The the
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan
(March 2013):
Summary of Feedback Transport
September 2013
Project name:
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan
(March 2013) : Summary of
Feedback
Date of this version:
25 September 2013
Status of report:
Final
Report prepared by:
Regional Local Planning –
Auckland Council
For further information contact:
Auckland Council Unitary Plan
help desk: (09)301 0101
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013):
Summary of Feedback –
Transport
Contents
1. Overview .............................................................................................................. 2 2. Summary of feedback .......................................................................................... 3 3. The key changes made ..................................................................................... 10 4. The next steps ................................................................................................... 16 1
1.
Overview
From 15 March to the end of May 2013, Auckland Council engaged with a range of
stakeholder communities and mana whenua events, online, and through the media
on the Draft Auckland Unitary Plan. This informal engagement period was designed
to encourage feedback across Auckland, to help improve the Auckland Unitary Plan
prior to formal notification. Council received over 21,000 pieces of feedback on the
draft Plan during the 11 week consultation period.
This Unitary Plan summary covers Auckland wide transport issues down to the
individual rules. A summary of feedback together with the key changes made to
these provisions is provided. A brief outline of the next steps relating to notification
of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and submissions to it is also provided
There was considerable feedback concerning transport with issues covering
networks (roads, rail and State Highways), public transport and parking. Feedback
relating to air and sea transport is not included in this report. Feedback related to
airports and airfields is included in the infrastructure feedback report. However this
report does make some reference to air and water transport in the context of the
Regional Policy Statement provisions.
Following engagement and analysis of feedback received, the approach to transport
matters was refined and put to the Council for consideration. Councillors and Local
Board chairs held a series of workshops on potential changes to the Proposed
Auckland Unitary Plan and final changes were discussed at formal, public Committee
meetings at the end of August and early September.
Key changes to the draft provisions resulting from both analysis and political
decisions are as follows:

The transport section of the Regional Policy Statement now gives greater
recognition to the importance of the ports and airports and the road and rail
networks which connect Auckland with other regions and nations.

A new policy about improving the integration of land use with transport has
been added to the Regional Policy Statement

A traffic generation rule has been added to the Auckland-wide transport rules.
It applies to development above a certain scale in all zones except the City
Centre, Metropolitan Centre, Town Centre and Terrace Housing and
Apartment Buildings zone

The requirements for integrated transport assessments have been clarified
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 2

Specific provision has been made for pedestrian and cycling facilities and
public transport facilities which are not located within the road network

The Mixed Use zone has been added to the locations where short-term and
long-term parking (non-accessory) is provided for as a discretionary activity in
the Mixed Use zone

Fourteen non-urban town and local centres have been excluded from the
centres where parking maximums (and no minimums) apply - parking
minimums now apply in these centres

Some changes have been made to the parking rates, including the inclusion
of specific rates for some additional activities. The main changes are:
- less parking is now required for dwellings in the Mixed Housing zones, with a
maximum (as well as a minimum) now applying in the Mixed Housing Urban
zone
- the parking requirements for industrial activities and storage and lock-up
facilities can now be based on either gross floor area or the number of full
time equivalent employees (where this is known)

Some changes have been made to the cycle parking requirements. The main
changes are:
- the requirements for secure (long-stay) parking have generally been
converted from a rate based on the number of employees to rate based on
gross floor area
- cycle parking is now required for larger retail developments
2.
Summary of feedback
2.1
Auckland wide issues
2.1.1 General comments
The Auckland Regional Policy Statement (RPS), which formed part of the draft
Unitary Plan, emphasised the need for integration between land use and transport
planning. The RPS strategy supported accommodating growth in Auckland in a
“quality compact urban form”. Objectives and policies supported increased
residential density being directed close to the frequent public transport network,
reflecting the view that greater use of non-car travel modes (mainly public transport)
will be necessary to avoid unacceptable levels of congestion on roads.
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 3
General feedback on these issues can be divided between those who supported the
RPS strategy and those focussed on perceived negative impacts on their local areas
or business activities.
Feedback which opposed the plan cited a perceived lack of detail in how the
transport network is planned to cope with impacts of the planned intensification,
often with reference to specific localities and especially those in the Mixed Housing
zone. Some of the areas concerned about transport impacts are shown below:
Point Chevalier
Milford
Belmont
Sunnynook
Orakei
Matakana
Dominion Road
Ellerslie
Howick
Waterview
Grey Lynn
Chatswood
Mt. Eden
Devonport
Manurewa
Takanini
Warkworth
Supporters of the plan identified specific projects as necessary for success including;
City Rail Link; Skypath, rail to the airport and North Shore, more provision for park
and ride, more express bus lanes and feeder services to maximise their use. More
cycle lanes and general provision for cycling was also mentioned. More localised
suggestions included ferry services between Browns Bay and the CBD, light rail to
Orewa and a transport interchange for Te Atatu.
There was a general agreement between both supporters and opponents of
intensification that Auckland needs an improved public transport system. This did not
mean that everyone supported all public transport projects with the City Rail Link in
particular polarising opinion.
Feedback from businesses and agencies involved with providing transport
infrastructure and those who depend on it for freight transport sought support and
protection for their operational needs. There were concerns expressed by operators
that the plan is unnecessarily restrictive and will impede the development and
maintenance of transport infrastructure required for implementation of the Auckland
Plan.
Adjoining local authorities also sought greater recognition and protection of cross
boundary transport networks that promote the integration of overlapping transport
systems.
2.1.2 Public transport
Although operational issues around public transport were not covered by the draft
plan, they were the focus of much of the transport related feedback. The RPS
referred to the need for a good frequent public transport system and the parking
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 4
section of the draft plan covered provision for park and ride facilities so the feedback
on operational matters was not unexpected.
The overall feedback was that a better public transport system is needed before the
planned residential and business intensification takes place and that the current
system is inadequate in many ways. Some comments focussed on the frequency of
the services, others on the facilities and the need for better integration between bus,
train and ferries.
The need for better public transport to service the proposed intensification appeared
to be accepted by most although there was some doubt that it will be developed fast
enough or well enough to take the pressure off the road network.
Views on the City Rail Link were divided with some feeling that the money would be
better spent elsewhere. Others suggested an even greater emphasis on
intensification along the rail corridors.
There were several comments about the high costs of public transport (fares)
particularly for rural and outer suburbs where the costs are higher. Services to outer
areas were seen as poor with towns like Pukekohe, Warkworth , Kumeu, Riverhead,
Waiuku all mentioned specifically.
2.1.3 Transport networks
This section relates to Auckland wide objectives and policies in the draft Auckland
Unitary Plan that relate to the transport network. The draft plan provided a framework
for the development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of infrastructure,
including the road network (excluding State Highways). Designations were found
elsewhere in the Plan and provided for State Highways (controlled by NZTA) and the
rail network (controlled by KiwiRail).
One of the policies in this section acknowledged the link between land use policies
and infrastructure (including the transport network) and gave the intention of the
DUP to:
“Prevent inappropriate subdivision, use and development which may
compromise, the efficient, affordable, secure and reliable operation and
capacity of existing significant infrastructure and associated networks. “ (S.
3.1.1.1 Policies about Provision of Infrastructure)
The feedback received under this section differentiated between those wanting to
increase road capacity to cater for more private cars and the proposed increase in
population and those wanting to forego this in favour of public transport and other
active modes such as walking and cycling. The RPS compact city strategy clearly
supports a multi-modal transport system with public transport being a significant
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 5
element. Managing growth without creating excessive congestion on the existing
road network was the challenge that generated most of the feedback.
Views expressed range from a belief that road building is “fighting a losing battle”
and those who argued for more roads.
The expressions of support for roads were most often expressed in terms of the
need for relief from current congestion problems or fears about future congestion
problems that will result from the residential intensification proposals. The local areas
concerned are too numerous to mention here but covered most of the city from (and
including) Drury to Warkworth. It was not always clear whether the remedy was seen
as more road capacity or less intensification. The concern was that supply and
demand for road capacity is not or will not be balanced.
Other feedback focused on the need for major infrastructure projects to help resolve
the problem. Some of these suggestions are set out in the table below:
Second harbour crossing
Skypath
Extra capacity on
Southern Motorway
More cycle ways
Light rail
Trams and Trolley-buses
By-passes
Penlink (Whangaparaoa)
Greater investment in rail
Other suggestions included congestion charges and toll roads, although there was
both support and opposition to these. Wider roads in areas of residential
intensification were also mentioned as necessary for the expected lower levels of on
street parking that will be provided.
Other feedback related to safety issues. Pedestrian crossings and lower speed limits
in residential areas were two suggestions put forward for consideration.
2.1.4 Parking, loading and access
The Auckland Plan includes Directive 10.6 which provided the context for many of
the parking provisions in the draft Auckland Unitary Plan. The directive states:
“Parking standards and innovative parking mechanisms should take account of
multiple objectives, including the need to:





Facilitate intensive and mixed use developments within strategic locations
Improve housing affordability
Reduce development costs
Encourage use of public transportation
Optimise investments in public parking facilities, civic amenities and centre
developments
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 6

Foster safe, convenient and attractive walkable neighbourhoods.”
Objectives, policies and rules in the draft Auckland Unitary Plan relating to parking
and access were included in the Auckland wide sections. The development controls
and activity tables differentiated between zones and different areas of the city. There
were additional development control rules in some Precinct Rules which include site
specific parking requirements.
Parking terminology and concepts used in the draft Auckland Unitary Plan included
the following:




Accessory parking = parking which the Unitary Plan permits or requires in
association with a development on the same site
Parking maximums = permitted parking with an upper limit (e.g. maximum of
1 space per 30m2 Gross Floor Area (GFA) of office space
Parking minimums = required parking with a lower limit (e.g. minimum of 1
space per 45m2 GFA of office space
Non-accessory parking = parking provided as a principal activity on a site
e.g. public or commercial parking
The draft Auckland Unitary Plan moved towards greater use of parking maximums
which is seen as consistent with Auckland Plan Directive 10.6. This change of policy
direction has been the source of considerable feedback, both in support and
opposition.
The proposed approach to accessory parking in the DUP is shown in Table 1 below:
Table 1: Accessory parking: draft plan approach
Zone/Area
City Centre
City Centre Fringe Area
Centres – Metro, Town
and Local
Townhouse and apartment
building zone
Mixed Use
All other areas
Minimums Apply?
No
No
No
Minimums Apply?
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No (except for offices)
Specific rates for accessory parking inside and outside the City Centre zone are
shown in Tables 2 and 3 below:
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 7
Table 2: Accessory parking- City Centre zone (maximum rates)
City Centre zone
Residential
Non-Residential
2
<75m GFA = 0.7 per dwelling
1:200m2 of GFA
75-90m2 GFA = 1.4 per dwelling
>90m2 GFA = 1.7 per dwelling
Visitor spaces = 0.2 per dwelling
No parking where accessed from pedestrian oriented street e.g.
lower Queen Street
Wynyard Quarter, Port Area have their own rules
Table 3: Accessory parking – outside City Centre zone
Where
Maximum
City Centre Fringe
(permitted rates)
Area
Centres – Metro,
Town, Local
Townhouse and
apartment building
zone
Mixed Use
Minimum (required) All other areas
rates
Residential
1 or 2 spaces
depending on
dwelling size
Visitor space = 0.2
per dwelling
Non-residential
Rates aim at 85%
peak parking
demand (except
allow more parking
for retail)
1 or 2 spaces,
depending on
dwelling size
Rates aim at 75%
peak parking
demand
Maximum rate
applies for offices
Much like other sections of this report, residents’ feedback was divided between
those who supported parking control as another lever for facilitating the compact city
strategy and those who were more concerned about the impact of increased onstreet parking associated with intensification on their neighbourhood. Many who
supported the approach thought that it did not go far enough and sought removal of
parking minimums in all areas.
Several comments related to the need for more and bigger park and ride facilities at
all public transport interchanges. Improved provision for cycle parking at train
stations was also mentioned.
Some feedback suggested there should be a requirement for more off-street parking
for apartments and a minimum of 2 spaces for each dwelling. Others favoured the
removal of parking requirements from the Mixed Housing zones in order to better
provide for more intensive development and improve affordability.. Some residential
developers pointed to the market demand for off street parking in the Terrace
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 8
Housing and Apartment Buildings zone and suggested ways this can be achieved
without dominating the streetscape.
Greater provision for disability car parking was also the subject of some feedback.
Business associations and retailers were concerned that the new parking maximums
will lead to a loss of business if customers cannot find a park. Feedback from these
groups tended to oppose parking maximums. Retailers and business associations
wanted to see more provision for short-term parking in shopping malls and town
centres. There were also concerns over vehicle access controls as they relate to
retail centres. The feedback suggested a more flexible approach might be more
appropriate rather than “blanket” provisions.
There was both support and opposition from hospitals and public health authorities
to the parking standards.
Some specific types of business sought changes to the parking standards to better
reflect their particular operations. Retirement villages, self-storage facilities, industrial
activities, motor vehicle sales and servicing, marinas, emergency facilities and
warehousing in particular felt the requirements for parking are inappropriate for
different reasons. Retirement villages opposed the cycle parking requirements which do not actually apply to them. Storage facilities and warehousing operations
argued their demand for car parking is far less than other commercial or industrial
uses where there is a larger on-site permanent workforce.
The draft Auckland Unitary Plan introduced new requirements for cycle parking and
end-of-trip facilities for some activities. End-of-trip facilities include showers,
changing rooms and lockers for commuter cyclists. While this is a policy that
received significant support it is also one which received considerable opposition.
Some schools, churches, major recreation facilities and other places of
entertainment and assembly perceived the cycle parking requirements to be too high
and opposed them.
2.2
High land transport noise overlay
The draft plan introduced an overlay to manage the effects of noise from busy roads
and railways. The purpose of the overlay is to protect noise sensitive uses in a
defined corridor along noisy transport routes. The rules apply when a new noise
sensitive use is proposed, or an existing one is altered. Noise sensitive activities
include dwellings, night wards in hospitals, and teaching rooms in education
facilities. The proposed rules required noise sensitive activities to undertake
acoustic mitigation (such as acoustic insulation or fencing) to ensure that internal
noise levels met a certain standard.
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 9
For land owners, this introduced some additional requirements, although there was
little feedback on this issue from private land owners.
Major transport operators were generally in favour of this overlay and some would
like to see the width of the corridor extended to include more properties. Feedback
suggested that the overlay and its rules will better provide for the operation,
maintenance and development of the existing road and rail network.
3.
The key changes made
This section of the report outlines the key change made in the Proposed Auckland
Unitary Plan, as compared with the draft Unitary Plan.
3.1
Regional Policy Statement
The introduction to the transport objectives and policies in the Regional Policy
Statement now includes a sentence making it clear that the objectives and policies of
the preceding section (Significant infrastructure and energy) must also be considered
when addressing transport matters.
A new objective refers to ‘a transport system that supports the integrated movement
of people, goods and services throughout Auckland and to other regions and
nations’. This gives greater recognition to the importance of the airports and ports,
and the road and rail networks which connect Auckland with other regions. Other
amendments also give more support to air and water transport. A policy which refers
to Auckland Airport, and Auckland and Onehunga ports, has been amended to
acknowledge the associated local, national and international trade, freight and visitor
connections. A policy has also added about protecting rail and shipping corridors
and air flight paths to meet future passenger and / or freight and trade demand.
There is greater use of the terms ‘effective, efficient and safe’ when referring to the
transport system or network.
The objective which referred to managing travel demand has been reworded to focus
on facilitating transport choices and enabling accessibility and mobility for all
sections of the community.
A new policy has been added about the location and design of activities sensitive to
noise in relation to strategic transport infrastructure. This supports the High Land
Transport Noise overlay referred to below.
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 10
A new policy addresses improving the integration of land use with transport. This
new policy incorporates previous policies about integrated transport assessments
and about freight routes.
A new policy recognises that where access to activities cannot be made effectively,
efficiently or safely by public transport, walking or cycling, trips will continue to made
by private vehicle. There is also reference to ‘recognising the full range of trips being
undertaken throughout Auckland by all sections of the community’.
3.2
Transport assessments
A traffic generation rule has been added to the Auckland-wide transport rules. A
restricted discretionary consent is now required for development which exceeds
specified thresholds in all zones except the City Centre, Metropolitan Centre, Town
Centre and Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zones. Applicants proposing
such developments may be required to provide a travel plan and a transport
assessment.
The integrated transport assessment requirements contained in the general
provisions (of the Auckland-wide rules) have been redrafted to clarify when such
assessments are required. Integrated transport assessments are generally intended
to address larger scale proposals than those assessed under the traffic generation
rule. The purpose of an integrated transport assessment is to assess the potential
effects a proposal could have on the transport network and any mitigation measures
needed to ensure that any adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated. The
PAUP now also sets out the information to be included in an integrated transport
assessment.
More information about the content of the traffic generation rule and the
requirements for integrated transport assessments can be found in the relevant
PAUP factsheet.
3.3
Transport networks
As with the draft Plan, the Auckland-wide network utility rules continue to provide for
the construction, operation and maintenance of the road network (other than state
highways) and associated transport services. Pedestrian overpasses or
underpasses providing a direct connection into or between buildings are now
provided for as a restricted discretionary activity. Other drafting changes have
occurred to provide greater clarity.
To complement the rules relating to the road network, ‘off-road pedestrian and
cycling facilities’ and ‘public transport facilities’ (outside of the road network) are now
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 11
provided for as restricted discretionary activities in the Auckland-wide transport rules.
The network utility rules continue to permit cycle, pedestrian and public transport
facilities within the road network.
The Strategic Transport Corridor zone, which applies to state highways and railways,
and complements the transport designations, has had some amendments. An
additional objective has been added to address potential reverse sensitivity effects of
non-transport activities on the operation of the corridor. Any activity not listed in the
activity table for the zone, but provided for within an adjoining zone as permitted,
controlled or restricted discretionary, is now provided for as restricted discretionary.
The draft Plan accorded such activities the same status as that listed in the adjoining
zone. A height in relation to boundary control has also been added where buildings
in the Strategic Transport Corridor zone adjoin a residential zone.
Some amendments were made to the mapped extent of the Strategic Transport
Corridor zone - in particular this zoning was removed from some portions of road
which are no longer state highway.
3.4
Parking, loading and access
The sections containing the Auckland-wide parking, loading and access rules and
related objectives and policies have been broadened by the introduction of some
other transport rules ie the traffic generation rule, and the provision for ‘off-road
pedestrian and cycling facilities’ and ‘public transport facilities’. These changes are
outlined above. Amendments have accordingly been made to the titles of these
sections (now called ‘Transport’ rather than ‘Parking, loading and access’) and the
objectives, policies, and definitions to reflect these changes to the transport rules.
Some amendments have been made to the objective about parking. The objective
now refers to ‘the number, location and type’ of parking / loading spaces - rather than
just generally referring to ‘supply’. It also refers specifically to the zones where
parking maximums apply - rather than the previous general approach of referring to
‘in and around the city centre, metropolitan, town and local centres, and within mixed
use corridors’. The objective now also specifically includes cycle parking and
associated end-of-trip facilities.
Park-and-ride
No substantive changes have been made to the provisions for park-and-ride. The
approach in the draft Plan already included objectives, policies and rules which
provided for park-and-ride facilities which support public transport as a restricted
discretionary activity.
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 12
Non-accessory parking
The Mixed Use zone has been added to the list of zones where short-term and longterm parking (non-accessory) provided is for as a discretionary activity.
Accessory parking (excluding cycle parking)
In keeping with the draft plan, the PAUP continues with the approach of applying
parking maximums so that on-site parking is permitted but not required in the City
Centre zone; City Centre Fringe overlay; Metropolitan, Town and Local Centres
zones; Mixed Use zone; Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone; and the
Mixed Housing Urban zone. However fourteen non-urban town and local centres are
now excluded from locations where parking maximums (and no minimums) apply.
Those centres are:


five town centres: Helensville, Kumeu-Huapai, Pukekohe, Warkworth and
Wellsford.
nine local centres: Karaka, Kaukapakapa, Leigh, Matakana, Riverhead, Snells
Beach, Te Hana, Waimauku and Waiuku
Some of these centres did not have a town centre or local centre zoning in the draft
plan. Parking minimums now require on-site parking in these centres except no
parking is permitted where associated vehicle access would be within a Key Retail
Frontage overlay in the five town centres.
No changes have been made to the parking maximums applying in the City Centre
zone. The tables which set out parking rates applying outside the City Centre zone
have been amended to refer to ‘full-time equivalent employees’ (rather than
employees) and ‘equivalent full-time students’ (rather than students). The parking
rates for retirement villages have also been amended to refer to ‘unit / apartment’
(rather than ‘unit’), and to provide for additional parking where a retirement village
includes rest home beds.
Some other changes have been made to the table which sets out the parking rates
for ‘all other areas’. ‘All other areas’ refers to locations outside of the parking
maximum areas described above. The changes to the table are:



less parking is required for dwellings in the two Mixed Housing zones and a
maximum (as well as a minimum) applies to the Mixed Housing Urban zone
no additional parking is required for boarding houses which accommodate school
students within a School zone
specific parking requirements have been introduced for motor vehicle sales,
repair and maintenance services, and for land used for organised sport and
recreation
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 13





the parking requirements for industrial activities and storage and lock-up facilities
can be based either on gross floor area or the number of full time equivalent
employees (where this is known)
specific parking requirements have been introduced for Massey University at
Albany Campus - as distinct from tertiary education facilities in general
less parking is required for marinas
the default rate for ‘all other activities’ (except where located in rural zones) is 1
per 50m2 GFA - instead of referring to the ‘activity closest in nature to the
proposed activity’
no parking is required for ‘all other activities’ where located in a rural zone.
Cycle parking
The cycle parking requirements were reviewed in response to feedback but the
overall approach to cycle parking and end-of-trip facilities has been retained. Some
changes have been made to the table which sets out the amount of cycle parking to
be provided in association with various activities. The requirements for secure (longstay) parking have generally been converted from a rate based on number of
employees to a rate based on gross floor area. This makes the rules easier to apply
at the time a building consent or resource consent is applied for, when the number of
employees is often not yet known. Other changes to this table are:





less visitor (short-stay) parking is required for offices - amended from 1 per
800m2 GFA to 1 per 1000m2 GFA
cycle parking is now required for larger retail developments (food and beverage
over 350m2 GFA; other retail over 500m2)
visitor (short stay) parking is no longer required for industrial activities and
storage and lock-up facilities, but is now required for hospitals and healthcare
facilities
less cycle parking is required for schools, particularly for younger students (Year
1 to 5)
requirements for entertainment and community facilities have been amended to
better match the associated PAUP definitions, and the range of facilities involved.
Some design standards have also been added for cycle parking.
The rules requiring end-of trip facilities (ie showers and changing facilities) now apply
to hospitals but not to medical facilities.
Access
The rules about Vehicle Access Restrictions have been clarified. This includes
clarifying when the associated rules apply to construction of a vehicle crossing only,
and when they apply to both construction and use of a vehicle crossing. The defined
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 14
road boundary control which applies around major intersections has been removed,
since it duplicates other vehicle access rules.
The vehicle crossing and vehicle access widths have been amended in conjunction
with the access requirements for rear sites in the subdivision rules. There are now
different requirements for different zones. The minimum vehicle crossing widths at
the boundary have increased in some instances - largely to ensure a better match
between the driveway widths and vehicle crossing widths. The requirements for the
City Centre zone are now the same as for the other centres zones. The passing bay
requirements have been amended to allow longer intervals between passing bays in
rural zones - 100m rather than 50m.
3.5
High land transport noise overlay
There have been minor changes to the objectives and policies for the High Land
Transport Noise overlay to clarify that the PAUP protects only new activities sensitive
to noise including additions to existing buildings e.g. new classrooms in existing
schools, and new bedrooms or sleeping areas and other living areas in residential
uses.
Minor amendments have been made to the rules to clarify that the maximum internal
noise levels apply to both bedrooms and sleeping areas (which are defined) as well
as habitable rooms (e.g. living rooms and kitchens) and classrooms. A table which
had some technical standards (octave band centre frequencies) has been removed
because road and rail noise will need to be measured determine how much noise
attenuation will be required on individual sites. The ventilation requirements have
been amended so that they are more realistic in situations where building owners
choose to keep windows or doors closed to meet the internal noise levels specified
by the rules. An assessment criteria which suggested that audio equipment, rather
than insulation, could be used to mitigate transport noise in teaching rooms has been
removed.
Mapping amendments were made to apply the overlay to some areas where it had
been omitted in error as follows:



a portion of Ash Street / Rata Street in Avondale / New Lynn
adjacent to the Newmarket viaduct
along the rail line from Subway Road, Pukekohe to the boundary of the Auckland
region.
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 15
4.
The next steps
The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan will be released for notification in late
September 2013 and will be the first combined resource management plan for
Auckland. It replaces the current Auckland Regional Policy Statement, four regional
plans and seven district plans. The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan does not
replace the Auckland Council District Plan (Hauraki Gulf Islands section). This
section of the plan applies to the majority of the Hauraki Gulf Islands until a plan
change is made to incorporate the Hauraki Gulf Islands section of the Auckland
Council District Plan into the Unitary Plan.
Submissions to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan close on 28 February 2014.
The proposed plan and associated information including submission forms may be
viewed on the council’s website www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/unitaryplan.
Draft Auckland Unitary Plan (March 2013): Summary of Feedback – Transport 16