and intensity as

to the centre tier within the commercial hierarchy;

(b) Provide for additional, but managed, commercial enablement within the mixed use

zone, given the proximity of these zones to the metropolitan and town centre

network;

(c) Provide recognition of the inappropriateness to accommodate all forecast retail

types, such as trade suppliers in centres.

(d) Provide additional capacity for retail enablement within the general business zone

and within Identified Growth Corridors for retail activities subject to criteria;

(e) Provide recognition of significant office complexes, and provision of a zoning

response through the Business Park zone;

(f) Restrict new commercial activity in Industrial zones, albeit recognising that some

retail outlets (such as trade suppliers) are better located in these areas than the

centres network; and

(g) Provide a framework for the management and distribution of commercial activity at

the district level. As based on the regional provisions in B3.1, the provisions seek

to better integrate commercial land uses with infrastructure, industrial land

scarcity, amenity considerations, the transport network and public transport

initiatives, and residential environments and intensification.


10/170

Page 10

5.16 I consider the mediated provisions as amended by Council evidence to be sufficiently broad

based to cope with lower or higher demands of growth, as conditions change with the ebb

and flow of the commercial market.

5.17 The District Plan provisions direct the extent and type of commercial enablement subject tocriteria that include:

(a) commercial intensification within the centres hierarchy to provide agglomeration

benefits and integrate efficiently with infrastructure provision and selective residential

intensification. There is recognition of types of some retail types and formats that are

inappropriate, or unable to locate, in centres.

(b) For industrial activities, there are medium to long term supply issues (which can be

alleviated through the Future Urban Zone), and the need to retain the integrity of the

zoned industrial land resource (as recognised through matters such as scarcity and

reverse sensitivity).

5.18 The evidence from the Council is that the approach caters for the anticipated demand for

commercial activities as associated with the PAUP (to 2031).

5.19 An agreed shortcoming of the notified PAUP was the extent to which Integrated Growth

Corridors were identified, and the appropriate mechanism to provide market certainty of

retail development opportunities. The notified AUP contained only one IGC, Lincoln Road.

The limited application reflected issues associated with defining and demarcating IGCs

given: competing interests, supply / demand imbalances at the Local Board level, current

land use patterns, and transport conflicts.

5.20 Policy 7 of B3.1 provides the mechanism for notating and recognizing IGCs as a secondary

preference for commercial developments that are inappropriate for or unable to locate in

centres. The approach is preferable to a more dispersed commercial distribution.

5.21 A policy and rule based framework for retail activities along a greater number of IGCs has

been recommended in this evidence. In addition to Lincoln Road, IGCs are also

recommended for segments of Wairau Road, Stoddard Road, New North Road (Kingsland)

and Ti Rakau Drive. The extent of these corridors is identified in Attachment B.

5.22 The key changes from the notified version of the PAUP proposed through this evidence to

the provisions are:


11/170

Page 11

Amendments to retail enablement within the mixed use zone so as to limit the extent of

commercial agglomeration.

Amendments to policy and inclusion of rules providing additional retail enablement

associated with those corridors notated with an IGC overlay, being: Lincoln Road,

Wairau Road, Stoddard Road, New North Road (Kingsland) and Ti Rakau Drive Amendments to the activity status and assessment criteria for specific types of retail

activities across the zones, primarily supermarkets and offices.

Amendments to policy and activity status for retail and offices within the local centre

zone.

5.23 In terms of section 32 of the RMA, I considered that the Auckland Council provisions which

are the subject of this evidence, as amended through the mediated provisions, represent

the more appropriate approach, bearing in mind the benefits and costs.


12/170

Page 12

PART A - STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS AND RELEVANT DOCUMENTS

6. STATUTORY CRITERIA

General Requirements – District Plan

6.1 A district plan should be designed in accordance with14

, and assist the territorial authority to

carry out – its functions15

so as to achieve the purpose of the RMA

6.2 The district plan provisions seek to address the ‘way’ and ‘rate’ in which commercial and

industrial land use is undertaken16

so as to promote the sustainable management of natural

and physical resources of Auckland17

. It is understood that the word ‘enable’ in Section 5 is

not unqualified, and the respective matters of the ‘higher order directions’ of sections 72, 74

and 76 provide further guidance and direction as to the application of ‘sustainablemanagement’ in relation to business land use for Auckland.

6.3 Relevant definitions from the RMA in this context, include:

‘Environment’ (which includes people, communities, physical resources, amenity

values, and social and economic conditions (Section 2).

‘Effect’ (which includes adverse, future, and cumulative effects – Section 3.

‘ Amenity values’ ( Section 2).

‘natural and physical resources’ ( which includes all structures - Section 2).

6.4 Trade competition and the effects of such are to be disregarded pursuant to s74(3)).

6.5 Section 7(c) provides an obligation to have particular regard to the maintenance and

enhancement of amenity values, in this instance as represented by the City’s centre

network including the physical qualities and characteristics which contribute to people’s

appreciation of these environments, the interface of business zones with more sensitive

zonings, and the nature and amenity expectations associated with ‘working environments’

within the industrial, and particularly Heavy Industrial zones.

14 RMA s74(1)

15 RMA s31(1)(a) and (b)

16 RMA s5(2)

17 Section 5(1)


13/170

Page 13

6.6 Section 7(f) provides an obligation with regard to the maintenance and enhancement of the

quality of the environment. In my view, this goes to the extent by which:

commercial development and reinvestment is reinforced within the centres network,

with associated gains in a built form intensity, quality and the diversity of activities

represented by these centres; and the extent by which commercial development within industrial zones may

disenfranchise appropriately sited industrial opportunities and also impact on the

qualities and amenities anticipated in these industrial zones.

6.7 Section 7(b) and section 7(ba) require particular regard to the efficient use and

development of natural and physical resources, and the efficient use of energy.

6.8 In my view, the Act recognises that structures, as part of the built environment (which

includes commercial centres, industrial buildings, community facilities, and the road

network and piped infrastructure) represent physical resources that need to be managed

and developed in a sustainable way so as to enable people and communities to provide for

their social, economic and cultural well-being.

6.9 Within Industrial environments, the plan provisions should recognise and provide for growth

of industrial activities and associated employment. Amenity expectations should respond to

the nature and scale of more robust activities occurring, and the potential for incumbent

activities to not be unduly limited by reverse sensitivity issues. A matter of importance is the

scarcity of the industrial land resource, and particularly larger allotments18

, through

industrial activities being disenfranchised by competing land uses.

6.10 The concept of ‘enablement’ is a key part of section 5 in this context. In terms of

commercial distribution, this has both enabling and disenabling consequences: people’s

wellbeing may be enabled through an increase in retail expansion across the region;

equally there may be a consequential dis-enablement associated with such an approach if

existing centres that are relied on by local communities experience decline, or commercialdispersal. In essence, this comes down to balancing ‘market’ needs against the wider

community needs and integration within wider urban form and growth objectives of the

Plan.

18 Evidence Taylor. B3.1 Paragraph 5.26


14/170

Page 14

6.11 When preparing its district plan the territorial authority must give effect to a national policy

statement or New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement19

.

6.12 When preparing the district plan provisions of the PAUP the Council must give effect to the

PAUP RPS20

.

6.13 In relation to regional plans:

(a) The district plan must not be inconsistent with an operative regional plan for any

matter specified in s30(1) or a water conservation order 21

; and

(b) Shall have regard to any proposed regional plan on any matter of regional

significance22

.

6.14 When preparing its district plan the territory authority must also:

(a) Have regard to any management plans under any other Acts23

, and consistency

with plans and proposed plans of adjacent territorial authorities24

;

(b) Take into account any relevant planning document recognised by an iwi

authority25

; and

(c) Not have regard to trade competition [or the effects of trade competition]26

.

6.15 The district plan must be prepared in accordance with any regulation27

.

6.16 A district plan must state28

its objectives, policies and rules (if any) and may29

state other

matters, such as principle reasons, methods (other than rules), and environmental results

anticipated.

19 RMA s75(3)(a)-(c)

20 RMA s75(3)(c) and ss 122(1) and 145(1)(f)(i) of the LGATPA. Refer Judicial Conference on Interim Recommendations 27

January 2015 Conference Minute.21 RMA s75(4)22

RMA s74(2)(a)23

RMAs74(2)(b)(i)24

RMA s74(2)(b)(ii)25

RMA s74(2A)26

RMA s74(3)27

RMA s74(1)(f)28

RMA s75(1)


15/170

Page 15

6.17 A territorial authority has obligations to prepare an evaluation report in accordance with s32

and have particular regard to that report30

.

Objectives and Provisions

6.18 The objectives in the district plan are to be evaluated as the most appropriate to achieve

the purpose of the RMA31

.

6.19 The policies are to implement the objectives, and the rules are to implement the

policies32

.

6.20 Each provision is to be examined, as to whether the most appropriate method for achievingthe objectives of the regional plan and district plan, by:

(a) Identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives33

;

(b) Assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the objectives,

including34

:

i. Identifying and assessing the benefits and costs of the environmental,

economic, social and cultural effects that are anticipated from the

implementation of the provisions, including opportunities for economic growth

and employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced35

; and

ii. Quantifying these benefits and costs where practicable36

; and

iii. Assessing the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient

information about the subject matter of the provisions37

.

6.21 In making a rule the local authority shall have particular regard to the actual or potential

effect on the environment of activities including, in particular, any adverse effect38

.

29 RMA s75(2)

30 RMA s74(1)(d) and (e)31

RMAs32(1)(a)32

RMA s32(6), s75(1)(b) and (c) and s76(1)(b)33

RMA s32(1)(b)(i)34

RMA s32(1)(b)(ii)35

RMA s32(2)(2)(a)36

RMA s32(2)(b)37

RMA s32(2)(c)


16/170

Page 16

Section 32 Assessment

6.22 The Auckland Unitary Plan Evaluation report identifies that the Council has focused the

section 32 assessment on the Objectives and Provisions that represent a significantchange in approach from those within the operative Auckland RMA policy statement and

plans.

6.23 The Council’s section 32 assessment for Business (Section 2.3) identified that the

approach in the PAUP largely continues that within the operative provisions. Section 2.3 of

that report identifies:

The proposed Unitary Plan seeks to enable business activity while achieving high environmental

standards through avoidance, remediation or mitigation of any adverse effects. Intervention with

regard to the distribution, scale and function of business activity is critical to promote

sustainable resource management and a compact urban form. This intervention is for two main

reasons:

(a) to achieve a distribution of business activity that integrates with:

i. strategic servicing and transport infrastructure;

ii. existing centre locations; and

iii. higher density residential living

(b) there is strong demand for business and commercial activities in Auckland and if these are

left unplanned there is an increased cost to the community.

6.24 I have assessed the Council's proposed changes to the PAUP in accordance with s32AA of

the RMA.

6.25 Proposed changes that do not represent a key policy shift are assessed pursuant to s32AA

to the extent appropriate to the significance of the change.

7. RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS

New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement

7.1 A number of Auckland’s centres and industrial zonings have a coastal location. However

these matters are not directly relevant to this evidence.

38 RMA s76(3)


17/170

Page 17

Regional Policy Statement

7.2 Aspects of the RPS which need to be considered and given effect to by the business

provisions include:

(a) B2.1 providing for Growth in a quality compact urban formThe associated provisions reinforce the focus for business growth in centres, within

neighborhoods and along frequent transport routes. Objective 2 focuses urban growth

within the metropolitan area. Objective 2 and Policy 2 provide for residential

intensification adjacent to the city, metropolitan, town and local centres. Policy 3

provides residential intensification within centres to promote a broad mix of activities

where these do not compromise the accommodation of commercial activities. These

matters are relevant in considering transport and accessibility integration with

commercial distribution. They are also relevant in terms of matters of built form (Mr

Trevor Mackie) and design (Mr Ian Munro).

(b) B2.2 A Quality Built Form

These matters seek to deliver a quality built environment (Objective 1). In terms of

commercial distribution, Objective 1(c) seeks to provide a well-connected network of

activity centres and movement networks. The provisions relate to matters of urban

quality and design, and promote choices and opportunities in built form. These

provisions are relevant in consideration of both the function, role and amenity of the

centres hierarchy, but also design expectations.

(c) B2.3 Development capacity and supply of land for urban development

This section sets out the anticipated development capacity to support population and

business over the next 30 years. Objective 1 ensures development capacity and land

supply to accommodate projected population and business growth. Unconstrained

business land within the RUB is required for an average seven year land supply under

Policy 1.

B2.3 is relevant in terms of ensuring that business growth and development is provided.

The district plan framework, in giving effect to these provisions, should ensure:

sufficient zoned capacity; the enablement of activities in an efficient and certain land

use framework; and that uses do not displace more appropriately located activities

when competing over scarce business land resources.


18/170

Page 18

(d) B2.7 Social Infrastructure

This section identifies the importance of social infrastructure to Aucklander’s quality of

life and socio-economic outcomes. Objective 1 seeks to ensure a high quality network

of social infrastructure to meet Aucklander ’s needs. Policy 1 requires small scale social

infrastructure accessible to local communities, with medium-scale social infrastructure(such as civic buildings, libraries) located in the city centre, metropolitan and town

centres. Policy 4 seeks to improve connections between social infrastructure and

modal networks such as public transport.

(e) B3.1 Commercial and Industrial Growth

This section provides the regional framework for the district level business provisions.

Objective 1 is concerned with ensuring opportunities for employment and business are

provided to meet growth. Objective 2 seeks to focus commercial growth in the

hierarchy of commercial centres and Identified Growth Corridors that support the

compact urban form. Objective 3 is concerned with: the provision for Industrial

activities in a manner that promotes sustainable and ongoing economic development;

the efficient use of land and buildings in business areas; and avoidance of conflicts

between incompatible activities.

This section seeks to sustain and enhance the role and function of centres as focal

points for community interaction, and is referred to as a ‘centres plus’ approach to

managing commercial distribution. Commercial intensification is to be encouraged in

the city centre, metropolitan and town centres city centre, metropolitan and town

centres, and enabled on Identified Growth Corridors. Commercial development to meet

anticipated demand is required, including through, as appropriate: the expansion of

existing metropolitan and town centres; the provision of new town and local centres

within the RUB; and in other locations.

Amendments to the notified provisions through mediation on the B3.1 provisions sought

to insert:

a new Policy 1 which identifies that the city centre, metropolitan centres and town

centres are important at a regional level while local centres and neighbourhood

centres are important at a local level;

amendments to Policy 3 to encourage commercial activities to locate within

centres; and


19/170

Page 19

amendments to Policies 5, 6 and 7 to clarify effects to be considered, and support

for transport integration when considering commercial enablement outside of the

existing centres network.

In terms of the Industrial provisions, the respective Policies seek to emphasise thesufficient supply of land for industrial activities, particularly land-extensive industrial

activities and for heavy industry (Policy 9); acknowledgement that industrial land

should be located where it is able to be efficiently served by necessary infrastructure

(Policy 10); and provide for the efficient use of scarce industrial land for industrial

activities and the management of adverse effects on industrial activities (Policy 11). A

new Policy 12 was sought to be added through the mediation and evidence to the

Panel to promote a management approach for reverse sensitivity effects on the efficient

operation, use and development of significant infrastructure and established industrial

activities.

(f) B3.2 Significant Infrastructure

Objective 5 seeks that infrastructure planning and development is integrated and

coordinated with land use and development to support growth.

(g) B3.3 Transport

Relevant objectives include: Objective 2 which seeks to provide an effective, efficient

and safe transport system that is integrated with, and supports a compact urban form;

and Objective 4 which is concerned with the provision of a transport system that

facilitates transport choice, and enables accessibility and mobility across all

communities.

Priority is given to public transport and the freight network for the Auckland’s arterial

road network (Policy 5), managing the increase in transport movement associated with

growth in accordance with a compact urban form recognising that this may result in

delays (Policy 7), and improving the integration of land use with transport (Policy 9)

including through ensuring that activities likely to generate significant vehicle trips can

be serviced by the rapid and frequent service network.

These provisions are relevant to the provisions as to the extent of enablement of

commercial activities outside of the centres network, and the notation and provision of

Identified Growth Corridors.


20/170

Page 20

Transport considerations

7.3 Under section 74(2)(b)(i) of the RMA regard must be had to "management plans and

strategies prepared under other Acts". These include:

the regional land transport plan (RLTP) which forms part of the National Land Transport

Programme and represents the statutory intentions of the New Zealand Transport

Agency, Auckland Transport and KiwiRail39 – which, amongst other things, sets out the

region's transport objectives, policies and measures over a 10 year period; and

the regional public transport plan – which identifies the public transport services to be

provided (RPTP).

7.4 It is understood that the RLTP and RPTP are key statutory documents that determine the

way in which the region's land transport network is operated, maintained and developed.

These plans outline a programme of increased investment in public transport,

improvements for road capacity, and upgrading and managing the arterial network so that it

can accommodate public transport and freight.

The Auckland Plan

7.5 The Auckland Plan is a matter to which regard is to be had under section 74(2)(b)(i).

7.6 Section 6 ‘Auckland’s Economy’ seeks to improve Auckland’s relative productivity. Priority 1

- ‘Grow a Business Friendly and Well-Functioning City’ includes: Directive 6.1 which seeks

to plan and provide for sufficient business zoned land and infrastructure to achieve growth

in employment and economic opportunity; Directive 6.2 that seeks to ensure an efficient

and effective regulatory process; Directive 6.3 – to protect, enhance and improve business-

zoned areas and business improvement districts.

7.7 Section 10 focuses on Urban Auckland, including how to achieve the development strategy.

The three stated Priorities are:

Realise quality compact urban environments;

Demand good design in all development;

Create enduring neighbourhoods, centres and business areas.

39 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, section 45(a). The RLTP replaces the regional land transport "programmes"

following the 2013 amendment to the Land Transport Management Act 2003.


21/170

Page 21

7.8 Directive 10.2 is concerned with capacity. It seeks to plan for a seven-year average of

unconstrained development capacity (zoned and serviced with bulk infrastructure) at any

point in time with a minimum of five years and a maximum of 10 years capacity.

7.9 Directive 10.3 focuses on intensification. It seeks to focus urban intensification in areas that

have infrastructure in place or which can be provided in a timely and efficient manner,

within walkable catchment of community facilities, open space, high-frequency public

transport, centres and business areas.

7.10 Directives 10.8 and 10.9 establish and reinforce Auckland Centres hierarchy. Directive 10.8

seeks to strengthen Auckland’s network of metropolitan, town, local and neighbourhood

centres, as the primary focus for retail and other commercial activity, while limiting out-of-

centre retail and office development. Directive 10.9 seeks to develop and manage business

areas to complement centres, without undermining their role and function in the centres

network, and to provide for a diversity of opportunities for business and employment

growth.

7.11 Directive 10.10 seeks to ensure Business park development promotes clusters of

technology and innovation.

7.12 The approach for recognising and providing for a centre hierarchy in the notified PAUP

stems from the Auckland Plan40. That approach identifies the following as related to

Metropolitan Centres to Neighbourhood Centres:

Metropol i tan centres – these serve regional catchments or have strategic roles within the

region. They provide a diverse range of shopping, business, cultural, entertainment and

leisure activities, together with higher-density residential and mixed-use environments.

They have good transport access and are served by high-frequency public transportation.

These centres have the greatest opportunities for additional business and residential

growth.

Town centres – these act as local hubs for communities, providing a wide range of retail and

business services and facilities, and community facilities. They are generally accessible by

frequent public transport services, and provide a range of residential living options,

40 Auckland Plan. Box 10.3 Urban Centres Hierarchy. Table 10.1 Urban Centres Hierarchy - Classification


22/170

Page 22

including mixed-use and higher-density options. They have variable capacity for

accommodating new residential and business development.

Local centres – these act as a focus for a community and provide a range of convenience

shops and small business services together with some community facilities. These centres

are focused on walkable catchments supported by public transport services. They have

variable capacity for accommodating new residential and business development, but to a

lesser extent to town centres, due to their individual and accessibility constraints.

Neighbourhood centres – these provide day-to-day convenience shopping within walkable

neighbourhoods. Based on a small group of shops, they may also be aligned with a

community facility, such as a school.

7.13 The Auckland Plan seeks to focus new retail and office activities into centres41

. It also

anticipates that new malls and large format retail activities will locate in centres, and be

designed to integrate with other centre activities, so as to contribute to the ‘place making’ of

the centre. The Auckland Plan recognises the importance of these activities in terms of

attracting people to centres and associated centre vibrancy. However, the Auckland Plan

does recognise that sufficient development capacity in centres is important in terms of

accommodating such commercial growth. The Plan also recognises that out of centre

commercial growth will be considered against criteria as to appropriateness (as contained

in the Unitary Plan).

7.14 The Auckland Plan did not envisage specific notated corridors as providing for additional

retail capacity to alleviate any shortfalls in supply through the centre network.

7.15 The Auckland Plan framework requires a compression of commercial activit ies (retail and

office) into the centres network, and establishes a hierarchy of centres based on matters of

scale, form and function. The Auckland Plan seeks to ensure provision for the community’s

immediate and long term needs for economic development, employment and social and

cultural wellbeing in a manner that strengthens Auckland centres network to support a

compact urban form.

41 Auckland Plan. Paragraph 588.


23/170

Page 23

7.16 Investment certainty is to be fostered, including reducing barriers to local business

growth42

, and Auckland’s restricted store of industrial land will be actively managed to

promote industrial activities43

.

7.17 The Section 051-054 provisions have regard to these directions.

42 Auckland Plan. Paragraph 379, 383.

43 Auckland Plan. Paragraph 390.


24/170

Page 24

PART B - CONTEXT TO THE PROVISIONS

8. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

8.1 B3.1 outlines the regional objectives and policies that affect and influence the ability of

Auckland to provide for its economic well-being. The approach to managing commercialgrowth in B3.1 is described as ‘centres plus’. The approach is a policy direction for

commercial growth to be located within the hierarchy of centres, plus identified growth

corridors, and other locations where appropriate.

8.2 Policy 4 of Section B3.1 sets out the scale and range of activities anticipated within centres;

Policy 1 as sought to be inserted through mediation establishes the regional and local

hierarchy.

8.3 The district plan provisions that flow from B3.1 establishes a centre hierarchy (from City

Centre to neighbourhood centre), the provision of Identified Growth Corridors ( ‘IGCs’), and

provisions that seek to retain the integrity of the industrial land resource for Industrial

activities.

8.4 Centres provide the primary focus for commercial intensification in the region as

established in B3.1 Policy 2.

8.5 The centres hierarchy in the district plan provisions is consistent with that established in the

Auckland Plan44

. The commercial hierarchy determines the role a centre fulfils in fostering

a compact urban form, through supporting residential intensification, transport initiatives,

employment opportunities, and social and community facilities.

8.6 Establishing a hierarchy provides for the ability to apply amenity and character provisions

based on the scale and density of activity that can be anticipated at each “tier‟. The

hierarchy links together the likely functional amenity (diversity and scale of activities) of a

centre with regulatory and Long Term Plan (‘LTP’) expectations for residential

intensification opportunities, social facility provision, and public transport initiatives. The

approach provides greater certainty in relation to amenity expectations at the interface with

surrounding zones, and the expectations of in-centre design and environmental quality.

44 Auckland Plan Box 10.3 Urban Centres Hierarchy.


25/170

Page 25

8.7 Regionally important centres are identified in B3.1 as being the city centre, metropolitan

centres and town centres45. The scale and distribution of this regional network of centres

provides efficiencies in terms of: the public transport network and other infrastructure; an

associated substantial range and scale of work and living opportunities; improvedaccessibility to a wide range of goods and services; and associated reduction in trip

generation and travel distances (VKT); and substantial scale commercial, civic and

community services.

8.8 The local centre network, local and neighbourhood centres tend to focus on providing a

range of convenience activities to support and serve local communities46. Future

opportunities and diversity of activities can be constrained through limitations imposed by

centre scale, property boundaries, and diverse ownership.

8.9 Centres are dynamic. They will fluctuate in terms of offer and vitality as investment into

centres ebbs and flows. Accordingly, aspects such as centre expansion, amenity

expectations and the functional and operational aspects of larger anchor stores

(supermarkets and department stores) are, in my view, important determinants of centre

viability. These matters are considered within the respective zone provisions.

Business distribution as a resource management issue

8.10 Rationalising the extent of legacy zones into a relatively limited number of zone has

narrowed the range of previously permitted commercial activities within a number of areas.

Chiefly, this has resource management implications for existing commercial activities within

the local centre zone, mixed use, light industrial zone and the heavy industrial zone. Ms

Jarette Wickham has addressed this matter in terms of the Industrial zonings.

8.11 In my view, it is appropriate for the Council to plan for the location and distribution of

businesses (collectively), including commercial activity, for the benefit of the wider

community. The provisions in B3.1, together with those of 051-053 provide an integratedframework.

45 B3.1 Policy 1(a).

46 B3.1 Policy 1(b).


26/170

Page 26

8.12 The positive effects of a new retail activity or centres may include improved access to

goods and services for those living nearby, or on accessible transit routes. Proponents of a

new business activity may react to a perceived market gap, and respond by catering to this

demand as motivated principally by economic gain. A new retail node may also reduce

existing congestion on road networks within the existing centre network. Thus, it must berecognised that some communities and networks will usually experience a positive result

from any proposal.

8.13 What is not always so well understood, or easily identified, is the complexity of adverse

effects that may be associated with certain patterns of retail distribution.

8.14 The basis for the justification in the intervention of the distribution of business activities is

no different to that applied to residential growth that seeks a compact urban form.

Councils, including Auckland Council, have restricted the spread of residential development

because the cost of allowing dispersal would be significant, and such costs are not

considered by the market. Such costs include increased infrastructure costs, reduced

transport efficiencies and increased emissions, effects on wider planning initiatives such as

improving the liveability of existing urban environments, and inefficient land use patterns.

An individual to the market does not always consider the costs of their decision on the

wider community of the district.

8.15 The Council has significant investment in the infrastructure of its centre network. This

includes both utility infrastructure, such as roading, and social infrastructure such as

libraries, community centres and civic facilities. These assets are generally provided in

centres with high activity and a critical mass that enables sufficient public use so as to

justify such investment. Accordingly, (and as signalled in RPS B:2.7) medium to large scale

social infrastructure is generally established in the (City Centre) Metropolitan and Town

Centre zonings.

8.16 The re-distribution of commercial activities out-of-centre can lead to significant social dis-

benefits to the community that is reliant on such existing facilities (such as reduced access,

e.g. by undertaking multi-purpose trips). Increased dispersal of commercial activities can

lead to decreased use of such facilities, and pressure for their duplication. Infrastructure

providers may also be affected in terms of the certainty they need as to whether to upkeep

or duplicate such infrastructure.


27/170

Page 27

8.17 There are also costs associated with a policy approach seeking to limit the location of

commercial activities (for example constraining commercial activities to centres). These

include potentially decreased competition, increased rents, reduced customer choice, and

reduced development. There are also issues as to opportunity costs for more fine grained

activities, the inability or inherent unsuitability to locate some formats (such as tradesuppliers) in centre, and the potential for capacity issues and crowding out activities.

8.18 Finally, reliance on a free market for the distribution of business activity can actually lead to

a decrease in private investor confidence in town centres and industrial zones, and their

investment in the physical infrastructure within it (i.e. the desire to invest or continue

investment).

Commercial Growth and Development

8.19 Auckland is expecting steady gains in household expenditure (both household increases,

and greater disposable income per household).

8.20 In a market with a well performing network of centres, an increase in available expenditure

(through growth) and employment opportunities signals the requirement for the provision of

additional, commensurate, increases in retail and office supply. The resource management

consequences being that unless demand is met, there will be the resultant dis-enablement

of the community’s economic and social well-being. It is understood that where there is not

a proximate co-location of ‘land uses such as housing, retail and offices in close proximity

to each other’ this can lead to travel inefficiencies47

.

8.21 Fairgray identifies that by 2031 there may be regional demand for an additional 1.1 million

m2 of retail / hospitality floorspace48

. Analysis of plan enabled capacity reveals between

1.7- to 2.0 million m2 of retail floorspace49

, of which 1.1 to 1.3million m2 is capacity in the

centre zones. Ms Fairgray concludes that at a regional level, capacity is sufficient except

for deficits at central North Shore and the mid western side of the isthmus50

.

47 Evidence Wong-Toi. Paragraph 5.1.1.

48 Evidence Ms Fairgray. Paragraph 6.1, Categories Retail paragraph 5.17 (inclusive Core retail, Trade retail, Food and beverage

retail, Food hospitality and household services).49

Evidence Ms Fairgray. Paragraph 6.7.50

Evidence of Ms Fairgray. Paragraph 6.14.


28/170

Page 28

8.22 The Auckland Plan’s policy approach seeks commercial intensification within the existing

centre network, to achieve a compact urban form. There is a tension, as identified in the

evidence of Mr Akehurst51

, in terms of the opportunity for the Auckland network of

commercial centres to provide capacity to accommodate all changing retail forms and

trends, particularly in relation to larger scale retail activities. In my opinion this tensionstems from centre capacity constraints, cadastral fragmentation, and even the opportunity

costs of finer grain in-centre development that would be lost to low intensity large format

activities that provide limited functional amenity.

8.23 I understand that retail supply is a function of three elements: offer, quality, and location.

Commercial offer and scale, is largely a factor of the centre hierarchy.

8.24 Smaller centres offer a narrower range of goods and services than may be found in the

larger centres. The scale and diversity of offer is a function of the size of the supporting

household catchment, and proximate distance to other larger centres. The district plan

manifestation of the centres hierarchy, is as set out in Section D3.1 – D3.6, and the

associated Activity Table at I3.1.

8.25 Given the rapid extent of household growth in Auckland, the wellbeing needs of the

community will, in a number of instances arise in locations that are unable to be served

efficiently by the existing centre network. There are also uncertainties as to the potential

changes in the distribution of Auckland’s future population52.

8.26 To service this growth in a managed context, rather than incrementally or through

dispersal, the Unitary Plan provides for a range of managed commercial development

opportunities:

(a) RPS B3.1 Policy 5 provides for the expansion of metropolitan and town centres;

(b) RPS B3.1 Policy 6 provides for new town and local centres within the RUB;

(c) RPS B3.1 Policy 7 provides for Identified Growth Corridors to accommodate managed

provides for commercial enablement. The associated criteria seek to ensure adversedistributional effects, or effects on the compact urban form can be considered. I

consider this managed approach preferable to wider commercial dispersal; and

51 Evidence Mr Akehurst. Summary H, Paragraphs 7.25, 9.7

52 Evidence Fairgray. Paragraph 6.52 – 6.57


29/170

Page 29

(d) RPS B3.1 Policy 8 provides for a range of ‘other locations’ for commercial enablement,

including the local and neighbourhood centre network, the Mixed Use Zone, General

Business and Business Park zones, and the Light and Industrial zones. This recognises

that there will be a spectrum of commercial enablement throughout a wide range of

business zones, but seeks to impose limits in terms of extent and type.

Travel and Transport

8.27 Travel efficiency is an important component of people’s day to day living. It has implications

for the integration of transport infrastructure with land use, modal choice, monetary

expense to individuals and implications for personal time. These matters are reflected in an

abundance of provisions in the RPS (B3.3), RLTP and RPTP.

8.28 The co-location of land uses such as intensive housing and commercial in close proximity

to each other provides benefits in terms of reduced travel lengths and the number of

vehicle trips to and from these activities and encourages multi-trip making.

8.29 The concentration of office activities and density in the city centre, metropolitan and town

centres provides particular benefits given its high density use and source of trips to

other centre activities. There are increased efficiencies in public transport infrastructure

through having concentrated centres of office employment.

8.30 At a macro level, travel efficiency can be considered to be a factor of vehicle kilometres

travelled (VKT), travel time, accessibility to and efficiency of other forms of transport than

the private car, and travel safety.

8.31 These matters are set out in the evidence of Mr Wong Toi.

Industrial Resources

8.32 Certainty as to the extent and type of commercial activity enabled within the Industrial

zones will have consequences for market expectations. Enabling commercial activities inIndustrial zones can and does start to disenfranchise the very categories of business for

which the zone was established. Other issues include reverse sensitivity effects, amenity

expectations and the dispersal of commercial activity that may otherwise have

agglomeration benefits in terms of a more efficient urban form.


30/170

Page 30

8.33 There are of course exceptions. Trade suppliers53, Marine Retail54

, Garden Centres55

and

Motor Vehicle Sales56

in particular are poorly suited to in-centre locations.

8.34 Their functional attributes such as car parking, built form and associated amenity, and in

many instances scale, largely precludes them from being easily accommodated in

Auckland’s centre network. Such activities in-centre are also counter-productive to urban

design expectations and create opportunity costs for more appropriate activities. I

understand that these activities have little or no implications in terms of the generation of

adverse distributional effects on the centre network.

8.35 Evidence from Mr Taylor for Topic B3.1 identified the following attributes of Auckland’s

Industrial land resource, it is understood that these matters remain applicable:

estimated industrial floor space

57

demand is likely to be approximately 3.1 millionm2 by 2026. A conversion to land area identifies a requirement of some 614ha of

land.

modelling for the Council identifies some 1,000ha of vacant industrial zoned land

could be developed to offer up to 2.3 million m2 of industrial floorspace58

. The

RUB provides for some 10,000ha (gross) of Future Urban Zone (‘FUZ’)59

.

8.36 I understand that the capacity to grow the industrial sector plays a significant role in the

growth of Auckland. Activities such as manufacturing, construction and transport and

storage constitute some 32% of regional employment60

.

8.37 There are pressures on the supply of industrial land, including through the development of

available industrial land for commercial and retail purposes. A loss of the integrity of

53 A business engaged in sales to businesses and institutional customers and may also include sales to the general

public… 54

The sale or hire of boats, wholesale and retail sale of fish, and accessory goods and services…

55 Shops for the sale of plants, trees or shrubs. Includes sale of: • landscaping supplies; • bark and compost; • statuary and ornamental garden features…

56 The sale or hire of motor vehicles and caravans…

57 Evidence Taylor. B3.1 Paragraphs 5.7 – 5.10



60 ABFM Employment 2013. Production and distribution 32.1%, Retail and Hospitality 22.3%, Commercial 27%, Education and

Heath 18.6%.


31/170

Page 31

industrial zoned land has a consequential impact on Auckland’s ability to provide industrial

land for industrial purposes.

8.38 The potential for sensitive uses to limit or diminish the efficient operation, use and

development of industrial activities has the ability to constrain the extent, scale and type ofindustrial operations within Auckland.

The Centre network

8.39 Auckland, like other large metropolitan centres has a polycentric urban structure.

Households will provide for their needs across a range of different centres and centre

types. Not all needs will, and can be met locally.

8.40 Retail tends to concentrate into large centres, and has a higher relative importance in terms

of establishing the function and role of these centres as hubs for convenience and

comparison shopping, as well as hubs for social interaction.

8.41 In terms of retail spend, along with the City Centre, Newmarket, Albany, Botany and

Manukau make up the five largest centres. These centres are distributed geographically

across Auckland, forming the main retail hubs in the central isthmus, north shore, eastern

Auckland, and southern Auckland respectively.

8.42 Over the last decade, the consolidation of existing centres, and formation of new centres

has, to a large extent accommodated both large format retail growth and comparison

shopping. Part of this pressure for providing retail capacity has also been through the

formation of commercial, and in particular Trade Suppliers and Large Format Retail on

traditional business arterial corridors such as Lincoln Road, Wairau Road and Stoddard

Road.

8.43 In a number of instances there has also been commercial expansion of existing Centres to

accommodate growth, such as at Ponsonby and St Lukes. The expansion of the

Metropolitan and Town Centre networks are recognised at the RPS level in Policy 5 of

B3.1. For Local Centres, expansion is recognised as being appropriate, subject to strategic

and localised effects.

8.44 Constraints to centre expansion, include transport network capacity, adjoining cadastral

fragmentation and residential intensification, and adjoining amenity expectations. These


32/170

Page 32

constraints will only get more pronounced as residential densities and land values increase

around centres.

8.45 Consolidation of many existing centres (primarily through intensification, but including

expansion as appropriate) will be required however, if centres are to remain relevant. Theprovisions in D3.3 (Metropolitan), D3.4 (Town Centres) and D3.5 (Local Centres) recognise

this need for growth and intensification.

8.46 Centre relevance is not just a matter of access to goods and services. There are explicit

linkages in the RPS provisions (as outlined in paragraph 7.2) between the City's centre

network and matters of urban form, infrastructure and transportation.

8.47 It is therefore important, that:

In-centre commercial activity is prioritised. This incorporates elements of ensuring the

regulatory framework is appropriately targeted; urban design requirements are not

unduly onerous; and those key anchors that go to the heart of providing for the vitality

and viability of the centre (supermarkets and department stores in particular) are

recognised in terms of their importance and functional requirements.

Centre expansion is anticipated to provide for supply side gains in commercial

provision. Such expansion is managed through consideration of local and strategic

effects; and

Commercial development in non-centre locations does not undermine the wider

commercial network.

8.48 It is understood that there is support for this overall approach from retail experts involved in

Expert Conferencing on these Topics as outlined in Mr Akehurst’s evidence61

:

… as a general principal, all the retail experts have agreed that the city is best served

when retail is focused on centres in the first instance, then around centres and finally in

other locations that do not generate adverse effects.

Large format retail provision

8.49 There was no specific large format retail zone within the Operative Plan provisions in a

manner set out by the PAUP General Business Zone.

61 Evidence Akehurst. Paragraph 7.42.


33/170

Page 33

8.50 Ms Fairgray identifies that of the forecast 1.1million m2 increase in retail floorspace demand

between 2013 to 2031, large format retail (inclusive of trade suppliers) accounts for some

50% of the this floorspace demand.62

8.51 The general business zone as notified, has a combined land area of 296ha, across some

15 locations. Particular clusters are located around Manakau Centre, Mt Wellington

Highway, Link Drive and Lincoln Road. These sites reflect the existing character and

extent of large format retail activities. 10 Supermarkets are located within the General

Business zone across eight locations.

8.52 The zone provides a framework to cater for a market trend toward large format retail and

trade supply outlets that has accelerated since the 1990’s.

8.53 I understand large format retail centres tend to have a significant consumer catchment,

which is due in part to:

their physical separation from residential neighbourhoods and location on the arterial

road network;

reliance on motor vehicles for access given the lack of accessibility by a variety of

other transportation options;

the destination-store influence of larger-format retailing activities that are a

distinguishing feature of such retailers given their scale and offer; and

A corresponding amenity based on large areas of car parking, bulky warehouse type

buildings, and landscape planting.

8.54 The design characteristics of the associated built form is of single storey (albeit high stud

buildings) with glazed frontages facing onto an outdoor at-grade and usually shared parking

area. Building facades are relatively plain and simple, reflecting the functional requirements

of such retail activities.

8.55 The market and the community generally accept that large floorplate retailing is the sale of

comparison items (not necessarily bulky goods) requiring greater amounts of floor and

display space, and usually the centre is accessed by private motor vehicle.

62 Ms Fairgray. Paragraph 6.1.


34/170

Page 34

8.56 There was no specific or consistent threshold for ‘Large Format Retail Activity’ in the legacy

plans. Historically: The Rodney District Plan in the mixed business zone has a threshold of

600m2 GFA63

, beyond which activities were RDA. The North Shore District Plan has a

minimum gross floor space threshold of 500m2

for a range of wholesale and retail trade

activities64

within the Sub-Regional 5 zone. Waitakere City District Plan the Henderson

Community Environment provided for retail floorspace exceeding 400m2 GFA65. It is

understood that Manakau City District Plans had no specific zoning – but provided for

minimum tenancies not less than 500m2 in the Business 2 (Suburban) and 3 (City Centre)

zones66. The Auckland District Plan – Isthmus Section did not provide a specific zoning for

large format retail.

Supermarkets and Department Stores

8.57 Supermarket led centres are significantly dependent upon their supermarket for their

commercial function, vitality and social interaction and ongoing sustainable management.

Supermarkets are the biggest generators of pedestrian and traffic movements with regard

to retailing, and also tend to underpin further social and retail infrastructure that forms a

‘centre’.

8.58 There are six supermarkets located within the neighbourhood centre zones. Four of these

are less than 2,000m2 GFA.

8.59 Of the 66 local centres notified in the PAUP, 26 contain supermarkets, 11 of these are less

than 2,000m2, 12 between 2,000m2 to 4,000m2, and only 3 above 4,000m2 GFA67.

8.60 There are 55 supermarkets located within the 43 town centres zonings, and 24 within the

10 metropolitan centre zonings.

63 Rodney District Plan Rule 9.9.2 Activity Table. Section 9.8.2.3 Mixed Business Zone Description.

64 North Shore City Plan. Rule 15.6.1.6

65 Waitakere City District Plan. Rule 5B(c)

66 Manakau City Plan. Rule 14.10.2

67 Auckland Council. Research, Investigations and Monitoring Unit. July 2015.


35/170

Page 35

8.61 In considering the retail hierarchy from the bottom up, I understand that the loss of a

supermarket represents the primary example of potential centre threat which could trigger a

loss of centre function and amenity, and materially disenable the community served.

8.62 With projected growth in households to 2031, and associated real spending power, Iunderstand there will be a constant demand for new supermarket formats across Auckland.

This will particularly occur as existing supermarkets are replaced (or displaced) with

modern supermarkets to remain competitive. The resource management consequences of

this is that in the short to mid-term future some of the smaller older supermarkets will be

replaced by their modern equivalent as each brand competes more strongly for market

share. This may involve either the re-development of the existing site or, in some instances,

the relocation to a more strategic location in the surrounding area.

8.63 There is an argument that once a centre reaches a certain critical mass, its function is

unlikely to be undermined by the loss of a supermarket offer, specifically where the centre

is supported by two or more supermarkets. However, such an approach does not consider

the loss of flow / multiplier benefits associated with in-centre supermarket activity.

8.64 The role of Department stores to in-centre function and role is also a critical consideration.

The presence of such stores as a ‘Farmers’ or ‘Warehouse’ provide a considerable

proportion, where present, of a centres general merchandising floorspace and appeal to

shoppers. The loss of such an offer can have substantial impacts on the appeal, and hence

viability of such centres.

8.65 I understand that the functional requirements of supermarkets and department stores

consist of the following:

(a) Clear visual and pedestrian access into the front of the building, or the entrance is

internal to the primary pedestrian concourse of an enclosed mall;

(b) The checkouts are located in a line with their backs to the windows / entrance;

(c) The two side walls do not have glazing to provide for the internal display of goods

and to prevent sunlight damage;

(d) The rear wall is likewise unglazed as it is generally used for the ‘back of house’

functions such as loading bays, waste recycling, storage, and on-site food

preparation activities.


36/170

Page 36

(e) A car park of sufficient size to meet typical customer demand is located adjacent to

the main entrances. Where supermarkets and department stores are agglomerated

within an ‘Integrated Retail Development68’ shared car parks and access may be

located in multiple locations around the periphery of the complex.

Office Activities

8.66 The consolidation of office, as well as retail is a principle means of achieving the RPS

B:3.1 provisions. Objective 1 seeks to focus commercial growth and activities within

centres; Policies 2 and 3 (mediated version) seek to encourage commercial intensification

in the city centre, metropolitan and town centres, and encourage growth of commercial

activities that support these centres respectively.

8.67 The agglomeration benefits of office activities within the city centre, metropolitan and town

centres are a critical element in achieving a compact urban form, as is outlined by Mr

Akehurst at paragraph 7.6 of his evidence.

8.68 I understand that the provision of dispersed office activities are unlikely to result in

additional business activity in Auckland, given the zoned capacity. A dispersed pattern of

office (and retail) distribution would likely detract from the potential efficiencies of this

activity being more consolidated in the city centre, metropolitan and town centre network.

These efficiencies are not limited to matters of economic productivity as outlined by Mr

Akehurst, they also extend to the efficient use and development of public transport

initiatives and modal choice as set out in the evidence of Mr Wong-Toi69

8.69 There is however the need to provide for flexibility in the mixed use zone, local centres and

the light industry zones. Offices in these locations as limited in scale and form, can

appropriately provide for choice and service local needs, without detriment to the wider

centres approach. These are set out in the evidence of Mr Akehurst and Ms Wickham.

Appropriate District Plan Response

68 As defined: An integrated and designed development that is principally within an enclosed and internalised building

envelope and is operated by a single management entity, and• incorporates at least two large format retail outlets• provides for shared accessory car parking for all tenancies within one site• incorporates a wide range of comparison good retailers and• may also incorporate entertainment and commercial facilities.

69 Evidence Wong-Toi. Paragraph 5.1.1

http://unitaryplan.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Pages/Plan/Book.aspx?exhibit=PAUPSept13http://unitaryplan.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Pages/Plan/Book.aspx?exhibit=PAUPSept13http://unitaryplan.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Pages/Plan/Book.aspx?exhibit=PAUPSept13http://unitaryplan.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Pages/Plan/Book.aspx?exhibit=PAUPSept13


37/170

Page 37

8.70 Mr Akehurst has outlined that in a polycentric City such as Auckland, with steady expected

gains in household expenditure (both household increases, and greater disposable income

per household), managing commercial (office and retail) distribution can be difficult70

. This

will especially be the case in rationalising the operative plan zoning framework where there

is the presence of commercial activities in non-centre locations.

8.71 I consider that:

the 051-054 provisions provide commercial certainty, integration of land use and

transport, and a rationalised approach to business activities in Auckland in a manner

that achieves a compact urban form, and gives effect to the provisions of B3.1.

the planning provisions give primacy to in-centre development, but allow some

flexibility for out of centre development; and

the Council has taken appropriate measures to distinguish and clarify zones centres,

and activities.

8.72 The 051-054 provisions seek to manage commercial activity, and inter alia urban form

through intervening in commercial land use patterns as a means of promoting sustainable

resource management and integrated management of effects.

8.73 An appropriate urban form exists to help secure the desired outcomes or manage effects

as generally established in the RPS provisions of the Unitary Plan. The corollary is that if

left unimpeded the resulting pattern of urban land use is likely to produce adverse

environmental effects. I consider that the commercial approach in the provisions attached

to Mr Wyatt's evidence supports this view.

70 Evidence Akehurst. paragraph 6.36


38/170

Page 38

PART C – SUBMISSIONS

SECTION C:1 – THE CENTRE ZONES - OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES

9. D:3.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES FOR THE COMMERCIAL ZONES

9.1 These provisions provide an overarching framework for the commercial centre provisions,

mixed use, general business and business park zone. They provide additional objectives

and policies to those considered within the respective zones, but seek to reduce the

duplication of provisions through establishing in this one section matters relating to: design;

the distribution of business activities; and role of the centres network.

9.2 The provisions are appropriate in light of the regional policy statement matters identified in

paragraph 7.2, and the distribution of commercial activities as set out in paragraph 8.26.

Objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4

9.3 Objective 1 outlines the environmental conditions associated with a strong centre network,

and the associated social and economic benefits this achieves.

9.4 Submissions to Objective 1 largely seek additional adjectives as to the extent by which

centres either: provide for a diversity of activities and concentrations of people (DNZ 3863-

83, AMP 4376-27, Urban Design Forum 5277-23, New Zealand Institute of Architects

5280-20); or amenity and safety considerations (HNZ839-10087, Minister of Police 4274-

17).

9.5 The submissions are supported in that they provide a more fulsome account of the role and

function of the centres network as expressed in RPS 3.1 Policy 4 (mediation version). The

amended text as agreed at mediation is provided below.

9.6 The form, scale and design quality of development is to reinforce the centres network is set

out in Objective 2. One submission from Peter Hollenstein 3184-17 seeks to insert

reference to the need for competition in development designs to improve good urban

design. That submission is opposed as being uncertain in application. The submission

from Ports of Auckland 5137-110 seeking that the Port Precinct be specifically excluded


39/170

Page 39

from the objective is opposed; the more specific provisions in the Port Precinct would take

precedence.

9.7 Objective 3 establishes the distribution of business activities of a scale and form so as to

provide for economic (clause (a)) and social (clause (b)) needs, and manages adverseeffects on the environment (clause (c)).

9.8 HNZ (839-1088) and Transpower NZ (3766-173) seek retention of the objective. G

Russell (2477-7, 8 and 9) seeks amendments to increase the spread of business activity,

cluster joint businesses, and promote self-sufficient recycling). Radio NZ (2750-36) seek

reference to significant rather than strategic infrastructure. Todd Property 4777-3 seek

recognition of economic viability and promotion of centres. Scentre 2968-231 and

Northcote Rd Holdings 3373-2 seek recognition of social wellbeing, residential growth

and employment respectively. AMP Capital 5883-31, Body Corporate 197887 6356-27

and Harvey Norman 5924-21 seek explicit recognition of out of centre locations for

business activity.

9.9 The approach within the objective as notified is supported. Submissions either seek greater

reco

051-054 hrg - auckland council (matthew bonis) - planning

Documents