081 amp capital investors nz ltd and pspib waiheke inc (j carvill, s tait) - planning - manukau city...

8/18/2019 081 AMP Capital Investors NZ Ltd and PSPIB Waiheke Inc (J Carvill, S Tait) - Planning - Manukau City Centre Business - JOINT SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENT

1/22

BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL

IN THE MATTER: of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local

Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act

2010

AND IN THE MATTER: of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, Topic 081

Rezoning and Precincts


2/22

CONTENTS

SUMMARY STATEMENT 3

1

INTRODUCTION 5

2

CODE OF CONDUCT 5

3 SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 5

4

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL POSITION 6

5 BENEFITS AND STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT 7

6

METROPOLITAN CENTRE COMPARISONS 9

7 RESPONSE TO COUNCIL OFFICERS 10

8 BUNNINGS SITE, LAMBIE DRIVE, MANUKAU 11

9 GOODMAN PROPERTY TRUST SITE, PLUNKET AVENUE, MANUKAU 13

10

CONCLUSION 15


3/22

SUMMARY STATEMENT

A. We support the rezoning of the land bound by Cavendish Drive, Lambie Drive, State Highway

20 and Puhinui Stream (‘the Site’) from General Business zone to Metropolitan Centre zone.

B. We do not agree with the Auckland Council Officers that the site is not suitable for rezoning due

to the presence of the High Aircraft Air Noise (HANA) overlay or the adjoining Heavy Industry

zone. The HANA results in only a small reduction in the development potential of the site, but,

in our view, does not mean that rezoning the Site to Metropolitan Centre is inappropriate. The

Sensitive Activity Restriction overlay is considered redundant, as the site on the opposite side of

Puhinui Stream owned by Goodman Property Trust (Goodman) at 70-100 Plunket Avenue is

developed with light industrial activities and we support the rezoning of the Goodman site to

Light Industry zone.

C. We consider that the rezoning of Goodman’s land to Light Industry zone reflects the existing

and planned activities on the site and the loss of Heavy Industry zoned land will be ‘offset’ by

the rezoning of Winstone Aggregates’ Wiri land. In accordance with Chapter C, Section 7.12,

Policy 4 the benefits of rezoning the Goodman land will outweigh the reverse sensitivity effects


4/22

network, which includes motorway connections, public transport and walking and cycling

opportunities and will contribute to centre vitality, social cohesion, connectedness and

integration and reduce the cost of infrastructure. Importantly, well located intensification will

ease the pressure for new infrastructure investment and outward expansion of the City.

F. In our opinion, the rezoning of the Site to Metropolitan Centre represents an appropriate

planning response to the policy framework set out in the Regional Policy Statement, the

Metropolitan Centre zone provisions of the PAUP, and the higher order strategic documents.

Importantly, it will provide for more intensive development in a location and manner that will, in

our opinion, enhance and support the role and function of the Manukau Metropolitan Centre.


5/22

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 This is a joint supplementary planning statement of Jennifer Marie Carvill and Susannah

Vrena Tait.

1.2 Our qualifications, expertise and experience were attached to our statement of evidence

dated 10 February 2016.

1.3 We have been retained by a group of submitters with collective interests in the land bound by

Cavendish Drive, Lambie Drive, State Highway 20 and Puhinui Stream (‘the Site’) comprising

PSPIB Waiheke Incorporated, Harvey Norman, John Woolley and John Murdoch, Mitre10

and Lambie Drive Nominees (the Submitters).

2 CODE OF CONDUCT

2.1 We confirm that we have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses set out in the

Environment Court of New Zealand Practice Note 2014. We have complied with the Code of

Conduct in preparing this evidence and agree to comply with it while giving oral evidence


6/22

c. A response to those matters raised by Auckland Council (Council) in opposition to the

rezoning of the Site to Metropolitan Centre zone;

d. The rezoning of 55 Lambie Drive, being land occupied by Bunnings Limited

(Bunnings), to Metropolitan Centre zone; and

e. The rezoning of 70-100 Plunket Avenue, being land owned by Goodman Property

Trust (Goodman), from Heavy Industry zone to Light Industry zone.

3.2 In preparing our evidence we have reviewed:

a. The joint statement of evidence of Council witnesses (specifically Anna Jennings,

Roger Eccles And David Wong);

b. Mr Matthew Norwell’s statement of evidence and rebuttal evidence (on behalf of

Bunnings) dated 10 February 2016 and 24 February 2016;

c. Mr Gerard Thompson’s statement of evidence (on behalf of Goodman Property) dated

10 February 2016; and


7/22

5 BENEFITS AND STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

5.1 As noted in our primary statement2, we consider that there are numerous benefits resulting

from the rezoning of the Site, including:

a. The Metropolitan Centre zone better reflects the existing land use patterns and

development potential for the Site. It builds on the existing Metropolitan Centre zone to

provide for commercial and residential intensification in a location that is well served by

public transport, community facilities and open space. This supports the centres based

approach to planning for commercial growth and is anticipated to support and

strengthen Manukau’s role in the centres hierarchy.

b. The proposed rezoning will increase the realisable retail supply in Manukau3

, which willsignificantly contribute to economic well-being in the area, particularly in the short to

mid-term. The inclusion of the Site in the Manukau Metropolitan Centre will assist with

meeting demand associated with rapid population rise, reduce retail dispersal and retail

leakage, improve amenity and increase product offering. This improved economic

performance will strengthen the Manukau Metropolitan Centre in the hierarchy of

centres and contribute to its function, role and vitality.


8/22

interaction, liveability and visitor experience. Providing for development that is more

intensive and a wider variety of activities on the Site will also ensure more efficient and

effective use of existing infrastructure, and critically will ease the pressure for new

infrastructure investment and outward expansion of the City.

5.2 We consider that rezoning the Site to Metropolitan Centre zone will realise the benefits

outlined above. Conversely, the General Business zone will not realise the potential benefitsand will result in the under-utilisation of the Site.

5.3 Council Officers5 and Mr Norwell have questioned whether the proposed rezoning is well

aligned with the intent of the Regional Policy Statement (RPS). The Council Officers

consider that a General Business zone is the most appropriate way to give effect to the RPS,

but did not provide a detailed analysis. We consider that the rezoning of the Site to

Metropolitan Centre zone is the highest and best use of the Site and is consistent with the

RPS. A detailed analysis of the relevant provisions of the RPS was included in our primary

statement of evidence6. However, we draw attention to the following policies again as we

consider them to be particularly relevant to the proposed rezoning:


9/22

d. Policy B3.1 Commercial and Industrial Growth. Based on the evidence of Mr Philpott,

there are sound economic reasons to include additional land in the Manukau

Metropolitan Centre zone, including a greater ability to meet short term demand

associated with rapid population rise, reduce retail dispersal, potential to reduce

leakage, improve amenity and increase product offering. We also consider that the

inclusion of this Site is an appropriate response to Policy B3.1.5 as it will enable higher

numbers of residents, workers and visitors to establish in close proximity to the

transport network and large urban facilities, while also strengthening the Manukau

Metropolitan Centre in the hierarchy of centres.

e. Policy B3.3 Transport10. Based on the evidence of Mr McKenzie and Mr Hughes, the

rezoning of the Site will create further efficiencies between the transport network and

adjoining land use and therefore has the potential to reduce reliance on privatevehicles.

5.4 Our primary statement also included a section 32 and section 32AA analysis11. We

concluded that the Metropolitan Centre zone is the most efficient and effective means of

achieving the objectives and policies of the PAUP and therefore the most appropriate way to

achieve the purpose of Resource Management Act 1991.


10/22

6.4 As noted in our primary evidence12, Manukau is the second largest centre in terms of

employment and in “nearest catchment” terms, is the closest Metropolitan Centre for

approximately 186,000 people13 (or 13 % of Auckland’s population). As such, Manukau has

the greatest potential demand for retail floorspace (out to 2031) out of any of the City’s sub-

regional areas14. However, Manukau has only the third largest Metropolitan Centre (by land

area) after Henderson and Albany15. Given the scale of employment and the size of the

catchment (including both Manukau and Papakura16), it is reasonable that the Metropolitan

Centre at Manukau should be larger, possibly the largest of the Metropolitan Centres in

Auckland. If the Site is rezoned as proposed, this would increase the Metropolitan Centre by

16.8 ha to approximately 62.5 ha, meaning it would be the second largest of the Metropolitan

Centres after Albany (which is approximately 69 ha – and includes both the Westfield Mall

and the Albany Mega Centre).

6.5 Furthermore, the figures in Attachment A show a notable lack of residential zoned land

adjacent to the Manukau Metropolitan Centre compared to other Metropolitan Centres. We

consider that this further supports the rezoning of the Site to Metropolitan Centre to increase

the opportunity for residential activities to establish in close proximity to retail, commercial,

i i d l t t iti


11/22

7.2 In our primary evidence, we confirmed that the HANA overlay affects only a small portion of

the site (approximately 3.5 ha out of 16.8 ha) (we have attached the overlay map showing

the Air Noise contours at Attachment B). Therefore, the HANA overlay does not significantly

restrict the potential development of sensitive activities within the Site if rezoned to

Metropolitan Centre zone17.

7.3 Furthermore, the Sensitive Activity Restriction overlay is considered redundant, as the site on

the opposite side of Puhinui Stream, which is owned by Goodman Property (70-100 Plunket

Avenue), is characterised by Light Industrial activities. As discussed in Section 6 above, we

support the rezoning of the Goodman site to Light Industry zone.

8 BUNNINGS SITE, LAMBIE DRIVE, MANUKAU

Introduction

8.1 Bunnings has sought to retain the General Business zone for the site that they lease at

55 L bi D i Th it i d b L bi D i N i Li it d h t th


12/22

8.4 Trade Suppliers are permitted activities in the Metropolitan Centre zone19. Furthermore,

additions up to 25 % of the existing GFA or 250 m² (whichever is lesser) are also permitted

activities. Accordingly, minor alterations or additions to Bunnings Manukau would not require

a resource consent that would necessitate an assessment of the amenity of the building or

site.

8.5 However, a larger scale addition to Bunnings would require resource consent. Such an

application would be assessed in accordance with the objectives and policies of the

Metropolitan Centre zone and Assessment Criteria D3.6.2.5 (new buildings and alterations

and additions to buildings not otherwise provided for).

8.6 Notwithstanding this, we consider that a certain level of reasonableness is to be expected of

Council staff when assessing larger format activities in a Metropolitan Centre zone, including

Trade Suppliers, Garden Centres, Supermarkets, Light Industry and Servicing activities and

Warehousing and Storage, all of which are permitted activities in the Metropolitan Centre

zone.

8 7 W id it ld th f b i i t d i l di t id f th ti iti


13/22

Reverse sensitivity

8.9 Trade Suppliers are permitted activities in the Metropolitan Centre zone and the General

Business zone. Dwellings and Visitor Accommodation are also permitted activities in the

Metropolitan Centre zone, although they are not permitted in the General Business zone.

Mr Norwell has cited reverse sensitivity as a concern for Bunnings22. In considering

Mr Norwell’s opinion, we have considered the implications of the mediated noise provisions

(Topic 040)23 as outlined below.

8.10 We agree with Mr Norwell that the night-time noise limit (11pm-7am) will reduce by 5 dBL Aeq

(from 65 dBL Aeq to 60 dBL Aeq) if the Site is rezoned from General Business zone to

Metropolitan Centre zone. However, Mr Norwell does not take into account that Noise

Sensitive Spaces must be designed and insulated so that internal noise levels are managed.

Specifically, Bedrooms and Sleeping Areas are required to achieve 35 dBL Aeq between 11pm

and 7am and other Noise Sensitive Spaces are required to achieve 40 dBL Aeq at all other

times.

8.11 The requirement for Noise Sensitive Spaces to be responsible (at least partly) for managing


14/22

Manukau area. Importantly, retaining Plunket Avenue HI zoning provides for larger HI zoned

block and a better protection against possible reverse sensitivity effects that could arise.

Retention of the HI zoning is the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives of the zone

gives effect to the RPS. (This position is consistent with the 051-054 evidence.)

9.2 As noted in our primary statement25, the nature of the activities on the Goodman site better

align with the Light Industry zone than with the (currently proposed) Heavy Industry zone. In

his evidence26, Mr Gerard Thompson states that the existing activities are a better fit with

those anticipated and provided for in the Light Industry zone. He further notes that there are

no manufacturing activities occurring on the land and that there is little prospect that the land

will ever transition to heavy industrial activities.

9.3 Our primary evidence considered that the rezoning of the Goodman land to Light Industry

was appropriate, largely because of the nature of the existing activities, but also because the

proposed rezoning of Winstone Aggregates’ Wiri land to Heavy Industry zone would offset

any potential loss of Heavy Industry zoned land. Importantly, we noted that the rezoning is

consistent with proposed Section 7.12, Policy 427 of the Air Management provisions which

id f th i f l d h th b fit f th i ill t i h th


15/22

existing Metropolitan centre zone boundary), which in turn would reduce to approximately

500 m if the Site is rezoned to Metropolitan Centre (which is comparable to the Sylvia Park

separation distance).

9.6 We consider that rezoning both the Goodman land and the Site (to Light Industry zone and

Metropolitan Centre zone respectively) and consequently increasing the separation distance

between the Manukau Metropolitan Centre and the nearby Heavy Industry zone is more

consistent with other Metropolitan Centres and provides better air quality management and

therefore amenity values for the Manukau Metropolitan Centre.

10 CONCLUSION

10.1 We support the rezoning of the Site to Metropolitan Centre zone. We consider that the

rezoning of the Site will support a quality compact city, by intensifying development in the

‘right’ location where retail demand has been demonstrated and where office and civic

activities are appropriate, and residential and visitor accommodation can be supported. The


16/22

10.3 We consider that rezoning Goodman’s land to Light Industry better reflects the existing and

planned activities on the site and will be ‘offset’ by the rezoning of Winstone Aggregates’ Wiri

land. The rezoning of the Goodman land will outweigh the reverse sensitivity effects on other

Heavy Industry zoned land (as required by Chapter C, Rule 7.12, Policy 4). Lastly, the

rezoning of both the Goodman land and the Site will result in separation distances (from

Heavy Industry zoned land) that are more comparable to other Metropolitan Centres.

10.4 We note that Lambie Drive Nominees Limited, as owners of 55 Lambie Drive, support the

rezoning of this site to Metropolitan Centre zone. We consider that the Metropolitan Centre

zoning will enable the ongoing operation, expansion or redevelopment of the site for Trade

Supplier activities. The PAUP includes suitable development controls in Metropolitan Centre

zones aimed at avoiding reverse sensitivity effects and limiting noise generating businesses.

10.5 Overall, we consider the proposed rezoning of the Site to Metropolitan Centre zone will better

achieve the strategic outcomes sought in the relevant higher order planning documents, the

zoning principles established by the Panel, and better achieves sustainable management

under Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991.


17/22

Attachment A


18/22 i n f r i n g e s c o p y r i g h t .

©

G o l d e r A s s o c i a t e s ( N Z ) L t d .

Manukau

Henderson Newmarket

Albany

¯

Area: 45.83 ha --> 62.68 ha | Distance: 0.85 km --> 1.16 kmExisting Retail GFA: 88,500 m

2(SFR share 56%) --> 152,100 m

2

(SFR share 33%) Area: 69.02 ha | Distance: 1.49 kmExisting Retail GFA: 148,100 m

2(SFR share 33%)

0 200 400

Metres 0 200 400

Metres

Proposed MetropolitanCentre Zone Extension


19/22 i n f r i n g e s c o p y r i g h t .

©


Sylvia Park

Westgate / Massey North Takapuna

Botany

¯

Area: 21.50 ha | Distance: 0.80 kmExisting Retail GFA: 84,900 m

2(SFR share 45%)


2(SFR share 39%)

0 100 200

Metres

0 100 200

Metres


20/22 n i n f r i n g e s c o p y r i g h t .

©


New Lynn Papakura

¯


2(SFR share 58%)


2(SFR share 76%)

0 200 400

Metres

0 200 400

Metres


21/22

Attachment B


22/22

Attachment B – Noise contours

Legend

The site HANA

MANA ANAA

081 amp capital investors nz ltd and pspib waiheke inc (j carvill, s tait) - planning - manukau city...

Documents