Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
IN THE MATTER
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
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
STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF CRAIG MCGARR FOR SCENTRE (NEW
ZEALAND) LIMITED
TOPIC 081 REZONING AND PRECINCTS (GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS)
(PLANNING)
10 FEBRUARY 2016
B J Matheson / F M Lupis
Phone +64 9 367 8000
Fax +64 9 367 8163
PO Box 8
DX CX10085
Auckland 1140
i
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A.
This evidence addresses the submissions of Scentre (New Zealand)
Limited in relation to Topic 081 - Rezoning and Precincts (Geographical
Areas) of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.
B.
In particular, my evidence addresses:
a. The Newmarket 1 Precinct where Scentre has substantial
landholdings which are suitable for extensive redevelopment,
including Scentre's integrated shopping centre and retail facilities. I
address the need for sufficient flexibility for development outcomes,
which are currently unnecessarily constrained by the basic floor
area and bonus floor area controls proposed within the notified
Newmarket 1 Precinct provisions.
b. The Saint Lukes Precinct where Scentre's Saint Lukes shopping
centre is located. I address the need for the Saint Lukes Precinct
provisions to sufficiently reflect the intent of the Saint Lukes
Concept Plan, including relevant activity statuses, while promoting
greater flexibility and more innovative urban design outcomes. In
particular I explain which parts of the Precinct Plan remain relevant
and which should be revisited in light of the overarching approach
of the Unitary Plan.
c. The Albany Centre Precinct where Scentre's Albany shopping
centre is located. I address in particular the need to reinforce the
focus and importance of the Albany shopping centre within the
Precinct consistent with the Metropolitan Centre zoning.
2988552
2
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
My full name is Craig Irving McGarr.
1.2
My qualifications and experience have been set out in previous
statements of evidence on other hearing topics that have been put
forward to the Hearings Panel for Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
("Scentre").1
Code of conduct
1.3
I confirm that I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct set out in
the Environment Court's Practice Note 2014. I have complied with the
Code of Conduct in preparing this evidence and agree to comply with it
while giving oral evidence before the Hearings Panel. Except where I
state that I am relying on the evidence of another person, this written
evidence is within my area of expertise. I have not omitted to consider
material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions
expressed in this evidence.
Scope of evidence
1.4
This evidence is prepared on behalf of Scentre and relates to Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts (Geographical Areas) ("Topic 081") of the
Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan ("Unitary Plan").
1.5
This evidence focuses on:
(a)
the Newmarket 1 Precinct where Scentre has significant
commercial landholdings which are suitable for extensive
redevelopment and intensification, including the integrated
shopping centre and retail facilities at 277 Broadway, 309
Broadway and Nuffield Street in Newmarket;
(b)
the Saint Lukes Precinct where Scentre's Saint Lukes
shopping centre is located and which is in the process of being
redeveloped; and
1
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Craig McGarr on behalf of Scentre (New Zealand) Limited,
Topics 051-054 - Business zones.
3
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(c)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
the Albany Centre Precinct where Scentre's Albany shopping
centre is located as the site of the primary retail component of
the Albany Centre.
2.
THE NEWMARKET 1 PRECINCT
Description of the Newmarket 1 Precinct
2.1
The Newmarket 1 Precinct is centred around the Broadway main street,
which is anchored by the Olympic Pools at the northern end and
Scentre's Westfield landholdings at the southern end. The Precinct is
bounded by Gillies Avenue to the West and the Main Northern Railway
Trunk Line to the east.
2.2
The Precinct description recognises Newmarket as a key centre for
growth, with regard to its "central location, good transport links and high
levels of amenity".2
The purpose of the Precinct is to facilitate
Newmarket's further development as a Metropolitan Centre with controls
to ensure new development makes a positive contribution to the
streetscape, and amenity and character of the Precinct in general.
2.3
The Precinct objectives seek to ensure that the Newmarket 1 Precinct is
a high quality built environment, achieved through "high-quality urban
design outcomes" and pedestrian linkages. The Newmarket 1 Precinct
policies expand on the measures that are intended to achieve these
outcomes, including avoiding adverse visual and dominance effects on
the streetscape and public open spaces from new development,
encouraging basement car parking and innovative building design, and
providing public pedestrian retail through-site linkages.
2.4
The Newmarket 1 Precinct includes two rules which apply in addition to
the Metropolitan Centre zone rules.
(The land in the Newmarket 1
Precinct is predominantly zoned Metropolitan Centre.) These rules limit
the basic floor area to 4:1, with a maximum floor area of 5:1 which can be
'achieved' through the provision of basement car parking, through-site
lanes and covered retail through site linkages. The only other rule in the
Newmarket 1 Precinct is a combined maximum height and height in
2
2988552
Chapter F, 2.11 Newmarket 1.
4
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
relation to boundary control that applies to a single property within the
Precinct (3 Teed Street).
Scentre's integrated shopping centre and retail facilities in
Newmarket
2.5
A plan identifying Scentre's properties in Newmarket is attached at
Appendix A of this evidence.
2.6
These sites are zoned predominantly Metropolitan Centre under the
Unitary Plan, with one of Scentre's properties on Mahuru Street zoned
Mixed Use. (This property is not included in the Newmarket 1 Precinct.)
2.7
As with all Scentre's shopping centres in Auckland, Scentre's integrated
Newmarket shopping centre provides a substantial contribution to the
local economy as well as functioning as a place where the local
community can come together.
2.8
In order to meet the objectives of the Metropolitan Centre zone and
maintain this focus of development, it is critical that the applicable
provisions are flexible enough to allow for intensification of Scentre's
properties and assets.
Scentre's submission
2.9
In its submission Scentre sought that the entire Newmarket 1 Precinct be
deleted on the basis that the controls under the Newmarket 1 Precinct
were contrary to the intention of the Metropolitan Centre zone to
encourage intensification and provide for the greatest concentration,
quality and scale of built form second only to the City Centre zone. 3 The
basic and maximum floor area ratio controls are contrary to the outcomes
that are anticipated and encouraged by the Newmarket 1 Precinct, and
the methods through which bonus floor area can be attained do not
support high quality urban design outcomes, but rather encourage the
provision of a limited range of public amenities in exchange for a minor
uplift of development opportunity.
2.10
There is no logical basis for a control which restricts the intensity of
activity in Newmarket relative to the objectives and policies of the
3
2988552
Scentre submission 2968-375.
5
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Metropolitan Centre zone, and the role and function of Newmarket in
contributing to Auckland's growth and intensification.
Council evidence on Newmarket 1 Precinct
2.11
In her evidence, Ms Barbara Overwater, on behalf of Auckland Council,
supports the deletion of the Newmarket 1 Precinct.4 The basis for Ms
Overwater's position is summarised as:
(a)
The urban design outcomes sought by the Newmarket 1
Precinct (primarily those that are encouraged and incentivised
through the Floor Area Ratio ("FAR") controls) are better
achieved through other provisions, including the Metropolitan
Centre zone and Auckland-wide provisions.
(b)
The deletion of the Newmarket 1 Precinct is consistent with the
Hearing Panel's Interim Guidance.
(c)
Auckland Council has developed a set of criteria for the
application of a precinct, as a result of hearings for Topic 050
City Centre. The Newmarket 1 precinct does not meet these
criteria, which are intended to manage any or all of the
following:5
(i)
a distinctive character; and/or
(ii)
a concentration of particular activities; and/or
(iii)
a specific activity on a site; and/or
(iv)
activities that have specific functional requirements;
and/or
(v)
4
5
2988552
significant transformational development opportunities.
Primary evidence of Barbara Overwater, on behalf of Auckland Council, dated 26
January 2016.
Primary evidence of Barbara Overwater, on behalf of Auckland Council, dated 26
January 2016, para 12.3.
6
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Relief sought by Scentre
2.12
As discussed above, Scentre's submission sought the deletion of the
Newmarket 1 Precinct in its entirety. Ms Overwater supports the relief
sought, and her recommendation satisfies Scentre's submission.
2.13
In my opinion, the outcomes set out in the objectives and policies for the
Newmarket 1 Precinct, while appropriate, are not given effect to by the
use of a floor area ratio control.
The 'bonus' elements provided to
incentivise public amenities for additional floor area do not provide for
benefits that are uniquely desirable in Newmarket compared with any
other Metropolitan Centre. The use of a floor area restriction is also
contrary to the level of growth and intensification that is anticipated and
actively encouraged in the Metropolitan Centre zone.
2.14
I agree with Ms Overwater that the Newmarket 1 Precinct should be
deleted from the Unitary Plan.
3.
THE SAINT LUKES PRECINCT
Description of the Saint Lukes Precinct
3.1
As outlined in the Saint Lukes Precinct description, the Saint Lukes
shopping centre is one of Auckland's premier retail destinations and
performs the role of anchor for the wider Saint Lukes Town Centre. It is
strategically located in the western part of the Auckland isthmus and is
well connected to the surrounding transport network. The Saint Lukes
Precinct covers an area of approximately 88,750m2, which comprises the
Saint Lukes shopping centre, and several properties to the north which
are occupied by residential uses and are also owned by Scentre.
3.2
The purpose of the Precinct is intended to enable the future expansion
and development of the shopping centre to keep pace with the growth
and development of other parts of urban Auckland.
3.3
The Precinct provisions, as notified in the Unitary Plan, effectively
correspond to a roll-over of the legacy provisions in the Operative
Auckland District Plan – Isthmus Section ("Operative Plan"), which were
introduced via Private Plan Change 8 (which introduced 'Concept Plan
2988552
7
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
E06-05 St Lukes Road, Mt Albert'), albeit some of the provisions have
been re-framed to align with the language and style of the Unitary Plan.
Plan Change 8 was lodged on 1 December 2008 and approved on 23
September 2010, but was subject to an appeal to the Environment Court.
A Consent Order was issued on 22 December 2011, following which the
St Lukes Concept Plan was made operative in 2012.
Scentre's Saint Lukes shopping centre
3.4
The Saint Lukes shopping centre, which was first established in 1971, is
zoned Town Centre under the Unitary Plan, and forms part of a wider
Town Centre zoning pattern. The shopping centre is the "heart" of the
Saint Lukes Town Centre, which comprises an area of mixed land uses
located around the intersection of Saint Lukes Road and Morningside
Drive.
Included within the Town Centre are community facilities (Mt
Albert Library and Citizens Advice Bureau), and small scale commercial
premises and medical facilities.
3.5
Scentre has also recently acquired a portion of Exeter Road to the north
of the Saint Lukes shopping centre and Scentre's submission proposes
that this should form part of the Town Centre zone (which Council's
evidence supports).6
3.6
A plan identifying Scentre's properties in Saint Lukes is attached at
Appendix B of this evidence.
3.7
In order to meet customer demand and maintain the community focus of
the Saint Lukes shopping centre, Scentre has made, and planned for,
significant investment in its development. This includes the work
undertaken to advance Plan Change 8, which was initiated to recognise
and secure further development opportunity within the shopping centre,
and in doing so provide both Scentre and the community with surety
concerning future development and intensification.
3.8
Resource consents were granted in 2013 for the 'Stage 4' development,
which comprises of an 11,400m² GFA (approx.) extension of the
shopping centre generally towards Morningside Road and Exeter Road.
The resource consents included a new main pedestrian entrance to the
6
2988552
Joint Statement of Evidence of Panjama Ampanthong and Hamish Scott, dated 26
January 2016, Attachment C.
8
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
centre at the corner of Morningside Drive and Exeter Road with this end
of the shopping centre being anchored by a 'cafè court', supermarket and
large tenancy above the 'cafè court' with parking on the roof. The Stage
4 development of the Saint Lukes shopping centre will extend the total
GFA of the shopping centre to 56,826m2.
3.9
Further resource consents were granted in 2015 for the 'Stage 4/5'
development which comprises of a 19,250m2 GFA (approx) extension to
the shopping centre.7
3.10
Overall, Scentre's existing Saint Lukes shopping centre occupies a site of
some 72,004m2. The centre contains 179 retail tenancies, and a gross
lettable area of 39,793m2. On an annual basis, the Saint Lukes shopping
centre generates around 8.4 million customer visits and around $320
million in retail sales.
Scentre's submission
3.11
Scentre sought a number of amendments to the objectives, policies and
rules contained in the Saint Lukes Precinct, so as to:
(a)
better align the provisions with those which were contained in
the Operative Plan, with these being the basis for Scentre's
master planning; and
(b)
in light of the growth and intensification and development
opportunity provided for by the Unitary Plan, in particular for
residential land proximate to the shopping centre, seek to
increase the development opportunity for the Precinct to provide
for the development of the shopping centre to keep pace with,
and service projected residential growth.
3.12
These amendments included the following:
(a)
Amendments at F.2.20 to objectives 1 and 2 to enable future
development (rather than redevelopment) at the Saint Lukes
shopping
centre
and
integrated
outward
expansion,
to
acknowledge that the demand for new retail floor area will often
7
2988552
The consent is subject to an objection by Scentre in relation to some minor aspects of
the consent conditions.
9
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
require a lateral as well as a vertical expansion of the existing
shopping centre.
(b)
The inclusion in the Activity Table at K.2.20 Saint Lukes 1 of
"recreation facilities" and "accessory buildings or accessory
activity for any permitted activities" as permitted activities within
both Areas A and B of the Precinct, and "exterior signs which
are part of an activity or development requiring resource
consent" as a restricted discretionary activity in both Areas A
and B.
These activities are included in the operative Saint
Lukes Concept Plan.
(c)
Amending the activity status at K.2.20 Saint Lukes 3(1) and (2)
(Development Controls) for an application to infringe the
development control rules to restricted discretionary activity
status (rather than the fully discretionary activity status
proposed), for consistency with the overall approach in the
Unitary Plan to requiring restricted discretionary resource
consent for a development control infringements.
(d)
Amend the building heights table at K.2.20 Saint Lukes 3.1(1)
(Development controls - Building height) while maintaining the
'interface controls' to provide for an appropriate response to the
surrounding context, noting the ability of the Precinct to sustain
greater height, and having regard to the increased height and
scale and intensity of development provided for in the
neighbourhood. The height sought is also consistent with the
approach of the Unitary Plan in respect of other (large) Town
Centres.
(e)
Increase the Additional Zone Height Control overlay applicable
to the Council library site to 32.5m and apply the Morningside
Datum RL on the Additional Control map, Urban Grid 31.
(f)
Amend K.2.20 Saint Lukes 3.6(2) (Development Controls parking, loading and access) so that there is a requirement for a
minimum of one parking space per dwelling for GFA in excess of
45,473m² and for other activities the rates set out in Table 4
clause 3.2 of the Auckland-wide rules - Transport Section.
2988552
10
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(g)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Amend assessment criteria applying to parking non-compliances
under rule K.2.20.3.6 so that loading areas are required to
comply with the same rule, and the assessment criteria reflects
the operative Saint Lukes Concept Plan.
(h)
Include assessment criteria relating to subdivision and exterior
signs which are currently included in the operative Saint Lukes
Concept Plan in the Saint Lukes Precinct provisions at K.2.20
Saint Lukes 6.2.
(i)
Include the definition of "site" in the Saint Lukes Precinct
provisions at K.2.20 so that rules including words "within 30m of
a site boundary" or words to a similar effect, do not apply to
individual site boundaries, when they are intended to apply to
the Precinct boundary.
(j)
Zoning of a portion of Exeter Road to "Town Centre" on the
Zone map, Urban Grid 31, to take account of its recent closure
and (for completeness) extend the Saint Lukes Precinct
boundary to include the portion of Exeter Road on the Precinct
Map Urban Grid 31, and make changes accordingly to Precinct
Plans 2 and 3.
3.13
Scentre's submission also sought the following minor amendments to the
Saint Lukes Precinct Provisions:
(a)
Delete the tree protection provision at Map 3, Table 3 and
Development Control 3.8(1) consistent with the approach of the
Unitary Plan to no longer include general tree protection rules.
(b)
Amendments to additional controls at Section 4 to replicate the
provisions of the existing operative Saint Lukes Concept Plan
which lists additional works and financial contributions, not as
"development controls", but rather agreed works (largely
expressed as "conditions") that need to be undertaken upon
completion of a specified cumulative additional GFA. The extent
to which these matters are to be addressed/complied with is a
relevant assessment criteria for controlled activities in Section 5
and restricted discretionary activities in Section 6 of the Precinct
2988552
11
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Plan (which reflects the operative Concept Plan) and it is
therefore not appropriate for these to be treated as development
controls in their own right.
3.14
There were no primary submissions made by any other parties in respect
of the Saint Lukes Precinct or the zoning of the Saint Lukes shopping
centre site, with the exception of a primary submission filed by Auckland
Council, explained below. There was one primary submission filed which
sought to retain the height limits for the Saint Lukes Town Centre,
however this submission does not oppose increased height, but rather
supports the principle of greater height limits for 'centre' zones generally.8
3.15
Auckland Council's primary submission in respect of the Saint Lukes
Precinct seeks corrections to references of the Precinct Maps, and also
seeks to add an objective and a policy in respect of providing for an
integrated transport network.9
3.16
There were no further submissions filed on Scentre's primary submission,
or on Auckland Council's primary submission points, except for further
submissions which either supported or opposed the entirety of Auckland
Council's primary submission, and which have no relevance to the Saint
Lukes Precinct or zoning.
3.17
In preparing this evidence and considering the relief sought by Scentre, I
have been conscious of the Panel's interim guidance on best practice
approaches to rezoning and precincts. In the context of precincts, the
Panel's guidance provides:
(a)
The purpose of the precinct should be clearly stated and justified
in terms of the RMA.
(b)
Precincts should take into account the issues debated in recent
plan changes.
(c)
Precincts should not override an overlay.
(d)
The purpose of the precinct cannot be achieved through the use
of the underlying zone and Auckland-wide provisions.
8
9
2988552
Primary Submission of Gary Russell, submission 2422-65.
Primary Submission of Auckland Council, submission 5716-1117, 1118, 1119, 1120,
1121, 1306, 1375, 1445.
12
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(e)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
The purpose of the precinct cannot be achieved through
applying for a resource consent.
(f)
When the proposal changes most of the underlying zone, a new
zone should be created instead of a precinct.
(g)
A precinct is not determined by existing resource consents and
existing use rights, but these will be taken into account.
3.18
(h)
The structure should be simple - ideally no more than one layer.
(i)
Precinct boundaries should follow property boundaries.
(j)
Precincts must use the definitions in the Unitary Plan.
In my opinion, the revisions Scentre is proposing achieve all of the
relevant aspects of the Panel's guidance. I consider that the proposed
Saint Lukes Precinct, as sought to be amended by Scentre:
(a)
has a clearly stated purpose and is justified in terms of section
32 and the RMA's sustainable management purpose;
(b)
while largely reflective of a recent Plan Change (operative
2012), the provisions respond to the surrounding conditions at
the time that the Plan Change was developed (determined by
the zoning and planning provisions for surrounding land in the
Operative Plan).
These conditions and the context have
significantly changed under the Unitary Plan, whereas the Saint
Lukes
Precinct
Plan
provisions
have
remained
largely
unchanged;
(c)
does not override any overlay;
(d)
includes outcomes that cannot be achieved through the
underlying zone or Auckland-wide provisions. The underlying
zones would provide an element of development opportunity on
the site but would not ensure the comprehensive integrated
planning approach that the Precinct provides, nor the range of
special controls relating to on-site activities and bespoke
interface treatment;
2988552
13
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(e)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
cannot be achieved simply through a series of resource
consents, for the same reasons as (d) above;
(f)
has been structured to "tweak" rather than replace the
underlying zones. The significant majority of the provisions of
the underlying zones apply.
Additional or different controls
relate to Precinct specific issues;
(g)
does not rely heavily on existing consents or existing use rights;
(h)
has a generally simple structure;
(i)
follows defined property boundaries; and
(j)
uses the Unitary Plan's definitions.
Council evidence on Saint Lukes Precinct
3.19
Mr Joao Machado and Ms Paulina Wythes, on behalf of Auckland
Council, have prepared evidence in the form of a "sub-regional overview"
of the approaches to, and responses to submissions on, rezoning and
precincts in Central Auckland.
3.20
In respect of the Saint Lukes Precinct Plan, Mr Machado and Ms Wythes
state:10
Enabling the development of a mixed use environment is a key
element of the development of a high-density town centre at
Saint Lukes. While the site itself may not contain all the
elements that comprise the town centre, it will form its
commercial heart, with the precinct encouraging and enabling
a wide range of uses including retail, entertainment, civic,
commercial and residential activities.
3.21
Mr Machado and Ms Wythes state that the final Concept Plan in the
Operative Plan was developed to respond to particular concerns of
parties to the plan change process. They state that the Precinct Plan is
"largely consistent with the outcomes of the private plan change" that
introduced the Saint Lukes Concept Plan to the Operative Plan. 11
10
11
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Joao Machado and Paulina Wythes, on behalf of Auckland
Council, dated 26 January 2016, para 10.7 (a) (ii).
Statement of Evidence of Joao Machado and Paulina Wythes, on behalf of Auckland
Council, dated 26 January 2016, para 10.7 (a) (iii).
14
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
3.22
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Mr Machado and Ms Wythes confirm that their "current" position is:12
…to retain the Saint Lukes Precinct provisions in the current
form, given its comprehensive set of provisions tailor-made for
the redevelopment of the existing shopping mall into a high
amenity town centre with main streets and mixed-use
development including residential apartments. We understand
that the submitter, Scentre, will lodge substantive evidence
through the Topic 081 evidence exchange due on 10 February
2016.
3.23
Mr Machado and Ms Wythes do not address the Saint Lukes Precinct any
further, and have not addressed the primary submission points filed by
Auckland Council.
3.24
A without-prejudice direct discussion was held between Scentre's
representatives, including myself, and Auckland Council on 16 December
2015.
The purpose of this meeting was to confirm the scope of the
outstanding concerns held by both parties in respect of the Saint Lukes
Precinct provisions. Discussions between the parties are ongoing.
Relief sought by Scentre
3.25
My evidence on the Saint Lukes Precinct provisions is structured
according to the relief sought by Scentre in its submissions on the Unitary
Plan. My evidence will consider the following:
12
2988552
(a)
The background to the relief sought by Scentre.
(b)
The Saint Lukes Precinct description.
(c)
The Saint Lukes Precinct objectives and policies.
(d)
The use of the term "site" as a uniquely defined term.
(e)
The Saint Lukes Precinct Activity Table.
(f)
The activity status for development control infringements.
(g)
The Saint Lukes Precinct Development Controls, particularly:
(i)
Building Height.
(ii)
Tree Protection.
Statement of Evidence of Joao Machado and Paulina Wythes, on behalf of Auckland
Council, dated 26 January 2016, para 10.7 (a) (iv).
15
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(iii)
(h)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Parking.
The Saint Lukes Precinct matters of discretion and assessment
criteria for:
(i)
Parking and loading areas not meeting certain
requirements.
3.26
(ii)
Subdivision.
(iii)
Exterior signs.
The changes to the Saint Lukes Precinct provisions that I support are set
out in Appendix C to this evidence.
Background to the relief sought by Scentre
3.27
Plan Change 8 to the Operative Plan was notified in 2008, following a
year and a half of work developing the provisions and engagement with
Council. This process took four years, with the Saint Lukes Concept Plan
becoming operative in 2012. In the notified Unitary Plan, the Concept
Plan has been translated to the Saint Lukes Precinct, which retains the
majority of the provisions and plans as they are in the Operative Plan.
Due to the relatively recent plan change (which is now four years old),
Scentre has not sought to comprehensively revisit the Saint Lukes
Precinct controls.
3.28
The zoning of the land surrounding the Saint Lukes Precinct in the
Unitary Plan has been provided with a significant 'uplift' of development
opportunity, relative to the Operative Plan zoning, in respect of building
height and density/intensity controls.
A comparative summary of the
changes to the height and density controls of the surrounding zoning in
the Operative Plan and Unitary Plan (as sought to be amended by
Auckland Council in evidence on the Residential and Business zone
topics13) is attached to this evidence at Appendix D.
3.29
The most notable example of this uplift of development opportunity
occurs within the adjoining residential land on Aroha Avenue to the east
and north of the Saint Lukes Precinct, together with the more enabling
13
2988552
Annexure D, Closing Statement of Auckland Council, Topics 059, 060, 062 and 063,
dated 18 November 2015; and Annexure A, Closing Remarks of Auckland Council,
Topics 051-054, dated 29 September 2015.
16
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
provisions of the business zoning of the land to the west and south. The
neighbouring land to the north and east was zoned Residential 6a in the
Operative Plan, with a height limit of 8m and a density of one dwelling per
375m2 gross site area. In the Unitary Plan, this land is proposed to be
zoned as Terrace Housing and Apartment Building ("THAB"), with a
height limit of 16m (up to 18m as a restricted discretionary activity) with
no density controls, and strong policy support for high-density residential
activity.
3.30
Development within the Saint Lukes Precinct at the interface with this
residential land is currently managed by specific 'interface controls' and
by area-specific building height controls to address potential adverse
effects at the common boundaries.
The interface controls were
specifically crafted in response to the form and intensity of residential
development that was provided for by the Operative Plan in the
Residential 6a zone, and to manage potential adverse effects that would
be experienced by such a form of development that was anticipated by
this zone.
With the proposed changes to the surrounding properties
(including more than doubling the permitted building height), the receiving
environment will be significantly different from that which the interface
controls were specifically developed to address.
3.31
As a general comment, the 'roll-over' of the legacy Saint Lukes Concept
Plan provisions to the Unitary Plan does not enable the development of
this Town Centre to 'keep pace' with other Town Centres in the Unitary
Plan. To illustrate this point, I have prepared a comparative analysis of
the 'interface controls' of the Saint Lukes Precinct against the 'default'
interface controls (height to boundary, yards, setbacks) that apply to the
Town Centre zone. This comparative analysis is attached as Appendix
E. The bespoke interface controls for Saint Lukes constrain development
to a significant degree, relative to the default provisions that apply to
other land zoned Town Centre, which are deemed to provide an
appropriate level of amenity for neighbouring land, including a
requirement for greater setbacks from the precinct boundaries for
development of a height up to 32.5m. Notwithstanding this, the bespoke
interface controls for the Saint Lukes Precinct are not opposed by
Scentre, and no amendments are sought to these provisions. Rather, as
will be discussed further in my evidence, greater height opportunity is
2988552
17
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
sought, while retaining the interface controls, with the resultant amenity
effects to neighbouring properties not being compromised.
The Saint Lukes Precinct description
3.32
Scentre's submission sought minor amendments to the description, which
I support, as set out in Appendix C. In summary, these amendments:
(a)
Correct minor grammatical errors.
(b)
Replace references to the "Saint Lukes Centre" with "Saint
Lukes shopping centre". This will avoid any potential confusion
between the use of the term 'centre' in this context and its
common usage in the Unitary Plan for a number of business
zones.
(c)
Replace the use of "Concept plan" with "Precinct plan" to reflect
the updated terminology, consistent with the balance of the
Unitary Plan provisions.
(d)
Clarify that the Saint Lukes Precinct provides for the future
expansion and development of the shopping centre, as opposed
to simply the redevelopment of the shopping centre.
The
planned development of the shopping centre goes beyond the
redevelopment of the existing buildings, and it is appropriate that
the description of the Saint Lukes Precinct specifically
recognises this.
The Saint Lukes objectives and policies
3.33
Scentre's submission sought minor amendments to the objectives and
policies of the Saint Lukes Precinct, which I support, as set out in
Appendix C.
These amendments, and my opinion as to their
appropriateness, are as follows:
(a)
Objectives 1 and 2: the amendments to these objectives, as
sought by Scentre, ensure that the objectives relate to the
development and intensification, rather than the redevelopment,
of the shopping centre. The amendments also replace the use
of 'Saint Lukes Centre' with 'Saint Lukes shopping centre'. The
2988552
18
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
reasons for the amendments sought to the objectives are the
same as those in respect of the amendments sought to the
description.
(b)
Policy 3: this policy should be amended to clarify that the Exeter
Road extension is intended to provide a connection to the
shopping centre from the residential land to the east.
As
currently worded, the policy is ambiguous, and is not clear as to
the purpose of the road extension. The proposed amendments
are consistent with the wording of this policy in the Operative
Plan provisions, and ensure that the policy is clear in its
purpose.
The use of the term 'site'
3.34
For consistency with the legacy Saint Lukes Concept Plan, Scentre
sought to include a statement regarding the definition of 'site', which
clarifies that the term 'site' refers to the boundaries of the Saint Lukes
Precinct Plan, except where the context requires otherwise.
3.35
I am cognisant of the Hearing Panel's recommendation that a precinct
must use the definitions of the Unitary Plan, and that the definition of 'site'
in the Unitary Plan relates to legal parcels of land on separate or
contiguous lots.
3.36
As a consequence of the incompatibility of the Unitary Plan definition of
'site' for the use it is intended to have in respect of the Saint Lukes
Precinct Plan, I consider that it is more appropriate to replace the term
'site' with 'Saint Lukes Precinct' where the context is referring to the
boundaries of the Precinct as a whole. These amendments are included
in the marked-up set of provisions appended as Appendix C.
The Saint Lukes Precinct Activity Table
3.37
In the notified Unitary Plan, the Saint Lukes Precinct activity table is
missing three activities that were included in the legacy Concept Plan.
Scentre sought the inclusion of these activities in its original submission.
These are:
(a)
2988552
Recreation facilities (Permitted activity).
19
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(b)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Accessory buildings or accessory activities for any permitted
activities (Permitted activity).
(c)
Exterior signs which are part of an activity or development
requiring resource consent (Restricted Discretionary activity).
3.38
In respect of 'recreation facilities', through Topics 051-054 (Business
zones), Council has proposed to list such activities as a permitted activity
in the Town Centre zone.14
In the absence of a contrary or more
restrictive Precinct control or provision, the provisions of the underlying
zoning apply. In this regard, on the basis that 'recreation facilities' are
provided for as a permitted activity in the underlying Town Centre zone, it
is not necessary to list this activity in the Saint Lukes Precinct.
3.39
Buildings and activities that are accessory to permitted activities are
provided for as permitted in the legacy Concept Plan provisions. The
underlying
Town
Centre
zone
provisions
require
a
Restricted
Discretionary activity consent for all new buildings, however the Saint
Lukes Precinct provides for buildings that are more than 30m from a site
boundary and/or that are less than 500m2 GFA as a permitted activity.
The Precinct therefore envisages, and provides for smaller scale
(accessory) buildings. The range of activities provided for by the Saint
Lukes Precinct together with the underlying Town Centre zone is broad,
and sufficiently encompasses the range of activities that are appropriate
in Saint Lukes, such that it is not necessary to include "accessory"
activities or buildings in the Saint Lukes Precinct activity table.
3.40
In respect of exterior signs, the Unitary Plan provides for any signage that
is part of a comprehensive development as a restricted discretionary
activity.15
Other signage is subject to the provisions of the Auckland
Council Signs Bylaw 2015. As such, it is not necessary for the activity
table of the Saint Lukes Precinct to provide for exterior signs, as sought in
Scentre's submission, as this is addressed by the Auckland-wide
provisions.
3.41
Overall, I do not consider that any changes to the Saint Lukes Precinct
activity table are required.
14
15
2988552
Annexure A, Closing Remarks of Auckland Council, Topics 051-054, dated 28
September 2015.
Chapter H, Rule 6.3.1.
20
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
The activity status for development control infringements
3.42
The notified provisions for the Saint Lukes Precinct provide for an
infringement to the building height, interface, and building location
development controls as a discretionary activity. An infringement to any
of the other development controls is provided for as a restricted
discretionary activity.
The Operative Plan provides for development
control modifications as a discretionary activity by default. Therefore, the
use of a discretionary activity status for an infringement to the three
specific development controls was consistent with the overarching
approach in that Plan.
3.43
The general approach in Chapter G of the Unitary Plan, as notified (and
consistent with the Panel’s further interim guidance on Chapter G), is to
apply a restricted discretionary activity status to a development control
infringement.16
A robust restricted discretionary assessment provides
adequate opportunity to address potential adverse effects arising from a
development control infringement, and reflects the approach taken in
other parts of the Unitary Plan including the Chapter G - General
Provisions put forward by Auckland Council at the Topic 004 Chapter G
General Provisions hearing.17
3.44
Infringements to any of the development controls in the Town Centre
zone would otherwise be considered as a restricted discretionary activity,
including any infringements to a building height or interface-type control.
There are no unique circumstances, other than the legacy Operative Plan
provisions being rolled-over, which set Saint Lukes apart with respect to
an assessment of a development control infringement. This status has
been rolled-over into the Unitary Plan without due consideration of the
approach to managing and assessing development control infringements
in the Unitary Plan as a restricted discretionary activity.
3.45
In my opinion, having regard to the restricted discretionary 'default' status
for development control infringements in the Unitary Plan, it is appropriate
16
17
2988552
Further Interim Guidance Text for Regional and District Rules – Chapter G, PAUP
Chapter G – General Provisions, dated 9 October 2015.
See Attachment B (Track change version of Chapter G – General Provisions) at 2.3.2
of the statement of evidence of Michele Perwick (Auckland Council) on Topic 004
Chapter G - General Provisions 10 November 2014.
21
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
to provide for such infringements to the Saint Lukes Precinct
development controls as restricted discretionary activities.
Building Height development control
3.46
Scentre's submission seeks to increase the maximum building heights
that are enabled by the Saint Lukes Precinct, to provide a building height
of 32.5m across the entirety of the Precinct.
3.47
As notified, the building height control is a roll-over of the legacy Concept
Plan provisions. The building height control provides for stepped heights
that:
(a)
are highest (30m) at the intersection of St Lukes Road and
Morningside Drive to provide flexible and high quality urban
design outcomes;
(b)
provide for flexible design outcomes within the majority of the
site (20m); and
(c)
reduce the building height at the sensitive interfaces with
adjoining residential land to the north and east (15m and 12.5m)
3.48
The height controls relate to datums to enable a building height 'plane', as
opposed to using a rolling height method, which is an impractical method
as a consequence of the topography of the site, and the practicalities of
providing for a relatively consistent floor plate.
3.49
As I explain in my evidence above, the development opportunity that is
enabled in the surrounding area by the Unitary Plan has been
significantly uplifted relative to the legacy Operative Plan provisions. A
summary of the uplift in respect of building height and density/intensity
controls is provided in Appendix D.
3.50
Notwithstanding the changes proposed to the surrounding area, the
height controls for the Saint Lukes Precinct have been rolled-over, and as
such they respond to a context that is no longer anticipated. This is most
prevalent at the northern and eastern parts of the Precinct adjoining
residential zoned land, where the height enabled on this adjoining land by
the Operative Plan is 8m, which is proposed to be increased to 16-18m
2988552
22
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
(THAB zone) in the Unitary Plan. The height enabled in the notified Saint
Lukes Precinct in the area of the site that directly adjoins this land is set
at 12.5m. It is unreasonable and illogical to expect that the surrounding
residential land can be developed to a height that is greater than the
adjoining Saint Lukes Town Centre, which is the focus of commercial and
community activities for this area, and where the Unitary Plan otherwise
anticipates that significant intensification will occur.
3.51
There are sufficient amenity controls in place, such as the interface
controls (which comprise of a variety of height to boundary, yard and
landscaping/amenity controls) to ensure that height will be constrained at
sensitive interfaces, and GFA controls to ensure an overall cap on
development.
These interface and intensity/GFA controls are not
opposed by Scentre, nor are there any amendments sought to these
controls.
3.52
The interface controls are a unique component of the Saint Lukes
Precinct. The Town Centre zone provides controls that are similar in
nature to these, for example height to boundary, yard and setback
controls. However, in the round, the Town Centre equivalents are less
onerous than the interface controls that apply to Saint Lukes, and in most
instances substantially so. A comparison of these controls is provided in
Appendix E, which includes an analysis of the relative setbacks from the
boundaries at which a 32.5m high building could be established. At all
interfaces, the required setbacks in the Saint Lukes Precinct are greater.
3.53
Relative to the manner in which other Town Centres are managed at the
interface with a residential zone, and the significant uplift in development
opportunity of the surrounding land, in my opinion, it is appropriate that
the height controls for the Saint Lukes Precinct are revisited.
3.54
That said, having further considered the opportunity and appropriateness
of additional heights, and the intent of stepped heights to respond to the
neighbouring residential zoned land, the building height planes have been
refined and reduced from Scentre's original relief sought within two areas
of the Saint Lukes Precinct. The revised height areas are attached in
Appendix F.
2988552
23
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
3.55
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
The revised height planes have been considered by Ms Rachel de
Lambert. The height planes have also been modelled by Boffa Miskell to
illustrate the heights enabled in three separate scenarios, namely:
(a)
The heights enabled within the Saint Lukes shopping centre and
surrounding land in the legacy Operative Plan provisions.
(b)
The heights enabled within the Saint Lukes shopping centre in
the Unitary Plan as notified (rolled-over from the legacy
Operative Plan), together with the height enabled by the
surrounding zoning height rules in the Unitary Plan, as proposed
to be amended by Auckland Council.
(c)
The heights now proposed for the Saint Lukes shopping centre
in the Unitary Plan (as set out in Appendix F), together with the
height enabled by the surrounding zoning height rules in the
Unitary Plan, as proposed to be amended by Auckland Council.
3.56
Ms de Lambert considers, from a landscape and visual perspective, that
the heights now proposed by Scentre are appropriate, and can be
accommodated in the neighbourhood context, with the maintenance of
the various interface controls without generating dominance effects on
the surrounding land or the streetscape.
3.57
The Saint Lukes Town Centre is not constrained by other overlays or
controls which would otherwise implicate the height opportunity that is
sought.
This is comparatively unique when considering other Town
Centres (particularly those within the Central Auckland Isthmus). I have
analysed other Town Centres in the Unitary Plan, and the implications to
the development opportunity as a consequence of the primary
constraining overlays.18
This analysis is set out in Appendix G. In
summary, of the 14 Town Centres in the Central Auckland Isthmus:
(a)
only three Town Centres (Point Chevalier, Saint Lukes and Glen
Innes) are un-constrained;
18
2988552
These include the Volcanic Viewshaft and Height Sensitive Area overlay; and the
Historic Heritage, Special/Historic Character, and Pre-1944 overlays.
24
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(b)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
two Town Centres (Avondale and Three Kings) are only affected
by the Pre-1944 overlay (arguably the least constraining overlay
included in this analysis);
(c)
three Town Centres (Ponsonby, Newton and Parnell) are
subject to the Historic Character overlay, and one (Onehunga) is
subject to a Historic Heritage Area overlay; and
(d)
eight Town Centres are either partially or wholly subject to a
Volcanic Viewshaft or Height Sensitive Area overlay. In most
instances, this overlay significantly constrains the height
opportunity of the affected land.
3.58
This analysis shows that the capacity to accommodate any substantial
growth is constrained in a significant number of Town Centres within
central Auckland. Having regard to the 'status' of a Town Centre in the
hierarchy of centres in the Unitary Plan, in my opinion it is appropriate to
enable more development and intensification in those Town Centres that
are comparatively un-constrained, and which can accommodate such
growth.
3.59
I consider that Saint Lukes Town Centre is comparable to the Pakuranga
Town Centre (located outside of the Central Auckland Isthmus), in that a
significant area of each centre is occupied by primarily retail-based
activities (in the form of a shopping mall), and serve as a hub for a wide
catchment. As a matter of distinction from Saint Lukes, the Pakuranga
Town Centre zone does not immediately adjoin any residentially zoned
land, and occupies a larger area of land. Land across the road from the
Pakuranga Town Centre is occupied by the Mixed Use zone, the land
beyond which is zoned THAB. The building height opportunity enabled
for Pakuranga in the notified Unitary Plan is 48.5m.
This height is
managed by the standard Town Centre zone development controls,
rather than being subject to tailored 'interface' controls. The development
opportunity enabled in this Town Centre is appropriate, relative to the unconstrained nature of Pakuranga, and the ability to accommodate growth
in this location.
3.60
Notwithstanding the height sought, Scentre has not sought to increase
the allowable intensity of activity (GFA controls), which provide for a
2988552
25
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
specific amount of commercial and retail floor area, but constrained within
a tight building envelope. In this regard, Scentre seeks the flexibility to
arrange the amount of floor area allowed by the Saint Lukes Precinct in
appropriate built forms. The increase in height within the central and
road-fronting portions of the precinct will enable better urban design
outcomes, and greater flexibility and integration with the existing buildings
and activities, relative to the spatial arrangement of activity and parking
areas that exist within the Precinct. To further manage this potential, the
heights proposed have been stepped relative to these interfaces, such
that the maximum 32.5m opportunity is set back from surrounding
residential land, and buffered by lower scaled heights and managed by
interface controls.
3.61
In my opinion, relative to the extent to which the Unitary Plan encourages
and enables residential and commercial intensification within and
surrounding the Saint Lukes Town Centre, it is appropriate to reconsider
the height controls within the Saint Lukes Precinct in this context. As
discussed in my evidence above, the height limits that are set out in
Appendix C and illustrated in Appendix F are appropriate, and can be
accommodated by the context and surroundings of the Precinct, relative
to the application of the more stringent interface controls.
It is not
appropriate to simply roll-over the legacy Concept Plan provisions without
careful consideration of the significantly different planning framework
(compared with the legacy zoning provisions), which has created an
entirely different receiving environment.
Tree Protection development control
3.62
The legacy Concept Plan contained a 'tree protection' rule, together with
a diagram which identified a number of trees which were exempt from
protection, and those which were protected.19
The documentation
submitted with the application for Plan Change 8 included an
arboricultural report which identified a number of trees which were
located within a nominal building platform to be enabled by the Concept
Plan. This report undertook an assessment of these trees against the
criteria for 'generally protected' trees in the Operative Plan, and confirmed
that each were suitable for removal. These trees were then identified as
19
2988552
Rule 5C.7.3.3C of the Operative Plan.
26
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
being exempt from the tree protection rule in the Concept Plan so that
subsequent development proposals did not need to revisit that matter.
3.63
The trees that were not located within the nominal building platform, or
not otherwise immediately requiring removal, were not subject to this
assessment and were instead subject to protection.
The criteria for
assessing an application to remove any of these trees were the 'general
tree protection' provisions of the Operative Plan.
The general tree
protection rules of the Operative Plan have since been made nonoperational (as have any such rules in all District Plans). The essence of
the tree protection rules in the Concept Plan was to confirm which trees
were still subject to general tree protection, and which were not, rather
than providing such trees with a greater level of protection.
3.64
The Unitary Plan does not contain general tree protection rules. The
Unitary Plan protects 'notable' trees which are assessed to have a
significant contribution to the local amenity or character, or the natural
environment. In this regard, the protection of trees has changed since
the legacy Concept Plan was introduced to the Operative Plan. No other
Town Centre has corresponding 'general' tree protection rules in the
Unitary Plan, and nor would it be appropriate to do so given that tree
protection rules are limited only to notable trees.
3.65
Relative to the manner in which the Unitary Plan now protects trees (and
the removal of general tree protection rules in the Operative Plan making
the legacy tree protection rule in the Saint Lukes Concept Plan effectively
obsolete), it is not appropriate to continue to protect a list of particular
trees in the Saint Lukes Precinct. These trees have not been subject to a
rigorous and robust assessment to determine whether they qualify as
'notable' trees, relative to the criteria used to assess trees in the Unitary
Plan.
To simply roll-over this rule from the legacy Concept Plan,
regardless of the overarching changes to the approaches to tree
protection, is unreasonable and does not enable the efficient use of the
Saint Lukes Precinct.
3.66
Many of the interface controls require landscaping strips with mature
specimen trees. These will ensure that the amenity that is derived from
trees within the Saint Lukes Precinct will continue to be provided.
2988552
27
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
3.67
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
In my opinion, it is not appropriate, in the context of the approach taken
by the Unitary Plan to the protection of trees, to retain a specific tree
protection rule in the Saint Lukes Precinct.
Parking
3.68
The Saint Lukes Precinct parking controls, as notified in the Unitary Plan,
are mostly consistent with the legacy Concept Plan parking rules, with the
exception that the parking ratio for 'dwellings' refers to the rates in the
Auckland-wide parking rules, as opposed to specifying a parking ratio.20
The Auckland-wide rules require a minimum of one parking space for a
studio or one-bedroom dwelling. This is consistent with the parking rate
required by the legacy Concept Plan. The Precinct provisions do set out
specific parking ratios for two or more bedroom dwellings, and for visitor
and loading spaces for dwellings. These are also consistent with the
legacy Concept Plan.
3.69
The Saint Lukes Precinct provisions for parking are inconsistent and
ambiguous, as these set out parking ratios for all larger (two or more
bedrooms) dwellings, and for visitor/loading spaces, but cross reference
the Auckland-wide rules for studio and one-bedroom dwellings.
For
simplicity, I consider that the parking ratios for all dwellings should be
stated within the Precinct rules, as set out in Appendix C.
3.70
Scentre's submission also sought to amend clause 3.6.2.d of the Saint
Lukes Precinct provisions such that parking rates for "other activities"
referred to 'Table 4' in clause 3.2 of the Auckland-wide parking rules. As
notified, this simply refers to clause 3.2 without specifying which set of
parking ratios apply.
In my opinion, this amendment is necessary to
ensure that cross-referencing to the Auckland-wide rules for activities
(besides dwellings) avoids any confusion as to which set of parking ratios
applies to other activities in the Saint Lukes Precinct.
Matters of discretion and assessment criteria
3.71
Scentre's submission sought to reintroduce the matters of discretion and
assessment criteria that relate to 'parking' which does not meet the
20
2988552
Rule K.2 Central, Saint Lukes, 3.6.
28
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
respective parking requirements, as well as for subdivision and exterior
signs.
3.72
In the legacy Concept Plan, the assessment criteria for parking matters
referred to the Parking Rules of the Operative Plan, rather than
containing specific assessment criteria.21 The Saint Lukes Precinct, as
notified, attempts to reference other criteria, however these refer,
ambiguously, to the "criteria contained in clause 3.2 above" and "clause
3.1".
These clauses do not logically correspond to any relevant
assessment criteria.22
3.73
In my opinion, it is appropriate that the Saint Lukes Precinct matters of
discretion and assessment criteria for parking matters refer to the
relevant provisions from the Auckland-wide criteria (as proposed to be
amended by Auckland Council), as these provide a current framework for
the consideration of a reduction of parking spaces for all activities under
the Unitary Plan.23 The relevant matters of discretion are set out at:
(a)
clause 5.1.2 of the Auckland-wide Transport provisions, for a
proposal to provide fewer than the required minimum number of
parking spaces; and
(b)
clause 5.1.3 of the Auckland-wide Transport provisions, for a
proposal to provide fewer than the required minimum number of
loading spaces.
3.74
The corresponding assessment criteria are set out at:
(a)
clause 5.2.2 of the Auckland-wide Transport provisions, for a
proposal to provide fewer than the required minimum number of
parking spaces; and
21
22
23
2988552
Rules 12.9.1.2(b), 12.9.1.2(c), and 12.9.1.2(d) of the Operative Plan.
For example, clauses 3.1 and 3.2 of the Saint Lukes Precinct Plan relate to the
building height and interface controls, respectively. Clauses 3.1 and 3.2 of the
Auckland-wide transport provisions relate to development controls for traffic
generation and number of parking and loading spaces, but not to assessment criteria
which are contained in sections 4 and 5 of the Auckland-wide transport provisions.
Refer to 'Revised Marked up version – H1 2 Rules – Corrected' appended to
Auckland Council's Additional Closing Statement, Topics 043-044, dated 7 September
2015.
29
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(b)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
clause 5.2.3 of the Auckland-wide Transport provisions, for a
proposal to provide fewer than the required minimum number of
loading spaces.
3.75
Having regard to the status of these provisions in respect of the hearings
process, and the relative uncertainty of the final form of the Unitary Plan
provisions, I consider that the relevant matters of discretion and
assessment criteria should be inserted into the Saint Lukes Precinct
provisions, as opposed to being cross-referenced, to avoid any
implications arising from further changes to the Auckland-wide provisions
made during the hearings, recommendation or decision processes. The
relevant matters of discretion and assessment criteria are set out in
Appendix C. These have been extracted from Auckland Council's latest
set of provisions for the Auckland-wide transport chapter of the Unitary
Plan.24
Subdivision
3.76
The Saint Lukes Precinct provisions, as notified, do not include
assessment criteria which correlate with the restricted discretionary
activity status for subdivision within the Precinct. Scentre's submission
sought to insert the criteria from the Concept Plan, which would add
further criteria to the assessment of subdivision activities in the Saint
Lukes Precinct (in addition to the Auckland-wide criteria for subdivision in
the Town Centre zone). The criteria specifically address matters that are
particular to subdivision within the Saint Lukes Precinct, and relate to
ensuring that subdivision is in accordance with the purpose and
provisions of the Precinct Plan, will not adversely affect the function and
dominant activities of the Saint Lukes shopping centre, and provides for
the required civil infrastructure works.
3.77
The subdivision assessment criteria contained in the legacy Concept Plan
are appropriate, relative to the specific matters that require consideration
for subdivision activity in the Precinct. In my opinion, it is appropriate that
these criteria are inserted into the Saint Lukes Precinct provisions, as
sought by Scentre's submission, and as set out in Appendix C.
24
2988552
Additional Closing Statement of Auckland Council, Topics 043-044, dated 30 August
2015.
30
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Exterior Signs
3.78
Lastly, with regard to Scentre's submission seeking to include
assessment criteria for exterior signs, as I have discussed in my evidence
above, I do not consider that it is necessary for there to be provisions for
exterior signage in the Saint Lukes Precinct plan, as signage is provided
for by the Auckland-wide provisions. Consequentially, there is no need to
include assessment criteria for exterior signage.
4.
THE ALBANY CENTRE PRECINCT
Description of the Albany Centre Precinct
4.1
The Albany Centre Precinct is predominantly occupied by commercial
and retail activities and covers the large emerging Metropolitan Centre
located to the west of State Highway 1 and contained by Oteha Valley
Road and Albany Expressway in the northern urban part of the North
Shore. A large public open space occupies the centre of the Precinct, to
the north of Civic Crescent.
4.2
The main retail focus of the Centre is Civic Crescent. Within the Precinct
are four sub-precincts (A-D) where different predominant activities are
located, along with other supporting activities. The four sub-precincts
have different development emphases and activities are required to
develop in accordance with the Albany Centre Precinct Plan 1.
Scentre's Albany shopping centre
4.3
Scentre's Albany shopping centre is zoned Metropolitan Centre, and is
located within the Albany Centre Precinct in the Unitary Plan.
The
shopping centre is located to the south of Civic Crescent, and is identified
by the Albany Centre Precinct 1 as being the main retail focus of the
Precinct.
The shopping centre forms a critical part of Albany's
commercial and community infrastructure and is important to the success
and vitality of the Albany Metropolitan Centre.
It provides a major
contribution to the local economy and is a focal point for the local
community, enabling and providing for social and economic wellbeing.
2988552
31
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
4.4
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
The site occupied by Scentre's Albany shopping centre is some 20.9
hectares. The shopping centre comprises 145 retail tenancies, within a
lettable area of 53,326m2. On an annual basis, the Albany shopping
centre generates around 8.4 million customer visits and around $368
million in retail sales.
4.5
Scentre's Albany shopping centre is identified as being part of the Albany
Centre Precinct; however it is not subject to any of the four sub-precincts.
The site is shown in Appendix H to this evidence.
Scentre's submission
4.6
Scentre sought a number of amendments to the objectives, policies and
rules contained in the Albany Centre Precinct.
These included the
following:
(a)
Amend Objective 3 so that the Albany integrated shopping
centre is specifically acknowledged as a facility which should not
be compromised by reverse sensitivity effects generated by the
planned location and development of other activities within the
Albany Centre.
(b)
Insert a new objective that specifically acknowledges the
ongoing use and development of the Civic Crescent area as the
retail focus of the Precinct. This will ensure Scentre's Albany
shopping centre and the services it provides in the Civic
Crescent area are sufficiently recognised in order for it to
continue to fulfil its key role in the community, compared with the
lessor role and function of the sub-precincts surrounding the
Albany shopping centre.
(c)
Amend Policy 6 so that it excludes development on Civic
Crescent.
This will clarify that Policy 6 does not require all
buildings to be constructed to the Civic Crescent street frontage,
which is an inappropriate condition for Scentre's Albany
shopping centre. In addition, Scentre sought to delete the last
part of Policy 6(b) (as well as consequential changes to the
Precinct Plan maps) relating to a new street between Don
2988552
32
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
McKinnon Drive and Civic Crescent as the location and nature
of this connection is no longer appropriate.
(d)
Amend Policy 11 to remove the extensive list of 'criteria' that
relate to design elements that contribute to the sub-regional role
and local identity of the Metropolitan Centre, as it is not
appropriate to list specific design criteria in a strategic policy for
the whole precinct.
(e)
Delete Development Control 1 relating to the requirement for
buildings to be constructed between ground-floor parking and a
street frontage. This is not appropriate as most of the street
frontages are occupied by parking.
4.7
Scentre's submission also sought the following minor amendments to the
Albany Centre Precinct Provisions:
(a)
Amendments to paragraphs three and four of the Precinct
description to appropriately recognise the importance of the
Albany shopping centre.
(b)
References to the "Structure Plan" should be replaced with
references to the "Precinct Plan" in the objectives and policies of
the Albany Centre Precinct provisions to maintain consistency
with other parts of the Unitary Plan.
(c)
Amendments to relevant objectives and policies to ensure
intense
residential
development,
high-density
office
development, car-orientated commercial and entertainment
activities, office development in a business park environment,
and a range of opportunities for retail activities within the Centre
do not detract from the retail focus provided in the Civic
Crescent and Main Street areas in the Albany Centre, or
generate potential reverse sensitivity effects on the Albany
shopping centre given its sub-regional role and importance.
(d)
Deletion of "in Albany centre" in Objective 5 of sub-precinct B as
the reference is superfluous.
2988552
33
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
(e)
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Amending retail greater than 100m² GFA per site in sub
precincts A and B to a non-complying status to reflect Objective
4, which provides for only a "limited range of retail uses [to be]
enabled" in the sub-precinct.
(f)
For clarity, amend Development Control 4 to read "Any
development not meeting the building setback controls set out
above is a non-complying activity except for the following which
are restricted discretionary activities: ..."
4.8
In preparing this evidence I have been conscious of the Panel's interim
guidance on best practice approaches to rezoning and precincts as
discussed above.
In my opinion, the revisions Scentre is proposing
achieve all of the relevant aspects of the Panel's guidance. I consider
that the proposed Albany Centre Precinct, as sought to be amended by
Scentre:
(a)
has a clearly stated purpose and is justified in terms of section
32 and the RMA's sustainable management purpose;
(b)
does not relate to a site that is the subject of any recent plan
change;
(c)
does not override any overlay. All overlay provisions including
heritage remain unchanged by the Precinct provisions;
(d)
includes outcomes that cannot be achieved through the
underlying zone or Auckland-wide provisions. The underlying
zones would provide an element of development opportunity on
the site but would not ensure the comprehensive integrated
planning approach that the Precinct brings, nor the range of
special controls relating to the unique locations and uses
throughout the Albany Centre;
(e)
cannot be achieved simply through a series of resource
consents, for the same reasons as (d) above;
(f)
has been structured to "tweak" rather than replace the
underlying zones. The significant majority of the provisions of
2988552
34
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
the underlying zones apply.
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Additional or different controls
relate to Precinct specific issues;
(g)
does not rely heavily on existing consents or existing use rights;
(h)
has a generally simple structure;
(i)
follows defined property boundaries; and
(j)
uses the Unitary Plan's definitions.
Council evidence on Albany Centre Precinct
4.9
Mr Trevor Mackie has prepared evidence on behalf of Auckland Council
in relation to the Albany Centre Precinct.25
Mr Mackie's evidence
provides an overview of the Albany Centre Precinct and the four subprecincts, and provides an analysis of submissions on the Albany Centre
Precinct. I will address Mr Mackie's evidence, where relevant to the relief
sought by Scentre, in the next sub-section of my evidence.
4.10
Mr Mackie has not accepted any of the relief sought by Scentre's
submission, with the exception of replacing all references to "Structure
Plan" with "Precinct Plan".
4.11
A without-prejudice direct discussion was held between Scentre's
representatives, including myself, and Auckland Council on 1 December
2015, to confirm the scope of the outstanding concerns held by both
parties. No further discussions have been entered into.
Relief sought by Scentre
4.12
My evidence on the relief sought by Scentre on the Albany Centre
Precinct provisions is structured as follows:
(a)
The background to the relief sought by Scentre.
(b)
The Albany Centre Precinct description.
(c)
The Albany Centre Precinct objectives and policies relating to
retail activity.
(d)
25
2988552
Policy 6.
Statement of evidence of Trevor Mackie, dated 27 January 2016.
35
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
4.13
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
(e)
Policy 11.
(f)
The activity status for retail activities in the sub-precincts.
(g)
The 'location of parking' development control.
The changes to the Albany Centre Precinct provisions that I support are
set out in Appendix I.
Background to the relief sought by Scentre
4.14
The Albany Centre Precinct is divided into 'components' (sub-precincts)
which encourage the establishment and intensification of a specific type
and/or range of activities, and discourages other activities from
establishing in that sub-precinct. The main retail focus within the Albany
Centre Precinct is located at Civic Crescent, which is occupied by
Scentre's Albany shopping centre. This area is commonly referred to as
the "Civic Crescent and Main Street" area. The dominant activities within
each of the sub-precincts are:
(a)
Sub-precinct A: high-density residential, and limited supporting
convenience retail.
(b)
Sub-precinct B: high-density office development, and limited
supporting convenience retail.
(c)
Sub-precinct C: car-orientated commercial and entertainment
activities, and retail limited to formats generally considered
unsuitable for other higher amenity areas of the Albany Centre.
(d)
Sub-precinct D: office and light commercial activities, and limited
supporting retail.
4.15
The Albany Centre Precinct provisions set out a framework of objectives
and policies which guide the spatial arrangement of activities, which are
given effect to by the rules and assessment criteria for particular activities
in the sub-precincts. There are no rules for that portion of the Albany
Centre Precinct which is outside of the four sub-precincts, including the
land owned and occupied by Scentre. The Metropolitan Centre zone
rules and controls would therefore apply without amendment.
2988552
36
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
4.16
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
The relief sought by Scentre in respect of the Albany Centre Precinct is
primarily related to ensuring that the provisions appropriately reflect the
spatial arrangement of activities that is established by the Albany Centre
Precinct and sub-precincts. As the Civic Crescent and Main Street areas
are not managed by rules in the Albany Centre Precinct, the primacy that
is afforded to this area for retail activity relies on the objectives and
policies which specifically provide for the "retail focus" of Civic Crescent,
and on the rules for the sub-precincts that discourage the proliferation of
retail throughout those sub-precincts.
4.17
Scentre's relief also addresses particular urban design and structure
planning matters, particularly the controls requiring 'active frontages' and
connecting roads.
The Albany Centre Precinct description
4.18
Scentre's submission sought several minor amendments to the Albany
Centre Precinct description.
These are set out in Appendix I.
In
summary, these changes will:
(a)
remove the ambiguous reference to the "north-facing sections of
the Albany Centre" in paragraph two. This reference is unclear
as to what areas are being referred to, and does not correlate
spatially with the sub-precincts or the balance of the Albany
Centre Precinct;
(b)
confirm the "supporting role" provided by the Business Park
zone to the south-east of the Metropolitan Centre zone in
paragraph two. This is consistent with the overarching approach
in the Unitary Plan for lower-order centre and specialist business
zones to support the Metropolitan Centre zone;
(c)
correct minor grammatical errors in paragraph three, and
confirms the nature of activity in the Civic Crescent area, being
the Albany shopping centre; and
(d)
4.19
correct one minor grammatical error in paragraph four.
Overall, I consider that the amendments sought will 'tighten up' the
description, will not have any significant impact on the provisions, and will
2988552
37
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
assist in the overall interpretation and application of the Albany Centre
Precinct provisions.
4.20
Mr Mackie identifies the amendments sought by Scentre to the
description, but has categorised and addressed these as part of the
theme of 'other activities not detracting from Albany shopping centre,
Civic Crescent and Main Street areas'. In my evidence below, I respond
to Mr Mackie's evidence on this theme.
However, in respect of the
description, the amendments sought are not specifically directed at the
theme of ensuring recognition of the focus of retail activity in these areas.
The amendments will only assist in the interpretation of the package of
provisions that apply in the Albany Centre Precinct, and assist in
confirming the nature of activity that is anticipated and provided for in the
Civic Crescent area.
The Albany Centre Precinct objectives and policies relating to retail
activity
4.21
Scentre's submission on the objectives sought to reinforce the retail focus
of the Civic Crescent area of the Albany Centre Precinct. As notified, the
objectives do not relate to these areas at all. The objectives, as notified,
are concerned with the following outcomes:
(a)
development
of
the
Albany
Centre
Precinct
occurs
in
accordance with the structure plan, which establishes a network
of roads, pedestrian connections, public open spaces, civic
spaces and landmarks (but not the distribution of activities
between sub-precincts);
(b)
a range of sub-precincts is provided to determine areas where
predominant activities are located; and
(c)
reverse sensitivity effects to the North Shore Domain and North
Harbour Stadium are avoided.
4.22
The four sub-precincts also have specific objectives which state the
predominant activity types that are intended for each area.
4.23
To address the distinct lack of support at the objective level for the Civic
Crescent area, Scentre's submission sought to include a new Objective 4
2988552
38
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
to clearly describe the purpose of this area as the retail focus of the
Albany Centre Precinct, and to ensure that this status was not
compromised by the location and development of other activities in the
Albany Centre. The submission also sought to add a qualifying phrase to
the sub-precinct specific objectives to confirm that the limited retail
provided for in each sub-precinct does not detract from the retail focus
provided in the Civic Crescent and Main Street areas.
4.24
Scentre's submission also sought to add the Albany Integrated shopping
centre to Objective 3 to ensure that reverse sensitivity effects were also
avoided from the anticipated development of other activities, particularly
the establishment of high density residential and office activities, as
encouraged by sub-precincts A, B and D.
4.25
In my view, it is critical that a specific objective that applies to the balance
of the Albany Centre Precinct (which is not subject to a sub-precinct) is
included. As notified, there is a clear lack of support at this level for the
retail focus that is encouraged in this area, and which has now been
partially established. The ongoing function and development of this area
is critical to the ongoing viability of the Albany Metropolitan Centre, and
as such it is critical for this to be recognised by the objectives for the
Albany Centre Precinct, as opposed to relying on this being implied.
4.26
Policy 8 of the Albany Centre Precinct, as notified, specifically recognises
the retail focus within the Civic Crescent and Main Street areas.
Scentre's submission also sought to qualify Policy 2 in the same manner,
which provides for a range of opportunities for retail (and other) activities
within the Precinct.
4.27
Mr Mackie considers that no further changes are required to the
objectives and policies to recognise the retail focus in the Civic Crescent
and Main Street areas. Mr Mackie states:26
In my opinion there should be no further policy emphasis and
protection of the dominance of the Mall in the centre, other
than that provided by Policy 8 and the resulting activity status
of retail within the sub-precincts. As Albany Centre is a
Metropolitan Centre, I consider that the Scentre submissions
are seeking an inappropriate level of policy restraint on retail
activity away from the Mall and possible future Main Street.
26
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Trevor Mackie, dated 27 January 2016, para 9.8.
39
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
4.28
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
I disagree. The changes that are sought by Scentre are not seeking to
introduce policy 'restraint', but are rather giving an appropriate level of
recognition to the retail focus in the centre, and the primacy that is
afforded to retail in this area over the sub-precincts. A key feature of the
Albany Centre Precinct is the spatial arrangement of activities, which
significantly differs to that of a 'standard' Metropolitan Centre zone. The
Albany Centre Precinct has been comprehensively and robustly planned,
and subsequently developed to achieve this outcome, such that it is
appropriate that this outcome, which has always been fundamental to the
development of the overall Albany Centre, is recognised. I do not agree
that this outcome is sufficiently recognised by a single policy.
The
inclusion of an objective to this effect provides the missing 'link' between
the precinct description and Policy 8.
4.29
Notwithstanding the above, I do not consider that it is necessary to qualify
each of the relevant objectives for the sub-precincts, or to Policy 2 as
sought.
In my opinion, the recognition of the retail focus is most
appropriately addressed by a new objective in conjunction with the
existing Policy 8. I consider that the new Objective 4 should be inserted
as follows (changes identified in underline and strikethrough, relative to
the wording sought in Scentre's submission):
The use and development of the Civic Crescent area is
maintained and enhanced as the retail focus for the centre and
is not compromised by the location and development of other
activities within the Albany Centre sub-precincts A-D.
4.30
This minor amendment clarifies that the establishment of retail activities
in the sub-precincts is not intended to compromise the retail focus in the
centre, which is a critical component of the spatial arrangement of activity
in the Albany Centre Precinct.
4.31
I also support the change to Objective 3 as sought by Scentre, as follows:
Ongoing use and development of the Albany integrated
shopping centre, North Shore Domain and North Harbour
Stadium is not compromised by the location and development
of other activities within Albany centre.
4.32
This amendment is not intended to ensure the retail focus at Civic
Crescent, as suggested by Mr Mackie.27 Rather the amendment is in
relation to ensuring that the Albany shopping centre is not adversely
27
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Trevor Mackie, dated 27 January 2016, paras 9.4 to 9.8.
40
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
affected by the establishment of other activities such as high-density
residential or office activities. The Albany shopping centre is an
established and developing component of the Albany Centre Precinct,
which should not be subject to adverse reverse sensitivity effects
generated by the development of other activities in the Albany Centre
Precinct.
Policy 6
4.33
Policy 6 encourages development to achieve a comprehensively-planned,
well-integrated and attractive centre, and achieve high quality urban
design outcomes.
The policy includes three particular considerations
which will achieve these outcomes, including:
(a)
Policy 6(a): The creation of attractive, active and lively retail
street frontages, including at Civic Crescent.
(b)
Policy 6(b): The provision of vehicle, cycle and pedestrian
access throughout the Centre, including a new street between
Don McKinnon Drive and Civic Crescent (as identified on Albany
Centre Precinct Plan 1).
(c)
Policy 6(c): Maintaining views and access along the main axes
shown on the Albany Centre Precinct Plan 1.
4.34
Scentre's submission opposed the reference to active street frontages at
Civic Crescent, on the basis that the Albany Integrated shopping centre is
not built to the street edge (at-grade parking and access areas are
located between the shopping centre and the Civic Crescent road
reserve), and nor is it appropriate to direct that future development should
achieve such an outcome.
Policy 6 can be interpreted as requiring
further development to locate to the street frontage, which would
compromise the use of this area for parking as a lawfully established use
of the land.
4.35
I agree that the reference to Civic Crescent in Policy 6(a) should be
deleted.
The design of the shopping centre at the northern frontage
adjoining Civic Crescent incorporates active uses, quality urban design
and landscaping, however it has not been constructed to the road
boundary. The majority of this street frontage has been developed by
2988552
41
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Scentre for functional efficiencies, which does not strictly accord with the
intention of the policy. The policy could be interpreted as requiring further
development of the Albany integrated shopping centre to be located at
the road frontage, which would compromise the use of this part of the site
as vehicle parking and access areas, and imposes an inappropriate level
of control on the development of the Albany integrated shopping centre.
Further development of this area is likely to have the same practical
requirements for the area of land fronting the road, such that it is not
reasonable for this policy to require such an outcome.
4.36
Scentre also opposed the reference to the new street between Civic
Crescent and Don McKinnon Drive, which would dissect Scentre's
landholding.
Scentre considers that it is inappropriate for a policy to
require a new street in this area, particularly as the practicalities of
providing this road have not been fully assessed. Scentre's submission
states that a consequential change will be required to the Albany Centre
Precinct Plan 1 which identifies the spatial alignment of such a road.
4.37
The 'Compliance with Precinct Plan 1' development control requires
development within the Albany Centre Precinct to be in accordance with
Precinct Plan 1.28 This Plan identifies the location and alignment of a
'collector' road dissecting Scentre's site between Civic Crescent and Don
McKinnon Drive to the south, on the eastern side of the Albany Integrated
shopping centre.
The development control only permits 20m lateral
variation from the indicative road alignment, beyond which a discretionary
activity consent is required.
4.38
Figure 1 below shows the existing private roading alignment within this
area of the shopping centre (in red line). At the southern area of the site
adjoining Don McKinnon Drive, a significant retaining wall has been
constructed (shown in yellow line) as a consequence of a substantial
difference in ground level between the shopping centre and the higherlevel Don McKinnon Drive.
28
2988552
Rule K.5.5.3.1.
42
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Figure 1: Existing private road alignment and retaining wall
4.39
Figure 2 below shows the indicative alignment of a public collector road
required by Albany Centre Precinct Plan 1, overlain on the aerial photo of
the shopping centre site.
following illustration.
2988552
The retaining wall is also identified on the
43
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Figure 2: Albany Precinct Plan 1 roading alignment overlaid on
aerial photo
4.40
The alignment of the collector road shown in Albany Centre Precinct Plan
1 cannot be practically achieved without a significant realignment through
a resource consent process. The intent of the indicative alignment of the
collector road is to connect with the round-about intersection of Don
McKinnon Drive and Corinthian Drive.
As a consequence of the
established retaining wall, a new road cannot be designed to connect to
this intersection. The opportunity to provide this connection has plainly
passed, and it is no longer appropriate to require further development to
be in accordance with an unachievable roading alignment. An alternative
roading alignment and connection with Don McKinnon Drive would
necessitate a new intersection which could have traffic implications which
have not been considered or assessed in the preparation of the legacy
Structure Plan.
2988552
44
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
4.41
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
In respect of Scentre's submission to remove the road from the Precinct
Plan 1, Mr Mackie states:29
Some minor access roads remain in private ownership,
including those through the Westfield Mall site and behind Pak
'n Save. As the mall will continue to develop and expand it is
appropriate that those internal circulation areas remain part of
the overall site. That could possibly include the proposed
future road linking Don McKinnon Drive through to the Civic
Crescent, if the eastern part of the Scentre land is developed
as extension of the mall. If developed for other purposes a new
street would in my opinion be more appropriate. The location
of an intersection with Don McKinnon Drive may need to
respond to topography created by the Westfield retaining wall,
or alternatively be integrated with future building development
in that part of the site. A new street would improve connection
and permeability of the centre by reducing the block size. The
need for, location and type of street may be determined in
relation to the uses proposed for the eastern end of the
Westfield Mall land.
4.42
Mr Mackie recognises that the existing retaining wall has implicated the
achievability of this roading alignment and connection with the roundabout intersection, but considers that a new street should still be provided
between Civic Crescent and Don McKinnon Drive in this area. However,
Mr Mackie does not propose any changes to Precinct Plan 1 or to the
development controls and policies which direct the development of such a
road. In this respect, a discretionary activity consent will be required for a
proposal to deviate from that alignment.
4.43
In my opinion, it is not appropriate to continue to identify an indicative
road alignment in this portion of the site on the basis that the opportunity
for a road layout in accordance with the indicative alignment and
connection with the round-about is not only impractical, but unachievable,
as a consequence of the established retaining wall. I do not consider that
an acceptable alternative is to rely on a discretionary activity consent
process to determine a new layout. Instead, it is my opinion that the
traffic circulation and connectivity provided in this area should be
designed relative to future development, and should be directed and
encouraged by Policy 6(b) of the Albany Centre Precinct (as proposed to
be amended) and the Auckland-wide transport provisions.
Scentre's
proposed amendment to Policy 6(b) is as follows:
enabling vehicle and pedestrian access throughout the
Ccentre to help link the northern and southern areas of the
29
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Trevor Mackie, dated 27 January 2016, para 9.30.
45
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
centre, including a new street between Don McKinnon
Drive and Civic Crescent
4.44
In my view, the amended policy encourages roading connections where it
is appropriate and practical to do so. The indicative road identified on
Albany Centre Precinct Plan 1 for this portion should be consequentially
deleted as it reflects a roading alignment that cannot be achieved on the
site.
Policy 11
4.45
Policy 11 requires development to be of an urban character that is
appropriate to its sub-regional role, and which creates a strong local
identity. The intent of this policy is appropriate, such that it recognises
the importance of quality urban design outcomes in achieving an
attractive high-amenity Metropolitan Centre. However, the policy, as
notified, expands upon this by containing a list of nine 'criteria'. These
are concerned with buildings fronting and addressing streets, active street
uses, architectural design, landscaping and tree planting, pedestrian
shelters and verandas, avoiding large at-grade parking areas, providing
'landmark' buildings, and ensuring access to daylight in buildings and
open spaces.
4.46
In my opinion, it is not appropriate for a policy to include an exhaustive list
of criteria that are required to ensure quality urban design outcomes. The
purpose of a policy is to provide the strategic direction for the Albany
Centre Precinct as a whole.
Policy 11 does so simply by requiring
development achieves high quality design outcomes as a matter of
principle.
The subsequent rules and related assessment criteria give
effect to this policy. By comparison, the objectives and policies for the
Metropolitan Centre zone, as proposed by Auckland Council, do not set
out exhaustive lists of elements that are 'required'. Such outcomes are
simply stated as a strategic direction for the zone, and given effect to by
the more detailed controls and assessment criteria.
4.47
With regard to the above, I consider that it is appropriate to delete the list
of 'elements' from Policy 11, as set out in Appendix I.
2988552
46
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
The activity status for retail activity in the sub-precincts
4.48
To reinforce the 'retail focus' of the Civic Crescent area, Scentre's
submission sought to apply a non-complying activity status to retail
activities greater than 100m2 GFA per site in the sub-precincts.
4.49
In the Business zone provisions, as now proposed by Auckland Council,
retail activity is permitted in the Centre zones, and is managed in the
other business zones to ensure that the function of the Centres are not
compromised. Retail activities greater than 200m2 GFA per tenancy are
a discretionary activity in the Mixed Use zone.
I consider that the
relationship between the Centre and Mixed Use zones is similar to the
relationship between the Civic Crescent area of the Albany Centre
Precinct and sub-precincts A and B, which each have a specialist nature
or purpose, with limited opportunity for retail activity.
Therefore, I
consider that a discretionary activity for retail activity greater than 100m 2
GFA within sub-precincts A and B is appropriate, consistent with the
management approach for retail activity in the Mixed Use zone.
4.50
Mr Mackie proposes to amend the listing of retail activity in the Activity
Tables for all of the four sub-precincts such that the size of retail activity
is managed per 'tenancy', as opposed to per site. Mr Mackie does not
provide any rationale for this change, except in relation to sub-precinct D,
for which he states:30
As agreed in mediation for the Business Topic 051 – 054, the
retail tenancy size is intended to manage the location of largeformat retail, rather than limiting smaller scale retail to a total of
450m2 on a site. I consider that change to refer to 'per
tenancy' can be supported within these sub-precinct provisions
for the identified retail area [identified in Precinct Plan 3: Subprecinct D activity areas].
4.51
Mr Mackie does not explain why this amendment is appropriate in the
other sub-precincts. It is inferred that the change has been carried
through each of the sub-precinct activity tables as a consequence to the
changes in the Business zone provisions which were proposed by
Auckland Council (and largely agreed by other key parties).
4.52
Mr Mackie's proposed change will enable small-scale retail activity up to
100m2 GFA per tenancy to establish throughout the sub-precincts. As
30
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Trevor Mackie, dated 27 January 2016, para 9.16.
47
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
notified, the activity descriptions limited retail activity to 100m 2 GFA per
site within these sub-precincts, which directly gives effect to the
recognition that "limited convenience retail" is intended to establish in
these areas. The sub-precincts do not anticipate "small-scale retail" to be
established.
4.53
I acknowledge that, relative to the purpose of sub-precinct D and the
nature of activities that are encouraged in this portion of the Albany
Centre Precinct, it is appropriate to manage retail activity per tenancy.
However, I do not agree that this approach is appropriate in the other
sub-precincts.
The Albany Centre Precinct has been specifically
developed to encourage a spatial arrangement of activity types, and this
explicitly recognises the Civic Crescent and Main Street areas as the
retail focus of the entire Albany Centre Precinct. The amendment that Mr
Mackie proposes to the management of retail activity will enable the
proliferation of small scale retail tenancies up to 100m2 GFA to establish
in other sub-precincts as of right, which is contrary to the overarching
approach of the Albany Centre Precinct framework. This framework is
unique and distinct from the management approach taken in the Business
zone provisions, with regard to the spatial arrangement and distribution of
activities in the Albany Centre Precinct, and as such it is not appropriate
to manage retail activity by the size of tenancies.
4.54
In my opinion, it is appropriate to manage retail activity in sub-precincts
A-C by the area of retail within each site. I do not believe that a 'workaround' of subdividing sites into 100m2 lots to establish retail activities
within each lot is a realistic outcome, or at risk of occurring. The ability to
establish small retail tenancies without a consent, as will be the case
under Mr Mackie's proposed amendments, is plainly contrary to the
overarching purpose and structure of the Albany Centre Precinct.
Location of Parking development control
4.55
The location of parking development control requires ground floor parking
within a building to be located away from street or public open space
frontages.31 Buildings must be designed to accommodate a business or
residential activity between any ground floor parking and the building
frontage.
31
2988552
The development control does not require other design
Rule K.5.5.3.4.
48
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
elements generally, such as use of glazing or architectural elements.
Therefore, the purpose of the development control is to ensure that street
frontages are activated.
4.56
The nature of the Albany integrated shopping centre, and the practical
and functional requirements of the activity, building and site design,
dictate the extent to which 'active' street frontages can be provided. The
suitability of 'active' street frontages varies for each street frontage, and it
is not always practical or appropriate to provide active uses on every
street frontage throughout the Albany Centre. For example, the southeastern boundary of Scentre's site is bound by a significant retaining wall,
and it is not appropriate to require active uses at this frontage for any
building that is developed within this area, nor is it appropriate to require
a consent process to demonstrate the irrelevance or inappropriateness of
such a control in each instance.
4.57
In my opinion, the site frontages that require specific consideration with
regard to urban design and street activation are those which have been
identified and overlain with the Built Environment: Building Frontage
overlay.
Through mediation for Topics 051 - 054 (Business zones),
Scentre and Auckland Council reached agreement on the application of
this overlay to the block fronting Civic Crescent, which included retaining
the overlay at Civic Crescent, and removing the overlay from all other
frontages, as set out in Figure 3 below.
2988552
49
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
Figure 3: Agreed spatial application of the Building Frontage
overlay.32
4.58
The controls associated with this overlay in the underlying Metropolitan
Centre zone sufficiently address urban design elements at these
frontages. I acknowledge that these controls do not specifically require
ground-floor parking to be located behind other activities to provide active
street frontages. That said, the controls do require:
(a)
buildings to adjoin the street frontage for a proportion of their
length;
(b)
ground floors to have a minimum finished floor to floor height;
(c)
ground floors to incorporate a minimum proportion of glazing
within the building elevation;
32
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Sarah Coady, dated 27 July 2015, Attachment B.
50
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
(d)
buildings to incorporate verandahs along the frontage; and
(e)
buildings to have a minimum height at the identified frontage for
a minimum depth.
4.59
The
combination
of
these
controls
inherently
encourages
the
establishment of activities at the identified street frontages, and
discourages parking from being visible, or located at the street frontage of
buildings.
The
activity
controls
and
associated
design-related
assessment criteria for all development in the underlying Metropolitan
Centre zone also sufficiently address amenity and design considerations
at the road frontage.
4.60
Mr Mackie supports the retention of this development control, on the
basis that:33
The development controls require an active use in buildings at
the street frontage. In my opinion use of those front parts of
buildings at ground floor for parking would prevent them from
contributing to the vibrancy of a Metropolitan Centre.
4.61
In my opinion, it is simply not realistic or appropriate to require every
street-facing frontage of a building within the Albany Centre Precinct to
have an active street frontage. The Building Frontage overlays identify
those frontages which are intended to be designed to achieve high-quality
design outcomes that enhance the vibrancy and amenity of the
streetscape, which inherently encourage active uses. These outcomes
should not be applied as a blanket control to all frontages throughout the
Albany Centre Precinct.
4.62
This development control, in my opinion, should be deleted.
Craig McGarr
10 February 2016
33
2988552
Statement of Evidence of Trevor Mackie, dated 27 January 2016, para 9.42.
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX A
SCENTRE'S PROPERTIES IN NEWMARKET
2988552
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX B
SCENTRE'S PROPERTIES IN SAINT LUKES
Portion of Exeter Road to be
zoned Town Centre
2988552
APPENDIX C
MARK-UP OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO SAINT LUKES PRECINCT PROVISIONS
Proposed changes are shown in strikethrough and underline
Grey highlighted text records further amendments sought by Scentre (New Zealand) Limited.
PART 2 - REGIONAL AND DISTRICT OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES»
Chapter F: Precinct objectives and policies
2
Central
2.20
Saint Lukes
The objectives and policies of the underlying Town Centre zone apply in the following precinct unless otherwise
specified. Refer to planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct.
Precinct description
Saint Lukes Shopping cCentre is one of Auckland's premier retail destinations and performs the role of anchor
for the wider Saint Lukes tTown cCentre. It is strategically located in the western part of the Auckland isthmus
and is well connected to the surrounding road network. Several bus routes serve the integrated shopping town
centre and the Morningside railway station is within walking distance.
The four concept precinct plans enable provide for the future expansion and redevelopment of the Saint
Lukes Shopping Ccentre. The principal focus of the concept precinct plans is to allow flexibility for the
configuration of the Shopping Ccentre's expansion and to enable a range of permitted activities, while
including a set of provisions to manage potential external effects.
Enabling the development of a mixed use environment is a key element of the development of a high density
town centre at Saint Lukes. The site Saint Lukes Shopping Centre itself may not contain all the elements
that comprise the town centre but it will form its commercial heart. The concept precinct plan provisions
enable and encourage the establishment of a wide range of uses including retail, entertainment, education,
civic, commercial and residential activities.
The concept precinct plans facilitate an extension to Exeter Road, as a . A private road linking Exeter Road
and Aroha Avenue that will provide safe, pleasant and convenient pedestrian access to the sShopping Ccentre
from the residential areas to the east as well as promoting a pedestrian oriented focus for the expanded
centre. Rules and assessment criteria are included to ensure a high level of pedestrian amenity and lower
priority for motor vehicles along this road.
Floor area limitations Intensity controls reflect the level of development floor area of activity considered
appropriate and sustainable, particularly in terms of potential traffic generation effects. In addition to the
precinct plans providing for lateral expansion, the height limits controls provide for allow flexibility in the
configuration of floor area, including higher buildings on two prime corners of the siteSaint Lukes Precinct, and
a mixture of uses. Around the perimeter of the entire siteSaint Lukes Precinct, a system of interface controls
apply so that adverse effects of new development on adjoining properties are avoided or mitigated.
Objectives
The objectives are as listed in the Town Centre zone except as specified below:
1.
Enable Tthe future expansion, and redevelopment and intensification of the Saint Lukes Shopping
Ccentre is enabled
2.
Integrate tThe future outward expansion and redevelopment of the Saint Lukes Shopping Ccentre is
integrated with nearby and adjoining residential and commercial areas.
Policies
The policies are as listed in the Town Centre zone except as specified below:
1.
Enable and encourage the establishment of a wide range of uses including retail, entertainment,
education, civic, commercial and residential activities.
2.
Require development to manage potential effects on the surrounding residential and commercial areas,
in particular effects on amenity and public safety..
3.
Enable a private road extension linking Exeter Road and Aroha Avenue, that provides a safe, pleasant
and convenient pedestrian access to the Saint Lukes Shopping Ccentre from the residential areas to
the east as well as promoting a pedestrian-oriented focus for the expanded Shopping Ccentre.
Chapter K: Precinct rules
2
Central
Saint Lukes
The Saint Lukes precinct implements a number of land use and development controls to enable further
development of the siteSaint Lukes Precinct. Various interface controls and height limits manage the effects of this
development on nearby and adjoining sites. Four concept plans guide the development of this precinct.
The activities, controls and assessment criteria in the underlying Town Centre zone and Auckland-wide rules
apply in the Saint Lukes precinct unless otherwise specified below. Refer to planning maps for the location and
extent of the precinct. Refer to figure 2 for the location of area A and area B.
Area A dominant activities include retail, entertainment, restaurants, cafes and other eating places.
Area B dominant activities include retail, offices and community facilities.
1. Activity table
The activities in the Town Centre zone apply in the Saint Lukes precinct unless otherwise specified in the activity
table below.
Activity
Area A
Area B
Public transport facility
P
NC
Parking accessory to permitted or approved activities
P
P
Entertainment facilities
P
D
Taverns
P
NC
Warehousing and storage
P
NC
Light manufacturing and servicing
D
D
Artisan industries
P
NC
P
P
Any activity providing parking for more than 100 vehicles
C
C
Construction and use of the proposed private link road from Exeter Road to
Aroha Avenue
C
C
New buildings or additions fronting Exeter Road Extension or Aroha Avenue
RD
RD
New buildings or additions not provided for as a permitted activity
RD
RD
Subdivision
RD
RD
Development
Construction of, or any addition to building(s) which:
- are not within 30m of a site boundary of the Saint Lukes Precinct
- increase the GFA on the site Saint Lukes Precinct by less than 500m2
Except where context requires otherwise, for the purposes of the concept plans and other provisions of the
Unitary Plan applying to the concept plans, site means the area covered by the concept plan as shown on Map
2: Precinct plan 2.
2. Land use controls
1.
An application to infringe the land use control rules will be considered as a discretionary activity.
2.1 Site intensity
1.
a.
Overall GFA limitation:
the maximum GFA on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct is 92,500m2.
2.
3.
Specific GFA limitations:
a.
the maximum GFA for a combination of retail, entertainment facilities, taverns and cafes, restaurants
and other eating places is 77,500m2
b.
the maximum GFA for offices is 15,000m2.
Floor area incentive for dwellings fronting Aroha Avenue:
a.
notwithstanding clause 1 above, the overall GFA limitation must be increased by 7.9m2 GFA for every
1m2 of GFA of residential development fronting Aroha Avenue, subject to a maximum increase of
7000m2 GFA
b.
notwithstanding 2(a) above, the maximum GFA must be increased by 5.7m2 GFA for every 1m2 of GFA
of residential development fronting Aroha Avenue, subject to a maximum increase of 5000m2 GFA.
3. Development controls
1.
Development that does not comply with clauses 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.7 is a discretionary activity.
2.
Development that does not comply with clauses 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 and 3.8 is a restricted discretionary activity.
1.
An application to infringe the development control rules will be considered as a restricted discretionary activity.
3.1 Building height
1.
The maximum height of any new building must be in accordance with the following table provided that
individual building elements above a height of 20m in height area 2 must not have a combined floor area in
excess of 1500m2. Refer to Map 2: Precinct plan 2 for Datum locations.
Table 1
Height area
Height above datum
Datum
Datum RL
1
20 32.5m
Morningside
36.35
2
30 32.5m
Morningside
36.35
3
20 32.5m
Aroha
41.01
4
15 20m
Aroha
41.01
5
12.5 16m
Aroha
41.01
6
12.5 16m
Aroha
41.01
2.
Notwithstanding clause 1 above, a building in height area 6 must not exceed 10m if that building is wholly
occupied by non-residential activity.
3.
Notwithstanding clause 1 above, for the purposes of assessing compliance with the maximum height rule in
the Saint Lukes precinct, no account shall be taken of any radio, television or communications aerials,
ancillary plant or machinery room structures, which may collectively occupy up to 10% of the roof area of
any building, provided such structures do not exceed the maximum height limit by more than 6m.
3.2 Interface controls
The following interface controls apply to any new building, or addition to an existing building, which is not provided
for as a permitted activity. Refer to Map 2: Precinct plan 2 for the allocation of street interface types.
1.
2.
Type A - street interface
a.
New development must incorporate a 5m landscaped strip along the road boundary, except where
occupied by vehicle or pedestrian access
b.
Development must comply with a building in relation to boundary control of 12m plus the shortest
horizontal distance between that part of the building and the road boundary.
c.
The landscape strip must be densely planted with trees and shrubs. Planting must include specimen
trees at a minimum of one every 6.5m. The specimen trees must be of a species which will achieve a
minimum height of 8m or more at maturity and must be of a planting grade of 160l or larger.
Type B - open space interface
a.
3.
4.
Type C - street interface
a.
New development must incorporate a landscaped area not less than 50 per cent of that part of the site
Saint Lukes Precinct between the road boundary and a parallel line 3m measured from the road.
boundary. The landscaped strip must be densely planted with trees and shrubs and, where provided,
must include specimen trees at a minimum of one every 6.5m. The specimen trees must be of a
species which will achieve a minimum height of 8m or more at maturity, and must be of a planting grade
of 160l or larger.
b.
along Morningside Drive, glazing and balconies must comprise no less than 30 per cent of the surface
area of the upper level facade of any building.
Type D - street interface
a.
Continuous pedestrian shelter must be provided along building facades.
b.
The shelter must have a minimum height of 3m and a maximum of 4.5m above the footpath immediately
below and, where practicable, must have a minimum width of 2.5m.
c.
A minimum of 50 per cent of the facade of buildings at ground level must comprise glazing and
pedestrian entries.
d.
Glazing and balconies must comprise no less than 30 per cent of the surface area of the upper level
facade of any building.
e.
The minimum height of building facades must be 6m.
f.
g.
5.
New development must comply with a building in relation to boundary control of 2m plus the shortest
horizontal distance between that part of the building and the siteSaint Lukes Precinct boundary,
excluding any covered walkway or pedestrian link that provides 'pedestrian circulation' between the
siteSaint Lukes Precinct and the open space.
No parking may be located in front of a building at ground level.
Parking at or above street level within a building must be located more than 10m from the siteSaint
Lukes Precinct boundary.
Type E - street interface
a.
Continuous pedestrian shelter must be provided along building facades.
b.
The pedestrian shelter must have a minimum height of 3m and a maximum of 4.5m above the footpath
immediately below and where practicable, and must have a minimum width of 2.5m.
c.
Buildings must directly adjoin street frontages for no less than 50 per cent of their length with no part of
the building facade located further than 5m from the street frontage at ground level.
d.
Where the building facade is set back at ground level, the area between the building and the street
frontage must be no less than 7.5m in length parallel to the street frontage and be occupied by activities
or amenities such as outdoor seating, display, landscaping or pedestrian amenities.
e.
A minimum of 70 per cent of the facade of buildings at ground level must comprise unobstructed glazing
and pedestrian entries.
f.
Glazing and balconies must comprise no less than 30 per cent of the facade of the upper levels of any
building.
g.
The minimum height of building facades at the boundary must be 6m.
h.
No parking may be located in front of a building at ground level.
i.
6.
Parking at or above street level within a building must be located more than 10m from the siteSaint
Lukes Precinct boundary.
Type F - residential interface
a.
Except as provided for in (b) below, a 3m-wide landscape strip must be provided along each boundary
which must be densely planted with trees and shrubs. Planting must include specimen trees at a
minimum of one every 6.5m. The specimen trees must be evergreen species which will achieve a
minimum height of 6m or more at maturity and must be of a planting grade of 160l or larger.
b.
For a depth of 16m from the Aroha Avenue road boundary, a 1.8m close-boarded fence must be
provided along the boundary in lieu of a landscape strip if that area is used principally to provide access
to parking spaces and service access ancillary to the activities within buildings with frontage to Aroha
Avenue.
c.
New development must comply with the height in relation to boundary diagram in Figure 1: Height in
relation to boundary below.
Figure 1: Height in relation to boundary
7.
Type G - street interface
a.
Except as provided for in (b) below, an integrated residential development in the form of terrace housing
with a minimum depth from the Aroha Avenue road boundary of 16m must be provided along the
frontage to which interface type G applies.
b.
for a distance of 16m south of the centreline of the Exeter Road extension, buildings may be occupied
at street level by retail premises, or restaurants, cafes and other eating places, and above street level
by any activity listed in section 1 of this precinct as a permitted activity in area B, except parking.
c.
One driveway may be provided to provide access to parking spaces and service access ancillary to the
activities within buildings with frontage to Aroha Avenue.
d.
Within height area 6, buildings must be a maximum of three storeys above ground level at the road
boundary or, alternatively three storeys above the roof of a semi-basement parking structure. For the
purposes of this rule, the height of a semi-basement structure above ground level must be no more
than 50 per cent of the total height (floor level to the top of the basement roof slab).
e.
For buildings occupied at street level by dwellings a minimum 1.5m-wide front yard must be provided
along the Aroha Avenue road boundary. Not less than 30 per cent of that part of the siteSaint Lukes
Precinct between the road boundary and a parallel line 6m measured from the road boundary must
comprise landscaped permeable surface.
f.
i.
a 3m setback must be provided along the Aroha Avenue road boundary, which must be integrated
with the existing footpath to form an extended pedestrian space and/or outdoor seating area,
including associated weather protection.
ii.
planting within the setback must consist of specimen trees at a minimum of one every 6.5m along
its full length, with foliage lifted to 2m above the level of the pedestrian space to enable people to
walk beneath. The specimen trees must be of a species which will achieve a minimum height of 8m
at maturity and must be of a planting grade of 160l or larger.
iii.
a minimum of 50 per cent of the facade of buildings at ground level must comprise glazing and
and/or pedestrian entries.
g.
No parking must be located in front of a building at ground level except where it is located on the street.
h.
Where an upper level of a building is occupied by a non-residential activity, glazing must comprise no
less than 30 per cent of the street facade of that level.
i.
The minimum GFA of dwellings must be 90m2. Tthe minimum GFA may be reduced by 8m2 where a
balcony of 8m2 or greater is provided.
j.
The maximum GFA of individual non-residential tenancies within buildings must be 250m2.
k.
8.
For buildings occupied at street level by non-residential activity the following controls must apply:
In the event that the buildings on the Aroha Avenue frontage existing at 22 December 2011 have been
removed and buildings have not been constructed along that frontage at the time any new buildings
within the siteSaint Lukes Precinct have been constructed less than 50m from the Aroha Avenue road
boundary, a 3m-wide landscape strip must be provided along the road boundary. This landscape strip
must consist of a 1.8m high fence 3m from the boundary with the intervening area densely planted with
trees and shrubs and must remain in place until such time as construction of buildings along the
frontage commences.
Type H - street interface
a.
An integrated mixed use development to a minimum depth of 16m from the Aroha Avenue road
boundary must be provided along the frontage to which interface type H applies. This must consist of
dwellings on the upper levels and retail premises, or restaurants, cafes and other eating places at street
level.
b.
One driveway may be provided to enable access to parking spaces and service access associated with
buildings with frontage to Aroha Avenue.
c.
Buildings must be a maximum of three storeys above ground level at the road boundary or, alternatively,
three storeys above the roof of a semi-basement parking structure. For the purposes of this rule, the
height of a semi-basement structure above ground level must be no more than 50 per cent of the total
height (floor level to the top of the basement roof slab).
d.
A 3m setback must be provided along the Aroha Avenue boundary which must be integrated with the
existing footpath to form an extended pedestrian space and/or outdoor seating area (including
associated weather protection).
e.
Planting within the setback must consist of specimen trees at a minimum of one every 6.5m along its
full length, with foliage lifted to 2m above the level of the pedestrian space to enable people to walk
beneath. The specimen trees must be of a species which will achieve a minimum height of 8m at
maturity and must be of a planting grade of 160l or larger.
f.
No parking must be located in front of a building at ground level except where it is located on the street.
g.
A minimum of 50 per cent of the facade of buildings at ground level must comprise glazing and/or
pedestrian entries.
h.
The minimum GFA of dwellings must be 70m2 but. The minimum GFA may be reduced by 8m2 where a
balcony of 8.0m2 or greater is provided
i.
The maximum GFA of individual non-residential tenancies within buildings must be 250m2.
j.
In the event that the buildings on the Aroha Avenue frontage existing at 22 December 2011 have been
removed and buildings have not been constructed along that frontage at the time any new buildings
within the siteSaint Lukes Precinct have been constructed less than 50m from the Aroha Avenue road
boundary, a 3m-wide landscape strip must be provided along the road boundary. This landscape strip
must consist of a 1.8m high fence 3m from the boundary with the intervening area densely planted with
trees and shrubs and must remain in place until such time as construction of buildings along the
frontage commences.
3.3 Building location
1.
Building development may take place anywhere on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct, subject to the
interface controls set out in clause 3.2 above.
3.4 Exeter Road extension
1.
The Exeter Road extension must be a pedestrian and vehicle link between Exeter Road and Aroha Avenue,
located generally as shown on Map 1: Precinct plan 1.
2.
With the exception of emergency service vehicles, heavy motor vehicles are not permitted to enter/exit
Exeter Road extension at the Aroha Avenue end.
3.
Continuous pedestrian shelter must be provided along each side of the street except for that area occupied
by vehicle access. The shelter must have a minimum height of 3m and a maximum of 4.5m above the
footpath immediately below. The shelter must be located no closer than 600mm from the kerb line of the
road and, where practicable, must have a minimum width of 2.5m.
4.
Buildings must directly adjoin the street frontage for not less than 50 per cent of their length with no part of
the building facade located further than 5m from the street frontage at ground level. Where the building
facade is set back at ground level, the area between the building and the street frontage must be not less
than 7.5m in length and be occupied by activities or amenities such as outdoor seating, display,
landscaping or pedestrian amenities.
5.
A minimum of 70 per cent of the street facade of buildings at ground level must comprise glazing and
pedestrian entries.
6.
Glazing and balconies must comprise no less than 30 per cent of the street facade of the upper levels of any
building.
7.
The minimum height of building facades at the street frontage must be 8m.
8.
The maximum GFA of individual tenancies within buildings fronting the street must be 2500m2.
9.
Parking must not be located in front of a building at the level of the Exeter Road extension between the
building and the road but parking may be located on the street. Parking at or above street level within a
building must be located more than 10m from the edge of the footpath nearest the building.
3.5 Location of site access
1.
Vehicle access to the siteSaint Lukes Precinct and primary pedestrian access to buildings must be
located generally in accordance with Map 1: Precinct plan 1. Access into individual tenancies and driveways
to parking spaces and service areas accessory to the activities within buildings with frontage to Aroha
Avenue may be provided in addition to the entries shown on Map 1: Precinct plan 1.
K8
3.6 Parking, loading and access
1.
For the first 45,473m2 of GFA a minimum of 2018 parking spaces are to be provided and maintained to the
council's satisfaction.
2.
For GFA in excess of 45,473m2, parking spaces are to be provided on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct
in accordance with the following rates as a minimum:
a.
for retail activities: one space for every 22m2 of GFA
b.
for cinemas: one space for every 11 seats
c.
for dwellings: one space per dwellingthe rates set out in Table 4 in clause 3.2 of the Auckland-wide
rules - Transport section in addition to the table below
d.
for other activities: the rates set out in Table 4 clause 3.2 of the Auckland-wide rules - Transport section.
Table 2
Unit size
Car parks
Two bedrooms or more and/or 75m2
gfa (includes 1 bedroom with GFA of
75m2 or more)
Visitor spaces
Maximum 2 car parks per dwelling
Loading spaces
1 space for every 5 dwellings (to the
nearest whole number)
1 space for 10 dwellings or more
3.
All parking areas must be interconnected within the siteSaint Lukes Precinct.
4.
Loading spaces must be provided in accordance with the requirements of clause 3.2 of the Auckland-wide
rules - Transport section, provided that surplus loading spaces existing prior to development of additional
floor space can be used to satisfy this requirement.
5.
Parking and loading areas must be dimensioned and formed in accordance with the requirements of clause
3.3 of the Auckland-wide rules - Transport section.
6.
Sufficient space must be provided on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct so that no reverse manoeuvring on
or off public roads is necessary by vehicles using parking or loading spaces.
3.7 Residential activity
1.
Minimum size (GFA):
a.
Except as provided for in clauses 3.2.7.i and 3.2.8.h above the following minimum sizes must apply to
dwellings:
i.
studio - 35m2
ii.
one-bedroom - 45m2
iii.
the minimum GFA for studio and one-bedroom dwellings may be reduced by 5m2where a balcony
of 8m2 or greater is provided for an individual dwelling.
b.
Two bedrooms - 70m2
c.
Three or more bedrooms - 90m2
d.
The minimum GFA for two-bedroom and three or more bedroom dwellings may be reduced by 8m2
where a balcony of 8m2 or greater is provided for an individual dwelling.
2.
Minimum apartment mix: In any one residential building containing more than 20 dwellings, the combined
number of one-bedroom dwellings and studios must not exceed 70 per cent of the total number of dwellings
within the building.
3.
Minimum daylight standards:
a.
All dwellings must be designed to achieve the following minimum daylight standards:
K9
i.
Living rooms and living/dining areas: a total clear glazed area of exterior wall no less than 20 per
cent of the space's floor area
ii.
Bedrooms: a minimum of one bedroom with a total clear glazed area of exterior wall no less than
20 per cent of the space's floor area
iii.
No more than one bedroom in a residential dwelling may rely on natural light borrowed from another
naturally lit room provided:
• the maximum distance of the bedroom from the natural light source window must be 6m
• the minimum total clear glazed area of the light source must be no less than 20 per cent of the
floor area of the bedroom.
4.
Outlook space:
a.
Refer to clause 9.10 of the residential zone rules and in addition to clause 9.10.6:
i.
5.
Private open space:
a.
6.
the outlook space may also be located over Exeter Road extension.
All dwellings must have outdoor living areas consisting of at least:
i.
an outdoor living area as specified in clause 9.12 of the Residential zone rules; or
ii.
a rooftop space with an area of 10m2 and a minimum width of 2m which has convenient access to
a living room.
Noise:
a.
Refer to clause 6.1.1.11 of the Auckland-wide rules - general section.
3.8 Tree protection
1.
Trees identified on Map 3: Concept plan 3 as trees subject to the tree protection rule and, described and
identified in Table 3 must not be altered, removed or have works undertaken within the dripline.
a.
Exceptions to this control are the following:
i.
Trimming of the canopy, excluding the roots, of any tree which does not damage its health. Such
works will be limited to no more than 20 per cent of live growth removal in any one year and must
be in accordance with currently accepted arboricultural practice, ensuring that the natural form and
branch habit of the tree species is maintained
ii.
If the trimming is done by a qualified arborist or arboriculturalist, the work must be limited to no
more than 30 per cent of live growth removal in any one year and must be in accordance with
currently accepted arboricultural practice, ensuring that the natural form and branch habit of the
tree species is maintained
iii.
If the trimming rule above does not apply, any regular minor trimming or maintenance must be done
by hand operated secateurs or pruning shears, in accordance with the accepted arboricultural
practice
iv.
The removal of any tree or part of a tree that is dead or that is suffering from an untreatable disease
which has caused a significant decline in its health, evidence must be produced if required. Where
any element of uncertainty exists as to the likely fate of the tree, the benefit of doubt will be given
to the tree's survival by not removing it until such time as its irreversible decline is obvious. Before
removing any affected tree, consultation with the council's arborist is strongly advised.
v.
Emergency tree works. In such circumstances the person undertaking the work must notify the
council in writing within seven days of the work commencing as to the reason for the work.
vi.
The actions of any statutory authority in carrying out of work authorised by statute. In such
circumstances the authority concerned must notify the council in writing no later than seven days
prior to the work commencing as to the reason for the work.
K10
Table 3
Tree number on
Figure 4
Common Name
Botanical Name
Location of
tree
Legal Description
16
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
17
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
Lot 1 DP 145632
18
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
80 St Lukes
Road
19
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
20
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
21
Evergreen Magnolia
Magnolia grandiflora
Lot 1 DP 145632
22
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
80 St Lukes
Road
23
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
24
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
25
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
Lot 1 DP 145632
26
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
80 St Lukes
Road
27
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
28
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
29
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
Lot 1 DP 145632
30
Evergreen Magnolia
Magnolia grandiflora
80 St Lukes
Road
80 St Lukes
Road
60
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
61
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
62
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
Lot 1 DP 145632
63
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
80 St Lukes
Road
64 x 2
Ponga Tree Fern
Dicksonia squarrosa
100 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
68
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
Lot 1 DP 145632
69
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
Lot 1 DP 145632
96
Persian Lilac
Melia azedarach
80 St Lukes
Road
50-60
Morningside
Drive
Lot 1 DP 145632
Lot 1 DP 145632
Lot 1 DP 145632
Lot 1 DP 145632
Lot 1 DP 145632
Lot 4 DP 6716
K11
115
Cheery
Prunus sp.
Exeter Road
tree located on
Council road reserve
116
Cheery
Prunus sp.
Exeter Road
117
Cheery
Prunus sp.
Exeter Road
tree located
Council road
tree located
Council road
151
Box Elder
Acer negundo
40 Aroha
Avenue
Lot 4 DP 32072
153
Akapuka
Griselinia lucida
Aroha Avenue
tree located on
Council road reserve
156
Akapuka
Aroha Avenue
tree located on
Council road
reserve
157
Akapuka
Griselinia lucida
Aroha Avenue
tree located on
Council road reserve
158
Akapuka
Griselinia lucida
Aroha Avenue
tree located on
Council road reserve
on
reserve
on
reserve
4. Additional controlsRequired Works and Financial Contributions
An application to infringe the additional rules below will be considered as a discretionary activity.
4.1 Pedestrian plaza
1.
A pedestrian plaza having a minimum area of 300m2 must be provided on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct, or
on an adjacent property readily accessed from the siteSaint Lukes Precinct. The plaza will be required no
later than the completion of a cumulative additional 19,250m2 GFA as a condition of consent. The plaza may
be roofed, may be separate or integrated with any buildings, and must:
a.
have a minimum horizontal dimension of 16m
b.
be readily accessible from adjoining street(s) during the regular trading hours of Saint Lukes centre
c.
provide shelter from the prevailing south-west winds
d.
receive sunlight between the hours of 11am-2pm throughout the year
e.
be designed for personal safety
f.
2.
provide accessible and comfortable seating which is not reserved for patrons of restaurants, cafes or
other eating places.
For clarity, an area within a building at the corner of Morningside Drive and Exeter Road that meets the
assessment criteria in clause 6.2.2 below may satisfy this requirement.
4.2 Required road works
1.
Unless determined by the council to be unnecessary, the following physical alterations to the road network
will be required as conditions of consent:
a.
b.
When a cumulative additional 11,000m2 GFA of activities other than offices plus up to 1500m2 GFA of
offices is constructed on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct:
i.
the installation of new traffic signals, including pedestrian crossings, at the intersection of
Morningside Drive and Exeter Road
ii.
the provision of an additional left turn lane from Morningside Drive into Saint Lukes, Road, generally
as shown on Map 4: Precinct plan 4.
When a cumulative additional 19,250m2 GFA of activities other than offices plus up to 5,000m2 GFA of
offices is constructed on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct:
K12
i. the construction of the Exeter Road extension.
c.
When Exeter Road has been constructed:
i.
the implementation of traffic calming measures on Aroha Avenue. In relation to Aroha Avenue,
the implementation of traffic calming must be undertaken in consultation with key
stakeholders. Such measures must be designed to have regard to the following traffic
principles:
•
reducing vehicle speeds to maintain residential amenity and public safety on Aroha Avenue.
•
minimising the likelihood that Aroha Avenue will become a 'rat run' route via the Exeter Road
extension for traffic unrelated to Westfield Saint Lukes or local residents, while ensuring that
Aroha Avenue and Bournemouth Avenue have a part to play in providing connectivity between
Sandringham Road and Morningside Drive
•
ensuring the measures are not so severe as to become a nuisance and/or a problem for
existing road users and local residents
•
ensuring the measures are not so severe as to discourage its use by Westfield Saint Lukes traffic
•
not encouraging undesirable driver behaviour
•
avoiding measures that will create safety issues for pedestrians and cyclists
•
ensuring traffic calming measures appear as an integral part of the design and appearance of
the road reserve.
Notes
1.
Avoiding the potential for the Exeter Road extension to be used as a 'rat run' will primarily be achieved with
the design of the Exeter Road extension to address the assessment criteria in 5.1.2 above.
2.
The provision of an additional left turn lane from Morningside Drive into St Lukes Road will entail the
relocation of part of the footpath onto the siteSaint Lukes Precinct and the construction of associated
retaining walls. That part of the siteSaint Lukes Precinct occupied by the footpath, but not the associated
retaining walls, must be vested with the council at no cost to the council.
3.
The residents of Aroha Avenue must be consulted by the council on both the design and implementation of
the traffic calming measures on Aroha Avenue.
4.3 Additional off-site road works
1.
In addition to the road works identified as being required in clause 4.2 above, some or all of the following
works, or financial contributions to partially fund such works, may be required as conditions of consent to
deal with effects on the road network generated by development on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct.
2.
Adjustments to the road layout and permitted turning movements at the car park access points on
Morningside Drive. These works must not be required before the completion of a cumulative additional
5000m2 GFA.
3.
The reconfiguration of Saint Lukes Road at its intersection with Wagener Place, and the existing traffic
islands, to provide:
a.
improved pedestrian access between development on the south side of Saint Lukes Road and the
siteSaint Lukes Precinct
b.
an additional west bound lane on Saint Lukes Road
c.
an extended right turn lane into Fowlds Avenue
d.
an extended right turn lane into Morningside Drive
e.
cycle lanes.
4.
These works must not be required before the completion of a cumulative additional 16,500m2 GFA of
activities other than offices plus up to 2500m2 GFA of offices.
5.
Improvements to the intersection of Saint Lukes Road and New North Road to provide:
K13
a.
an extension to the westbound approach lanes; and/or
b.
a double right turn from Saint Lukes Road, eastbound approach, into New North Road.
6.
These works must not be required before the completion of a cumulative additional 19,250m2 GFA of
activities other than offices plus up to 5000m2 GFA of offices.
7.
Conditions of consent requiring the implementation of works at any of the locations listed in clauses 4.2 and
4.3 above may be imposed on individual applications for resource consent when the need for such works is
demonstrated. Conditions of consent may also be imposed requiring monitoring of the traffic conditions,
including consideration of the adjacent frequent public transport network at any of the listed locations and
reporting of the monitoring results to the council. Remedial works may be required if the council determines
this is necessary.
8.
The amount of any contribution to the cost of any required works, either by works or by financial contribution,
will be that proportion of the actual cost of road works required as a result of the particular application. The
proportion that is payable on any application will be determined taking into account the amount of traffic
generated by the development for which resource consent is being sought, relative to existing traffic, and the
extent to which that development will use up additional capacity provided by the improvement works. In
calculating the financial contribution payable, consideration will also be given to the benefits accruing to other
road users and property owners in terms of actual usage and increased capacity.
4.4 Other required works
1.
If any of the existing cherry trees currently growing within the berm on either side of Exeter Road are
removed to facilitate development work on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct, an equivalent number of cherry
trees of a planting grade of 160l or larger must be planted elsewhere on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct, such
as within a plaza area, within the setback on Aroha Avenue required with the type H interface or as street
trees along Exeter Road extension.
a.
2.
The plaque currently located within the berm on the eastern side of the southern leg of Exeter Road
commemorating the planting of the existing trees must be relocated near to the replacement trees in a
location to be agreed with the council.
The following additional works must be implemented no later than the completion of a cumulative additional
40,000m2 GFA.
a.
The construction of buildings adjoining interfaces type D and type E.
b.
Improved pedestrian accessibility between the Mount Albert library and Westfield the Saint Lukes
Shopping Centre by improving the configuration of the pedestrian crossing to the mall, clearing
vegetation and improving directional signage within the mall and on the library site, and by providing a
covered walkway between the library and the subject siteSaint Lukes Precinct.
4.5 Financial contributions/development contributions
1.
A private development agreement detailing the proportional contribution towards the cost of off-site works
and other financial contributions/development contributions will apply to development contemplated by this
precinct. The private development agreement must specify the amount of the financial
contributions/development contributions to be expended on any upgrades of roads, services or open spaces
in the local area in the vicinity of the siteSaint Lukes Precinct (including any upgrades of Aroha Avenue in
addition to the required traffic calming measures) to be carried out by the council.
5. Assessment - Controlled activities
5.1 Matters of control
The Council will reserve its control to the matters listed below:
1.
Activities providing parking for more than 100 vehicles
a.
The suitability of parking management strategy which:
i.
mitigates against the effects of spill over of parking onto neighbouring streets
ii.
provides for efficient use of on-site parking.
K14
b.
i.
vehicular access to and from the siteSaint Lukes Precinct in a manner which ensures adequate
sight distances and prevents off-site congestion
ii.
safe and efficient servicing of tenants operating within the siteSaint Lukes Precinct
iii.
circulation of traffic within the siteSaint Lukes Precinct
iv.
pedestrian safety including the separation of pedestrian and vehicle access and circulation and,
where appropriate, the provision of circulation spaces specifically designed for shared use
v.
security measures to ensure that any nuisance resulting from the inappropriate use of parking
areas on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct is controlled
vi.
bicycle parking in a convenient location.
c.
The sufficiency of a travel demand management plan which details measures that will be undertaken to
encourage the use of public transport and other modes of transport as alternatives to the use of private
vehicles, and which is to be implemented at the time the resource consent is exercised and continued
thereafter.
d.
The design of vehicle access so that it:
e.
f.
2.
The extent to which a site traffic management strategy provides for:
i.
provides for a high level of pedestrian amenity
ii.
provides and enhances pedestrian and vehicular safety
iii.
minimises pedestrian crossing distances
iv.
provides adequate signage
v.
maintains the intended pedestrian focused environments at interface type D and Exeter Road
extension
vi.
provides for or enhances access for a range of users, e.g. cars, motorcycles and bicycles.
The design of the layout of parking areas to provide for personal safety.
Ensuring that any required works in clauses 4.2 - 4.3 above are undertaken in conjunction with the
development in order to mitigate effects generated by that development.
Construction of the proposed Exeter Road extension linking Exeter Road with Aroha Avenue
a.
The Exeter Road extension is designed as a pedestrian oriented, at-grade street, encouraging slow
movement of vehicles and providing a high level of pedestrian priority and amenity.
b.
A high-quality, high amenity, pedestrian environment is achieved on both sides of the street by the use
of such design elements as wide footpaths, underground services, and the coordinated use of high
quality materials, street furniture, signage and lighting.
c.
Traffic calming measures to encourage the slow movement of vehicular traffic and enhance pedestrian
safety are implemented, including narrower than usual traffic lanes, tight tracking curves, textured road
surfaces or other accepted traffic engineering mechanisms.
d.
Traffic engineering measures are implemented to discourage vehicles from using the Exeter Road
extension as a shortcut between Exeter Road and Aroha Avenue.
e.
Measures to discourage heavy motor vehicles from using Exeter Road extension are implemented,
including signage, and road geometry and informing the tenants of the centre in writing of this
requirement.
f.
A management plan for the operation of Exeter Road extension addresses maximising the use of that
road to distribute traffic around the siteSaint Lukes Precinct while allowing for occasional use for
special events and taking account of potential adverse effects on residents of Aroha Avenue.
g.
The required works in clause 4.2 above are undertaken in conjunction with the development in order to
mitigate effects generated by that development.
K15
6. Assessment - Restricted discretionary activities
6.1 Matters of discretion
For activities/development that is a restricted discretionary activity in the Saint Lukes precinct, the council will
restrict its discretion to the following matters, in addition to the matters specified for the relevant restricted
discretionary activities in the underlying zone. For the avoidance of doubt, these general matters of discretion do
not apply to an activity that is restricted discretionary due to an infringement to the specific additional controls in
section 4 above.
1.
New buildings and additions and alterations to existing buildings
a. General criteria:
i.
building design and location
ii.
stormwater
iii.
water conservation and re-use
iv.
timing of required works.
b. Additional criteria for buildings on the Exeter Road/ Morningside Drive and Saint Lukes Road/
Morningside Drive corners:
i.
building mass.
ii.
additional criteria where interface controls apply:
iii.
2.
•
planting
•
building design
•
service lane design and management
•
signage and exterior lighting
•
character and streetscape.
additional criteria for buildings fronting Exeter Road extension:
•
building design.
•
Additional criteria for pedestrian access to buildings:
-
visibility and accessibility
-
movement
-
amenity
-
safety
-
legibility
-
passive surveillance
-
streetscape.
Vehicle or pedestrian access not meeting the locational requirements of clauses 3.5 or 3.6 of this precinct
a. vehicle access
b. pedestrian access.
3.
Parking not meeting the requirements of clause 3.6 of this precinct
a. parking and loading spaces
b. kerbs
c. building line designations.
4.
Loading areas not meeting the requirements of clause 3.6 of this precinct
a. parking and loading spaces
b. kerbs
K16
c. building line designations.
5.
Subdivision
a. permitted activities or activities granted consent
b. consistency with Saint Lukes precinct
c. dominant activity on-site
d. works, infrastructure and contributions.
6.
Exterior signs
a. signage and exterior lighting.
7.
Alteration or removal of trees, or work within the dripline of trees, not exempt by clause 3 above
a. building site
b. access
c. parking and loading spaces
d. services
e. consideration of alternatives
f. trees
g. amenity
h. ground stability.
6.2 Assessment criteria
1.
New buildings and additions and alterations to existing buildings - general criteria for building design
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of, the extent to which:
i.
the design of those parts of any building visible from, and within 30m of, a road or residential or
open space zone, is of high quality and, where appropriate, responds to and enhances the positive
characteristics of the local streetscape
ii.
the scale, proportion and rhythm of architectural features and the fenestration, materials, finishes
and colours (as appropriate) of proposed buildings addressing street frontages acknowledge the
characteristics of the streetscape and provide street frontages with architectural design richness,
interest and depth
iii.
flat planes or blank facades devoid of modulation, relief or surface detail can be avoided
iv.
any otherwise unavoidable blank walls are enlivened by display cases, artwork, articulation,
modulation and cladding choice to provide architectural relief
v.
long building frontages are visually broken up by variations in height, form and other design means
such as variations in facade design and roofline, recesses, awnings, upper level balconies and
other projections, materials and colours
vi.
servicing elements are concealed where possible and not placed on facades unless integrated into
the facade design
vii.
exterior lighting is integrated with architectural and landscape design to minimise glare and light
overspill onto adjacent properties and streets
viii.
exterior signage and signage zones are integrated with the design of buildings
ix.
any rooftop mechanical plant or other equipment is screened or integrated in the building design
x.
buildings are designed to contribute to the prevention of crime through their design and
configuration
xi.
the location and design of buildings avoid or mitigate significant adverse shadowing effects, if any,
on adjacent residential properties on Aroha Avenue and Cornwallis Street
K17
2.
xii.
appropriate provision is made for the treatment and disposal of stormwater runoff from buildings and
ancillary parking areas, including flood protection, in accordance with relevant standards
xiii.
water conservation and water re-use has been considered where appropriate, having regard to costs
and to the environmental benefits of groundwater recharge
xiv.
any required works in clause 4 of this precinct are undertaken in conjunction with the development
in order to mitigate effects generated by that development.
Additional criteria for buildings on the Exeter Road/Morningside Drive and Saint Lukes Road/Morningside
Drive corners
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
3.
i.
building mass at the corner of Morningside Drive and Exeter Road is fragmented to provide a
generous pedestrian entry and level of amenity, and to visually, spatially and physically integrate
the interior of the building with the street
ii.
building mass at the corner of Saint Lukes Road and Morningside Drive architecturally reinforces,
'punctuates' and emphasises this prominent comer location by increased height, building mass,
and/or the deployment of traditional urban design techniques such as providing a major pedestrian
entrance or architecturally distinctive and vertically proportioned forms.
Additional criteria where interface controls apply
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
4.
i.
planting within the required landscaping strips along the street frontages for interface type AA, type
C, type F, type G and type H contributes to a high level of visual amenity for the frontage
ii.
building facades at interface type D include a relatively strong expression of building mmass,
predominantly vertical proportions and emphases, architectural modulation, articulation or relief
along the street frontage at all levels, pedestrian entrances, windows or balconies, and changes in
surface texture or detail
iii.
any service lane situated on interface type D is designed as a pedestrian oriented, at-grade lane
providing a high level of pedestrian amenity, with its use by small service vehicles controlled by way
of a management plan
iv.
building facades at interface type E contribute at street level to pedestrian vitality, interest and
public safety, relative to a variety of architectural detail, and maximising visibility and access
between buildings and adjacent pedestrian areas
v.
the design of building facades at interface type F provides a good level of visual amenity when
viewed from adjoining properties, ensures privacy for residential neighbours, and avoids adverse
effects on adjoining properties from ambient lighting and vehicle headlights
vi.
the design of building facades at interfaces type D, E, G and H, and fronting the Exeter Road
extension, screens any car parking within buildings in a manner that positively contributes to the
articulation of the building, and avoids or mitigates adverse effects of motor vehicle headlights on
public spaces and neighbouring residential properties
vii.
signage and exterior lighting along the frontage identified as interface types G and H has regard to
the neighbouring residential environment
viii.
the form, mass, proportion and materials of buildings at interface types G and H are compatible
with the character of surrounding residential buildings and the streetscape and do not compete with
that character. For the avoidance of doubt, apartments to the north and terrace housing to the
south of the Exeter Road extension, with or without a pitched roof, constructed in accordance with
the provisions in clauses 3.2.7 and 3.2.8 above are deemed to be building forms that are
compatible with the character of Aroha Avenue.
Additional criteria for buildings fronting Exeter Road extension
K220
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
i.
5.
building facades fronting the road contribute at street level to pedestrian vitality, interest and public
safety, relative to a variety of architectural detail, and maximising visibility and access between
buildings and adjacent pedestrian areas.
Additional criteria for pedestrian access to buildings
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
6.
i.
entrances are clearly visible and easily accessible from the street and incorporate pedestrian
shelter and amenity.
ii.
ease of movement, amenity, safety and legibility for pedestrians are provided or enhanced;
iii.
opportunities for passive surveillance are provided for or enhanced;
iv.
movement for a range of users, e.g. pedestrians, cyclists, people with disabilities, mobility
scooters, is provided for or enhanced;
v.
where pedestrian entries into the centre cannot be lined by active uses, for example where through
a car park or corridor, a good quality of design and lighting is achieved, and vehicular and
pedestrian traffic are separated to the extent practicable in order to minimise conflict
vi.
where pedestrian entrances are near public transport stops, they allow easy, direct and safe
access into the centre and are lined by active uses.
Vehicle or pedestrian access not meeting the locational requirements of clauses 3.5 or 3.6.6 above
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
i.
Vehicle access
•
ii.
The extent to which the matters listed in clause 5.1.1.d above are addressed and the extent to
which vehicle access:
-
provides an effective connection to the siteSaint Lukes Precinct
-
provides adequate sight distances
-
prevents congestion caused by the ingress and egressentry and exit of vehicles.
Pedestrian access
K221
7.
•
recognises pedestrian desire lines
•
enhances overall site circulation, access and legibility
•
provides easy connections to an extended pedestrian network linking adjacent sites
and facilities e.g. Warren Freer Park and the Megacentre.
Parking and loading areas not meeting the requirements of clause 3.6 above
a. Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
i. the criteria in clause 3.2 above are met Parking and loading areas:
•
are properly graded, drained and sealed to prevent dust nuisance or concentrated runoff of
water from the Saint Lukes Precinct.
•
are located remote from residential zone boundaries. Where this is impracticable adequate
screening should be provided in the form of fencing or landscaping, in order to reduce to an
acceptable level any adverse aural or visual impacts on residentially zoned properties.
• have internal circulation designed to the satisfaction of the Council so that the particular
requirements of individual proposals for safe and efficient vehicle circulation on site are
attended to, and so that adverse effects on the roading network are prevented.
ii. the criteria in clause 3.1 above are metReduction in parking spaces: The following criteria apply only to
parking areas (not loading areas) and only as they relate to the off-site effects of the activity.
• Whether the amount of parking proposed is sufficient for the proposal having regard to:
• the nature of the oeration including the interaction between activities on the Saint
Lukes precinct
• the availability and accessibility of public transport serving the Saint Lukes Precinct
• the measures and commitments outlined in a travel plan for the Saint Lukes Precinct
which will reduce the need for vehicle use to a level where parking demands can be
satisfactorily addressed through efficient use of the proposed parking.
• the extent to which activity on the Saint Lukes Precinct have complementary parking
demands.
• the effects of parking overspill from the reduction in parking on adjacent activities and on the
transport network
• the extent to which there is public parking on-street or off-street in the immediate vicinity with
capacity and availability at the times required to serve the proposal
• the extent to which the parking requirements of the proposal will be met by entering into a
shared parking arrangement with another site in the immediate vicinity that has available
parking spaces which are not required at the same times as the proposed activity
• the extent to which it is physically practicable to provide the required parking on the site
including in terms of the existing location of buildings and the availability of access to the
road.
iii. Departure from loading spaces requirements:
 the effects of the proposed loading arrangements on the safe and efficient operation of the
adjacent transport network
 the specific business practice, operation or type of customer associated with the proposed
activities
 the extent to which an accessible and adequate on-street loading space is available nearby
or can be created while having regard to other demands for kerbside use of the road.
 the extent to which the reduction in loading spaces will contribute to the efficient use of
land and the growth and intensification provided for in the Saint Lukes Precinct.
iv. favourable consideration may be given to the provision of stack parking subject to the following
criteria:
•
stacked parking occurs when access to a parking space is achieved through another
parking space
•
stacked parking will generally only be allowed in special circumstances in order to
alleviate adverse effects, where no feasible alternative exists
K222
iv.
stacked parking may be allowed for one of the two required parking spaces for any
residential development where each residential unit has two parking spaces physically
associated with it
•
stacked parking may be a satisfactory means of providing staff parking where:
-
the staff parking area is clearly defined, marked and separated from other required
parking on the siteSaint Lukes Precinct
-
at least 50 per cent of the parking spaces in the staff parking area comply with
the provisions of clause 3.2 above.
Kerbs
•
v.
•
Where a parking or manoeuvring area is adjacent to a road, a kerb or similar barrier, not less
than 150mm high and at least 600mm from the road boundary, must be provided on those
parts of the frontage not used for vehicular access.
Building line designations
•
No required parking or loading spaces, manoeuvring area, or part thereof must be located
between any building line designation and the road alignment shown on the planning maps.
b. Where it is desired to provide parking in excess of the Unitary Plan requirements, it may be feasible to
operate stacked parking which must be specifically designed to the council's satisfaction. The
satisfactory operation of the required parking area should not be compromised.
8. Subdivision
Applications will be assessed in terms of the extent to which:
a.
b.
c.
the proposed use of any new site or sites created is in accordance with the precinct's permitted activities or
with an application for resource consent which has been granted or applied for concurrently;
the subdivision is consistent with the precinct and will not adversely affect the operation and management of
the dominant activity;
the subdivision provides for the required works, infrastructure, and contributions in money as set out in Rule
4.4.
K223
7. Precinct plans
Precinct plan 1: Activity areas
K224
Comment [BC1]: Delete Precinct plan 2
and replace with a new Precinct Plan 2
based on diagram below.
Precinct plan 2: Interface types and building height areas
K225
K226
Precinct plan 3: Tree protection
K227
Precinct plan 4: Proposed access layout
K228
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX D
COMPARISON OF HEIGHT AND DENSITY/INTENSITY CONTROLS OF
LAND SURROUNDING SAINT LUKES TOWN CENTRE
2988552
HEIGHT AND INTENSITY CONTROLS
Operative
District
Plan
Zoning
Operative District Plan provisions
Maximum Height
Business 8 B2.1 The maximum height of any new building
(St Lukes
shall be in accordance with the following table
Road, Mt
provided that individual building elements above
Albert
a height of 20 metres in Height Area 2 shall not
Concept
have a combined floor plate area in excess of
Plan)
1,500m2.
Proposed
Zoning
Updated PAUP provisions (Council’s
evidence on residential and business
zones)
St Lukes Precinct
1.
The maximum height of any new
building must be in accordance with the
following table provided that individual building
elements above a height of 20m in height area
2 must not have a combined floor area in
excess of 1500m2. Refer to Map 2: Precinct
plan 2 for Datum locations.
Operative
District
Plan
Zoning
Operative District Plan provisions
Height
area
1
2
3
4
5
6
Height
above
Datum
20m
30m
20m
15m
12.5m
12.5m
Proposed
Zoning
Datum
Datum
RL
Height
area
Morningside
Morningside
Aroha
Aroha
Aroha
Aroha
36.35
36.35
41.01
41.01
41.01
41.01
1
2
3
4
5
6
B2.3 For the purpose of assessing compliance
with the maximum height rule, no account shall
be taken of any radio, television or
communications aerials, ancillary plant or
machinery room structures, which may
collectively occupy up to 10% of the roof area of
any building, provided such structures do not
exceed the maximum height limit by more than
6m.
12.5m
Height
above
Datum
20m
30m
20m
15m
12.5m
12.5m
Datum
Datum
RL
Morningside
Morningside
Aroha
Aroha
Aroha
Aroha
36.35
36.35
41.01
41.01
41.01
41.01
2.
Notwithstanding clause 1 above, a
building in height area 6 must not exceed 10m
if that building is wholly occupied by nonresidential activity.
B2.2 Notwithstanding B2.1, the maximum height
of a building in Height Area 6 shall be 10m if
that building is wholly occupied by nonresidential activity.
Residential
7b
Residential
7b
Residential
7b
Updated PAUP provisions (Council’s
evidence on residential and business
zones)
12.5m
Town Centre – St
Lukes
Mixed Use
12.5m
THAB
3.
Notwithstanding clause 1 above, for the
purposes of assessing compliance with the
maximum height rule in the Saint Lukes
precinct, no account shall be taken of any
radio, television or communications aerials,
ancillary plant or machinery room structures,
which may collectively occupy up to 10% of the
roof area of any building, provided such
structures do not exceed the maximum height
limit by more than 6m.
18m
16m (plus 2m for roof)
16m (up to 18m as RDA)
Operative
Operative District Plan provisions
District
Plan
Zoning
Residential 10m
7a
Residential 8m
6a
Residential 8m
5
Business 4 15m
Open
10m
Space 4
Site Intensity
Business 8 B3. Site intensity
(St Lukes
B3.1 Overall Gross Floor Area Limitation
Road, Mt
 The maximum Gross Floor Area on the
Albert
site is 92,500m2.
Concept
B3.2 Specific Gross Floor Area Limitations:
Plan)
(a) The maximum Gross Floor Area for a
combination of retail, entertainment
facilities, taverns and cafes, restaurants
and other eating places, is 77,500m2
(b) The maximum Gross Floor Area for
Offices is 15,000m2
B3.3 Floor Area Incentive for Residential Units
fronting Aroha Avenue
(a) Notwithstanding B3.1, the Overall Gross
Floor Area Limitation shall be increased
by 7.9 m2 Gross Floor Area for every 1
m2of Gross Floor Area of residential
development fronting Aroha Avenue,
subject to a maximum increase of
7,000m2Gross Floor Area.
Proposed
Zoning
Updated PAUP provisions (Council’s
evidence on residential and business
zones)
THAB
16m (up to 18m as RDA)
THAB
16m (up to 18m as RDA)
THAB
16m (up to 18m as RDA)
Mixed Use
Town Centre – St
Lukes
16m (plus 2m for roof)
18m
St Lukes Precinct
2.1 Site intensity
1. Overall GFA limitation:
a. the maximum GFA on the site is
92,500m2.
2.
Specific GFA limitations:
a. the maximum GFA for a
combination of retail,
entertainment facilities, taverns
and cafes, restaurants and other
eating places is 77,500m2
b. the maximum GFA for offices is
15,000m2.
3.
Floor area incentive for dwellings
fronting Aroha Avenue:
a. notwithstanding clause 1 above,
the overall GFA limitation must be
increased by 7.9m2 GFA for
every 1m2 of GFA of residential
development fronting Aroha
Operative
District
Plan
Zoning
Operative District Plan provisions
Proposed
Zoning
(b) Notwithstanding B3.2(a), the maximum
Gross Floor Area in B3.2(a) shall be
increased by 5.7m2 Gross Floor Area for
every 1m2 of Gross Floor Area of
residential development fronting Aroha
Avenue, subject to a maximum increase
of 5,000m2 Gross Floor Area.
Residential
7b
Residential
7b
Residential
7b
Residential
7a
Residential
6a
Business 4
Open
Space 4
Intensity – 1 person per 25m2 site area
Density – 1 dwelling per 200m2 gross site area
Intensity – 1 person per 25m2 site area
Density – 1 dwelling per 200m2 gross site area
Intensity – 1 person per 25m2 site area
Density – 1 dwelling per 200m2 gross site area
Intensity – 1 person per 25m2 site area
Density – 1 dwelling per 200m2 gross site area
Intensity – 1 person per 45m2 site area
Density – 1 dwelling per 375m2 gross site area
Basic FAR – 2:1
Maximum FAR – 4:1
No FAR or intensity controls
Town Centre – St
Lukes
Mixed Use
Updated PAUP provisions (Council’s
evidence on residential and business
zones)
Avenue, subject to a maximum
increase of 7000m2 GFA
b. notwithstanding 2(a) above, the
maximum GFA must be
increased by 5.7m2 GFA for
every 1m2 of GFA of residential
development fronting Aroha
Avenue, subject to a maximum
increase of 5000m2 GFA.
No density/intensity controls
No density/intensity controls
THAB
No density/intensity controls
THAB
No density/intensity controls
THAB
No density/intensity controls
Mixed Use
No FAR or intensity controls
Town Centre – St
Lukes
No FAR or intensity controls
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX E
COMPARISON OF SAINT LUKES PRECINCT AND TOWN CENTRE
INTERFACE CONTROLS
2988552
INTERFACE CONTROLS
Interface type
(Precinct)
Type A – street
interface
Relates to
Open Space
zone
Type B – open
space interface
Relates to
Town Centre –
St Lukes zone
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
a. New development must incorporate a 5m landscaped
 Height to Boundary – 8.5m
strip along the road boundary, except where occupied
+ 45° (measured from
by vehicle or pedestrian access
opposite side of road)
b. Development must comply with a building in relation to
 Building Setback – 6m
boundary control of 12m plus the shortest horizontal
setback above 27m
distance between that part of the building and the road
 Glazing (street-facing
boundary.
façade) – 50% of width and
c. The landscape strip must be densely planted with trees
50% of height
and shrubs. Planting must include specimen trees at a  Yards – no control at front
minimum of one every 6.5m. The specimen trees must
boundary
be of a species which will achieve a minimum height of
8m or more at maturity and must be of a planting grade
of 160l or larger.
a. New development must comply with a building in
relation to boundary control of 2m plus the shortest
horizontal distance between that part of the building
and the site boundary, excluding any covered walkway
or pedestrian link that provides 'pedestrian circulation'
between the site and the open space.



Height to Boundary – 8.5m
+ 45°
Building Setback – no
control (does not apply at a
side boundary)
Glazing (street-facing
façade) – no control (does
not apply at a side
boundary)
Comment
‘Default’ Town Centre
zone provisions do not
require a yard/landscape
setback.
A 32.5m building can be
constructed at:
 20.5m from the
boundary under
Precinct rules
 6m from the
boundary under
default Town
Centre rules (taken
from opposite side
of Cornwallis St)
The library site has been
rezoned from Open Space
to Town Centre, with
associated significant uplift
of development
opportunity.
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at:
Interface type
(Precinct)
Type C – street
interface
Relates to
THAB and
Mixed Use
zones on
opposite side
of St Lukes
Road, and
Town Centre –
St Lukes zone
on opposite
side of
Morningside
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
a. New development must incorporate a landscaped area
not less than 50 per cent of that part of the site between
the road boundary and a parallel line 3m measured from
the road boundary. The landscaped strip must be
densely planted with trees and shrubs and, where
provided, must include specimen trees at a minimum of
one every 6.5m. The specimen trees must be of a
species which will achieve a minimum height of 8m or
more at maturity, and must be of a planting grade of
160l or larger.
b. along Morningside Drive, glazing and balconies must
comprise no less than 30 per cent of the surface area of
the upper level facade of any building.
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
 Yards – 3m (planted with a
mixture of trees, shrubs or
ground cover plants for a
depth of at least 3m)


Height to Boundary
o Opposite THAB zone 8m + 60° (measured
from opposite side of
road)
o Opposite Mixed Use
zone – 8m + 60°
(measured from
opposite side of road)
o Opposite Town Centre
– St Lukes zone – no
height to boundary
control
Building Setback
o Opposite THAB zone –
Comment


30.5m from the
boundary under the
Precinct rules
24m from the
boundary under the
default Town
Centre rules
A 3m ‘side’ yard would
apply at the boundary
under the default Town
Centre zone rules.
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at the road
boundary under the default
Town Centre zone height
to boundary rules, when
measured from the
opposite side of St Lukes
Road and Morningside
Drive. Therefore, no
difference between
Precinct and Town Centre
rules.
No landscape strip or yard
required under the default
Interface type
(Precinct)
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
Drive.
Type D – street
interface
Relates to
Mixed Use
zone on
opposite side
of St Lukes
Road, and
Town Centre –
St Lukes zone
on opposite
side of
Morningside
Drive.
a. Continuous pedestrian shelter must be provided along
building facades.
b. The shelter must have a minimum height of 3m and a
maximum of 4.5m above the footpath immediately below
and, where practicable, must have a minimum width of
2.5m.
c. A minimum of 50 per cent of the facade of buildings at
ground level must comprise glazing and pedestrian
entries.
d. Glazing and balconies must comprise no less than 30
per cent of the surface area of the upper level facade of
any building.
e. The minimum height of building facades must be 6m.
f. No parking may be located in front of a building at
ground level.
g. Parking at or above street level within a building must
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
6m setback above
18m
o Opposite Mixed
Use/Town Centre
zones – 6m setback
above 27m
 Glazing (street-facing
façade) – 50% of width and
50% of height
 Yards – no control at front
boundary
 Height to Boundary
o Opposite Mixed Use
zone - 8m + 60°
(measured from
opposite side of road)
o Opposite Town Centre
– St Lukes zone – no
height to boundary
control
 Building Setback –
Opposite Mixed Use/Town
Centre zones – 6m setback
above 27m
 Glazing (street-facing
façade) – 50% of width and
50% of height
Comment
Town Centre zone rules.
Glazing rules are
comparable.
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at the road
boundary under the default
Town Centre zone height
to boundary rules, when
measured from the
opposite side of St Lukes
Road and Morningside
Drive. Therefore, no
difference between
Precinct and Town Centre
rules.
Verandahs would not be
required under the default
Town Centre zone rules.
Interface type
(Precinct)
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
be located more than 10m from the site boundary.
Type E – street
interface
Relates to
Town Centre –
St Lukes zone
on opposite
side of
Morningside
Drive, and
THAB zone on
opposite side
of Exeter Road
a. Continuous pedestrian shelter must be provided along
building facades.
b. The pedestrian shelter must have a minimum height of
3m and a maximum of 4.5m above the footpath
immediately below and where practicable, and must
have a minimum width of 2.5m.
c. Buildings must directly adjoin street frontages for no
less than 50 per cent of their length with no part of the
building facade located further than 5m from the street
frontage at ground level.
d. Where the building facade is set back at ground level,
the area between the building and the street frontage
must be no less than 7.5m in length parallel to the
street frontage and be occupied by activities or
amenities such as outdoor seating, display, landscaping
or pedestrian amenities.
e. A minimum of 70 per cent of the facade of buildings at
ground level must comprise unobstructed glazing and
pedestrian entries.
f. Glazing and balconies must comprise no less than 30
per cent of the facade of the upper levels of any
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
 Yards – no control at front
boundary
 Verandahs – no control for
street frontages not subject
to the Key Retail Frontage
overlay
 Height to Boundary
o Opposite Town Centre
– St Lukes zone – no
height to boundary
control
o Opposite THAB zone –
8m + 60° (measured
from opposite side of
road)
 Building Setback
o Opposite Town Centre
zone – 6m setback
above 27m
o Opposite THAB zone –
6m setback above
18m
 Glazing (street-facing
façade) – 50% of width and
50% of height
 Yards – no control at front
boundary
Comment
No minimum floor height
rules under default Town
Centre zone rules.
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at the road
boundary under the default
Town Centre zone height
to boundary rules, when
measured from the
opposite side of
Morningside Drive and
Exeter Road. Therefore,
no difference between
Precinct and Town Centre
rules.
No requirement for
verandahs under the
default Town Centre zone
rules.
No minimum floor height
rules under default Town
Centre zone rules.
Interface type
(Precinct)
Type F –
residential
interface
Relates to
THAB zone
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
building.
g. The minimum height of building facades at the
boundary must be 6m.
h. No parking may be located in front of a building at
ground level.
i. Parking at or above street level within a building must
be located more than 10m from the site boundary.
a. Except as provided for in (b) below, a 3m-wide
landscape strip must be provided along each boundary
which must be densely planted with trees and shrubs.
Planting must include specimen trees at a minimum of
one every 6.5m. The specimen trees must be evergreen
species which will achieve a minimum height of 6m or
more at maturity and must be of a planting grade of
160l or larger.
b. For a depth of 16m from the Aroha Avenue road
boundary, a 1.8m close-boarded fence must be provided
along the boundary in lieu of a landscape strip if that
area is used principally to provide access to parking
spaces and service access ancillary to the activities
within buildings with frontage to Aroha Avenue.
c. New development must comply with the height in
relation to boundary diagram in Figure 1: Height in
relation to boundary below.
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
 Verandahs – no control for
street frontages not subject
to the Key Retail Frontage
overlay




Height to Boundary – 8m +
60°
Building Setback – no
control (does not apply at a
side boundary)
Glazing (street-facing
façade) – no control (does
not apply at a side
boundary)
Yards – 3m (planted with a
mixture of trees, shrubs or
ground cover plants for a
depth of at least 3m)
Comment
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at:
 27.6m from the
boundary under the
Precinct rules
 14.14m from the
boundary under the
default Town
Centre zone rules
Yard/landscape strip is the
same between the
Precinct and Town Centre
zone.
Interface type
(Precinct)
Type G – street
interface
Relates to
THAB zone on
opposite side
of Aroha
Avenue
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
a. Except as provided for in (b) below, an integrated
residential development in the form of terrace housing
with a minimum depth from the Aroha Avenue road
boundary of 16m must be provided along the frontage to
which interface type G applies.
b. for a distance of 16m south of the centreline of the
Exeter Road extension, buildings may be occupied at
street level by retail premises, or restaurants, cafes and
other eating places, and above street level by any
activity listed in section 1 of this precinct as a permitted
activity in area B, except parking.
c. One driveway may be provided to provide access to
parking spaces and service access ancillary to the
activities within buildings with frontage to Aroha Avenue.
d. Within height area 6, buildings must be a maximum of
three storeys above ground level at the road boundary
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence




Height to Boundary – 8m +
60° (measured from
opposite side of road)
Building Setback – 6m
setback above 18m
Glazing (street-facing
façade) – 50% of width and
50% of height
Yards – no control at front
boundary
Comment
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at:
 14.14m from the
boundary under the
default Town
Centre zone rules.
The Precinct rules do not
provide a height to
boundary control, but limits
height in this part of the
site to 3 stories above a
semi-basement parking
floor.
Interface type
(Precinct)
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
or, alternatively three storeys above the roof of a semibasement parking structure. For the purposes of this rule,
the height of a semi-basement structure above ground
level must be no more than 50 per cent of the total height
(floor level to the top of the basement roof slab).
e. For buildings occupied at street level by dwellings a
minimum 1.5m-wide front yard must be provided along
the Aroha Avenue road boundary. Not less than 30 per
cent of that part of the site between the road boundary
and a parallel line 6m measured from the road boundary
must comprise landscaped permeable surface.
f. For buildings occupied at street level by non-residential
activity the following controls must apply:
i. a 3m setback must be provided along the Aroha
Avenue road boundary, which must be integrated
with the existing footpath to form an extended
pedestrian space and/or outdoor seating area,
including associated weather protection.
ii. planting within the setback must consist of specimen
trees at a minimum of one every 6.5m along its full
length, with foliage lifted to 2m above the level of the
pedestrian space to enable people to walk beneath.
The specimen trees must be of a species which will
achieve a minimum height of 8m at maturity and must
be of a planting grade of 160l or larger.
iii. a minimum of 50 per cent of the facade of buildings
at ground level must comprise glazing and and/or
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
Comment
Interface type
(Precinct)
Type H – street
interface
Relates to
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
pedestrian entries.
g. No parking must be located in front of a building at
ground level except where it is located on the street.
h. Where an upper level of a building is occupied by a nonresidential activity, glazing must comprise no less than
30 per cent of the street facade of that level.
i. The minimum GFA of dwellings must be 90m2. Tthe
minimum GFA may be reduced by 8m2 where a balcony
of 8m2 or greater is provided.
j. The maximum GFA of individual non-residential
tenancies within buildings must be 250m2.
k. In the event that the buildings on the Aroha Avenue
frontage existing at 22 December 2011 have been
removed and buildings have not been constructed along
that frontage at the time any new buildings within the site
have been constructed less than 50m from the Aroha
Avenue road boundary, a 3m-wide landscape strip must
be provided along the road boundary. This landscape
strip must consist of a 1.8m high fence 3m from the
boundary with the intervening area densely planted with
trees and shrubs and must remain in place until such
time as construction of buildings along the frontage
commences.
a. An integrated mixed use development to a minimum
depth of 16m from the Aroha Avenue road boundary
must be provided along the frontage to which interface
type H applies. This must consist of dwellings on the
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence


Height to Boundary – 8m +
60° (measured from
opposite side of road)
Building Setback – 6m
Comment
A 32.5m building could be
constructed at:
 14.14m from the
boundary under the
Interface type
(Precinct)
THAB zone on
opposite side
of Aroha
Avenue
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
upper levels and retail premises, or restaurants, cafes
and other eating places at street level.
One driveway may be provided to enable access to
parking spaces and service access associated with
buildings with frontage to Aroha Avenue.
Buildings must be a maximum of three storeys above
ground level at the road boundary or, alternatively, three
storeys above the roof of a semi-basement parking
structure. For the purposes of this rule, the height of a
semi-basement structure above ground level must be no
more than 50 per cent of the total height (floor level to the
top of the basement roof slab).
A 3m setback must be provided along the Aroha Avenue
boundary which must be integrated with the existing
footpath to form an extended pedestrian space and/or
outdoor seating area (including associated weather
protection).
Planting within the setback must consist of specimen
trees at a minimum of one every 6.5m along its full
length, with foliage lifted to 2m above the level of the
pedestrian space to enable people to walk beneath. The
specimen trees must be of a species which will achieve
a minimum height of 8m at maturity and must be of a
planting grade of 160l or larger.
No parking must be located in front of a building at
ground level except where it is located on the street
A minimum of 50 per cent of the facade of buildings at
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
setback above 18m
 Glazing (street-facing
façade) – 50% of width and
50% of height
 Yards – no control at front
boundary
Comment
default Town
Centre zone rules.
The Precinct rules do not
provide a height to
boundary control, but
limits height in this part of
the site to 3 stories above
a semi-basement parking
floor.
Interface type
(Precinct)
Notified PAUP Precinct Provision
ground level must comprise glazing and/or pedestrian
entries.
h. The minimum GFA of dwellings must be 70m2 but. The
minimum GFA may be reduced by 8m2 where a balcony
of 8.0m2 or greater is provided
i. The maximum GFA of individual non-residential
tenancies within buildings must be 250m2.
j. In the event that the buildings on the Aroha Avenue
frontage existing at 22 December 2011 have been
removed and buildings have not been constructed along
that frontage at the time any new buildings within the site
have been constructed less than 50m from the Aroha
Avenue road boundary, a 3m-wide landscape strip must
be provided along the road boundary. This landscape
strip must consist of a 1.8m high fence 3m from the
boundary with the intervening area densely planted with
trees and shrubs and must remain in place until such
time as construction of buildings along the frontage
commences.
Equivalent Updated Town
Centre Zone Provision (height
to boundary, setback, yards
etc) – Business Zone
evidence
Comment
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX F
PROPOSED HEIGHT CONTROL DIAGRAM
2988552
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX G
SUMMARY OF CONSTRAINTS ON TOWN CENTRE ZONES
2988552
Town Centres in urban Auckland (Albany to Takanini)
Town centre
Height
Volcanic Viewshaft / HSA
Historic Character / Pre-1944 / Historic
Heritage1
North Shore
Browns Bay
Sunnynook
Glenfield
Milford
Birkenhead
Northcote
Devonport
16.5/12.5m
16.5m
24.5m
24.5/16.5m
24.5/20.5/16.5m
24.5m
12.5m
No
No
No
No
No
No
HSA
No
No
No
No
No
No
Significant number of scheduled buildings.
Historic Character proposed by Council.
Waitakere
Te Atatu North
Glen Eden
16.5m
24.5m
No
No
No
Some scheduled buildings only.
Central Auckland
Avondale
Mt Albert
Point Chevalier
Stoddard Road
32.5m
16.5m
16.5m
16.5m
No
Viewshaft (18-27m)
No
Small area affected by Viewshaft
(13-20m)
Some Pre-1944
Some Pre-1944
No
No
Saint Lukes
Ponsonby
16-30m
12.5m
No
No
No
Historic Character
Some scheduled buildings
1
As updated in Auckland Council’s evidence, Topic 079.
Town centre
Height
Volcanic Viewshaft / HSA
Historic Character / Pre-1944 / Historic
Heritage1
Historic Character
Historic Character
Some Pre-1944
No
No
Some pre-1944
Pre-1944
Newton
Parnell
Remuera
Glen Innes
Panmure
Three Kings
Royal Oak
16.5m
12.5m
16.5m
32.5m
16.5-24.5m
16.5/24.5m
24.5m
Viewshaft (13.5-20m)
Viewshaft (11-37m)
Viewshaft (24-32m)
No
Viewshaft (7.5-20m)
No
Viewshaft affects approx. half of
town centre (16-27m)
Onehunga
Manukau/South
Howick
Highland Park
Pakuranga
Otahuhu
24.5m
Viewshaft (19.5-31m)
Historic Heritage Area
7-12.5m
24.5m
48.5m
12.5-24.5m
No
Viewshaft (26-39m)
No
No
Mangere
Ormiston
Otara
Hunters Corner
Papatoetoe
Manurewa
Takanini
16.5m
32.5m
16.5m
16.5m
24.5m
24.5m
16.5m
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Some scheduled buildings
No
No
Historic Heritage Area both sides of Great
South Road
No
No
No
No
Some pre-1944
No
No
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited
Submitter number 2968
Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts
(Geographical Areas)
Primary evidence
APPENDIX H
SCENTRE'S PROPERTIES IN ALBANY
2988552
APPENDIX I
MARK-UP OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO ALBANY CENTRE PRECINCT PROVISIONS
Proposed changes are shown in strikethrough and underline
Green text changes records proposed amendments by Auckland Council that are supported by
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited.
Red text changes records proposed amendments by Auckland Council that are not supported by
Scentre (New Zealand) Limited.
Grey highlighted text changes records proposed amendments by Scentre (New Zealand) Limited.
PART 2 - REGIONAL AND DISTRICT OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES»
Chapter F: Precinct objectives and policies
5
North
5.1 Albany Centre
The underlying zoning of land within this precinct is Metropolitan Centre, Business Park and Public Open Space –
Community zones. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct.
Precinct Description
The Albany Centre precinct covers the large emerging metropolitan centre located to the west of State Highway 1
and contained by Oteha Valley Road and Albany Expressway in the northern urban part of the North Shore.
The precinct recognises the component parts of the Metropolitan Centre zone on the north-facing sections of
Albany Centre and also the supporting role of the southern section covered by Business Park zone. It
identifies four sub-precincts with different development emphases and requires activities to develop in
accordance with the Albany Centre precinct plan 1: Albany Centre.
The main retail focus of the centre is to be the Civic Crescent area. The mainstreet-type retail area in the north
east will act as a catalyst for the grouping of employment-related activities in this area, and help to link the Albany
busway station with via the Main Street area with the and shopping centre in the Civic Crescent area. Retail
activities should generally be limited outside of these two areas to those activities that support the day-to-day
needs of office workers and residents, or involve retail formats that cannot be integrated into the Civic Crescent
and Main Street areas.
Commercial office development is encouraged throughout the centre, particularly in areas north of Don
Mackinnon Drive and also extensively in the southern section in athe business park environment.
Intensive residential development is encouraged to locate in certain parts of the precinct where the retail and
commercial focus is not as strong, particularly in areas beyond the core area circled by Don Mackinnon Drive.
Sub-precinct descriptions:
Albany Centre sub-precinct A
Is applied to particular areas within the Albany metropolitan centre which are suited for high-density residential
apartment living, with limited opportunity for convenience retail at ground level.
Albany Centre sub-precinct B
Is applied to particular areas within the Albany metropolitan centre which seek to encourage the establishment of
employment-generating activities, such as high-density office development, supported by a limited range of
convenience retail activities.
Albany Centre sub-precinct C
Is applied to particular areas within the Albany metropolitan centre which are suited for car-orientated commercial
and entertainment activities, limiting retail to those formats generally considered unsuitable for other higher
amenity areas of the Albany Centre precincts.
Albany Centre sub-precinct D
Is applied to particular areas within the southern section of Albany Centre which are suited for office and light
commercial activities, withand limited opportunity for retail in a specific location within the sub-precinct. This
reflects the approved comprehensive development plan for this area.
Objectives
The underlying zone and Auckland-wide objectives are as listed in the underlying Metropolitan Centre and
Business Park zones except as specified below apply in this precinct, in addition to those specified below:
1.
Development of the centre reflects the key features and outcomes of the Albany Centre Structure precinct
Pplan 1.
2.
A range of distinct areas or ‘sub­precincts’ within Albany centre where different predominant activities are
located, along with other support activities is provided.
3.
Ongoing use and development of the Albany integrated shopping centre, North Shore Domain and North
Harbour Stadium is not compromised by the location and development of other activities within Albany
centre.
4.
The use and development of the Civic Crescent area is maintained and enhanced as the retail focus for the
centre and is not compromised by the location and development of other activities within the Albany Centre
sub-precincts A-D.
Albany Centre sub-precinct A:
5.6. High-density residential development is the primary activity, and a limited range of retail uses is enabled
where they support the desirability and attractiveness of the area.
Albany Centre sub-precinct B:
6.7.
Significant employment opportunities are provided by high-intensity development in Albany centre to
support future population growth.
7.8.
High-density office development is the primary activity, with a limited range of retail uses where they
support the desirability and attractiveness of the area.
Albany Centre sub-precinct C:
8.9.
Car-orientated commercial and entertainment activities are the primary use, with a limited range of
retail uses where they support the desirability and attractiveness of the area.
Albany Centre sub-precinct D:
9.10. Significant employment opportunities are provided by high-quality office and light commercial development
in the southern section of Albany centre to support future population growth.
10.11. Office development in a business park environment is the primary activity, with a limited and specific
location for retail uses to support the desirability and attractiveness of the area that do not detract from the
retail focus provided in the central and northern part of Albany centre.
Policies
The policies are as listed in the underlying Metropolitan Centre and Business Park zones and Auckland-wide
policies apply in this precinct in addition to those except as specified below:
1.
Enable an appropriate mix and layout of activities, buildings, movement of pedestrians, cyclists and
vehicles, and open space networks within the centre precinct so as to achieve a sustainable, safe and
visually attractive environment, with vibrant public spaces that encourage community interaction.
2.
Provide for a range of opportunities for retail activities within the centre precinct that support the
desired employment, urban form and character outcomes for its different sub-precincts.
3.
Provide opportunities for intensively developed apartments within specified parts of the Albany centre to and
a high standard of residential amenity and design.
4.
Require that any development within the Centre Sub-precinct D provides sufficient off-street parking and
is designed and located to facilitate traffic movement (both vehicular and pedestrian) within the centre.
5.
Require development to create a connected green network that links the different parts of the
centreprecinct with parks and other public spaces as described in the Albany Centre precinct pPlan:
Albany Centre 1.
6.
Seek to ensure that Encourage all buildings, additions, alterations or development to make positive
contributions to the amenity of the centre precinct and its surrounds, help to achieve a
comprehensively-planned, well-integrated and attractive centre, and achieve high quality urban design
outcomes including:
a.
the creation of an attractive, active and lively retail street frontage to Civic Crescent and Cornerstone
Drive between Don Mackinnon Drive and Corban Avenue
7.
b.
enabling vehicle, cycle and pedestrian access throughout the Ccentre to help link the northern and
southern areas of the centre, including a new street between Don McKinnon Drive and Civic
Crescent
c.
maintaining views and pedestrian and cycle access along the axis to and from Spencer Ridge
Reserve and the central park area shown on the Albany Centre Structure Precinct pPlan 1:
Albany Centre.
Require development to complement, and where necessary provide for, pedestrian linkages between the
North Shore Domain and North Harbour Stadium and the major public transport points and public parking
areas within and adjacent to the wider centre.
8.
Focus retail and entertainment activities within the centre precinct predominantly on public streets,
particularly the central block south of Civic Crescent and the development of a Main Street area linking the
busway station with this area.
9.
Require activities adjoining the new Main Street on Cornerstone Drive to support the development of a
vibrant main street that encourages daytime and evening use of the area through the mix of activities,
including retail, cafes, restaurants, cinemas, offices and above ground floor residential apartments.
10.
Recognise the North Shore Domain and North Harbour Stadium as important regional facilities by requiring
new residential development to avoid, remedy or mitigate against any adverse effects generated beyond its
boundaries.
11.
Require development within the centre to be of an urban character appropriate to its sub-regional role, with
the creation of a strong local identity.
Elements that contribute to the creation of strong local identity include the various features shown in the Albany
Centre Structure Plan and:
a.
buildings in close proximity to site frontages
b.
active uses along street frontages and development above ground floor overlooking the street
c.
breaking down building forms into horizontal distances that create a human scale and visual interest, safety and
activity along street frontages for pedestrians
d.
street trees and landscaping that complement those already established within the centre and which are
ecologically and culturally appropriate to their location
e.
buildings that provide shelter for pedestrians and continuous areas of paving along streets to provide for
pedestrian amenity in the centre
f.
absence of large on-site parking areas between buildings and streets
g.
absence of blank walls along street frontages, and adjacent to and visible from other public spaces
h.
landmark buildings or features of innovative design on prominent sites that contribute to the creation of a unique
identity within the centre
i.
j.
access to daylight and sunlight within buildings and in streets, other public spaces and private outdoor
spaces.
Ability to stage development and provide adaptable buildings for changing activities.
Albany Centre sub-precinct A:
12.
Require development of high-density residential to provide for apartments with a high standard of residential
amenity and a limited amount of convenience retail.
Albany Centre sub-precinct B:
13.
Ensure Require that the potential of the sub-precinct to provide for employment opportunities is not
compromised by predominantly low-density development, or reverse sensitivity associated with inappropriate
forms or location of residential development.
14.
Encourage employment-generating activities such as high-density office development by limiting retailing to
activities that provide for the convenience needs of office activities and which do not diminish the amenity and
vibrancy of the sub-precinct.
Albany Centre sub-precinct C:
15.
Encourage the development of a general business area by enabling the establishment of car-orientated
commercial and entertainment activities and limiting retail activities to those formats which are unsuitable for
the other higher amenity parts of the Albany Centre precinct.
Albany Centre sub-precinct D:
16. Encourage employment-generating activities such as office development in a high-quality business park
setting.
17. LimitRestrict retailing activities to locations that provide for the needs of the office and light commercial
activities and which do not diminish the business park amenity of the sub-precinct.
5.5 Albany Centre
The underlying zoning of land within this precinct is the Metropolitan Centre zone (including sub-precincts A, B and
C), Business park zone (including sub-precinct D), and Public Open Space – Community Zone. Refer to the
planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct.
The provisions in Chapter I for the underlying zone and Auckland-wide provisions of Chapter H apply in this
precinct unless otherwise specified below.
The rules in this section implement the objectives and policies in Chapter F, section 5.5.
The activities, controls and assessment criteria in the underlying zone apply in the following precinct and subprecincts unless otherwise specified. Refer to planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct and subprecincts. The applicable underlying zones in relation to Albany Centre precinct include the Metropolitan Centre
zone (including sub-precincts A, B and C), Business Park zone (including sub-precinct D), and Public Open
Space - Civic and Community zone.
1. Activity tables
1.
The activities in the underlying zone and Auckland-wide activities apply in thise Albany Centre precinct
unless otherwise specified in the activity table below.
Activity table 1 - Sub-precinct A
Activity
Activity Status
Commerce
Entertainment facilities
RD
Food and beverage up to 200m2 GFA per sitetenancy site
P
Food and beverage greater than 200m2 GFA per sitetenancy site
RD
Garden centres
D
Marine retail
D
Motor vehicle sales
Offices greater than
Retail up to
100m2
Retail greater than
D
500m2
GFA per site
GFA per sitetenancy site
100m2
GFA per sitetenancy site
D
P
D
Supermarkets
NC
Trade suppliers
D
Industry
Light manufacturing and servicing
RD
Repair and maintenance services
RD
Warehousing and storage
RD
Development
Additions and alterations to buildings that are less than 15m2 in area on the facade of a
building that fronts a road or Public Open Space zone
P
Activity table 2 - Sub-precinct B
Activity
Activity
Status
Accommodation
Dwellings
RD
Retirement villages
RD
Supported residential care
RD
Commerce
Entertainment facilities
RD
Food and beverage up to 200m2 GFA per sitetenancy site
P
Food and beverage greater than 200m2 GFA per sitetenancy site
RD
Garden centres
D
Marine retail
D
Motor vehicle sales
D
Retail up to
100m2
GFA per sitetenancy site
P
Retail greater than 100m2 GFA per sitetenancy site
D
Supermarkets
NC
Trade suppliers
D
Industry
Light manufacturing and servicing
RD
Repair and maintenance services
RD
Warehousing and storage
RD
Development
Additions and alterations to buildings that are less than 15m2 in area on the facade of a
building that fronts a road or Public Open Space zone
P
Activity table 3 - Sub-precinct C
Activity
Activity
Status
Accommodation
Dwellings
RD
Retirement villages
RD
Supported residential care
RD
Commerce
Offices greater than 500m2 GFA per site
RD
Retail up to 2000m2 GFA per sitetenancy site
NC
Retail greater than 2000m2 GFA per sitetenancy site, including large format retail
P
Service stations
RD
Development
Additions and alterations to buildings that are less than 15m2 in area on the facade of a
building that fronts a road or Public Open Space zone
P
Activity table 4: Sub-precinct D
Activity
Activity
Status
Commerce
Retail up to 450m2 per tenancy within the Retail/Mixed Use Retail activity area (see Precinct
Plan 3)
P
Retail greater than 450m2 p e r t e n a n c y within the Retail/Mixed Use Retail activity area (see
Precinct Plan
3)
Retail greater than 450m2 p e r t e n a n c y within other activity areas (see Precinct Plan 3)
RD
NC
2. Land use controls
2.1 Dwellings in sub-precinct A
1.
Any new dwelling must be subject to a no-complaint covenant entered onto the property title and registered
in favour of the North Shore Stadium and North Shore Domain Trust.
2.
The no-complaint covenant will require any landowner or occupant to forego any right to lodge submissions
in opposition to, or otherwise restrict, noise sound from concerts at the stadium which are in accordance
with any approved framework plan, any lawfully established activities, any approved resource consent for a
controlled or restricted discretionary activity or liquor license renewal.
3. Development controls
1.
The underlying zone development controls and Auckland-wide controls apply in this precinct, unless
otherwise specified below. For permitted activities in the Albany Centre precinct and sub-precincts, the
development controls in the Metropolitan zone or the Business Park zone apply in the precinct or subprecinct unless otherwise stated below.
3.1 Compliance with Precinct Plan 1: Albany Centre
1.
Development must provide the streets (arterial, collector and local) within 20m of their location as shown in
Precinct Plan 1: Albany Centre, except that:
a.
local street (main street) must join Don McKinnon Drive in the same location as the collector (main
street)
b.
local street (main street) must be provided within 10m of its location as shown in Precinct Plan 1.
2.
The design of all streets, including dimensions and design features, must be in accordance with the relevant
figures in Appendix 11.5.1.
3.
All streets shown in Precinct Plan 1: Albany Centre must be transferred to the council as public roads
except those shown as local streets (public/private).
4.
Reserves must be provided in accordance with Precinct Plan 1: Albany Centre.
5.
Open air pedestrian only areas longer than 50m must have a clearway of 3.5m to enable access by
emergency vehicles with an overall minimum width between buildings of 12m.
6.
Development that does not comply with clause 1-5 aboveInfringement of this control is a
discretionary activity except for the following which are restricted discretionary activities:
a.
variations to the location, width and design of local streets
b.
variations to the location of the local street (main street), provided that the alignment follows the
secondary axis and is no more than 20m from the alignment at the boundary with the land zoned Public
Open Space - Civic and Community
c.
variations to the location, size and design of:
i.
reserves and open spaces
ii. identified features on Lot 2 DP 338562.
K7
3.2 Front yard
Table 1
Area
Minimum front yard
Sub-precinct A local streets where dwellings are
located on the ground floor
3m
Sub-precinct C arterial and collector (commercial)
5m
Sites fronting Oteha Valley Road
7.5m
1.
Any dDevelopment that does not comply with thenot meeting the front yard controls is a non
complying activity, except for the following which are restricted discretionary activities:
a.
in sub-precinct A, reducing the front yard to 1.8m
b.
on sites fronting Oteha Valley Road, the front yard may be reduced to 5m, provided that a minimum 40
per cent of that part of the building fronting Oteha Valley Road is fully glazed to provide showroom and
display areas.
3.3 Maximum building setback
1.
Buildings on sites in sub-precinct A or B that front arterial, collector (commercial) and local street
(commercial) must not be set back more than 5m from the road frontage for the full length of the building,
except that 40 per cent of the length of the building may be set back up to 15m where any setback greater
than 5m is at least 40m beyond any intersection with collector (main street) or local street (main street).
2.
Buildings on sites located along the local street connecting collector (main street) with Munroe Lane must
not be set back more than 3m from the road frontage for the full length of the building.
3.
Buildings on sites in sub-precinct C fronting Munroe Lane and Appian Way must not be set back more than
12m from the road frontage for the full length of the building.
4.
Any development not meeting the building setback controls is a non complying activity except for the
following which are restricted discretionary activities:
a.
Buildings on sites fronting a collector (main street) or local street (main street), where:
i.
the building setback is provided to accommodate plazas, eating areas, arcade entrances and
pedestrian through routes associated with a ground floor use and is no more than 12m, or
ii.
b.
the building setback accommodates rain gardens installed to mitigate the effects of stormwater
runoff and is no more than 3m.
Buildings on sites fronting arterials or local streets (commercial), where the building is set back more
than 15m but less than 20m, provided that the setback is at least 40m from any intersection with a
collector (main street) or local street (main street).
5.
Buildings on sites in sub-precinct D must be set back in relation to the setbacks shown in Precinct Plan 4:
Sub-precinct D building setbacks.
6.
Sites in sub-precinct D must provide 10m yard setback to Public Open Space zone boundaries.
3.4 Location of parking
1.
Ground floor parking within a building must not be located adjacent to the street frontage or any space in
public ownership. Buildings must be designed to accommodate a business or residential activity, depending
on the zone, between any ground floor parking and the building frontage.
2.
On sites in sub-precinct A, there must not be parking between any building and the front boundary of the
site. Parking must be located to the side of, the rear of, within or under buildings.
3.
On sites in sub-precinct C fronting Munroe Lane and Appian Way, no more than one aisle of parking may
be located directly between a building's frontage and the front boundary of the site. All other parking must
be located to the side of, the rear of, within or under buildings.
4.
Parking adjacent to the street frontage is provided for in Sub-precinct D consistent with Precinct Plan 4: SubK8
precinct D building setbacks.
5.
Any dDevelopment that does not comply with clauses 1 -4 abovenot meeting the location of parking
controls is a non complying activity, except for the following which is a restricted discretionary activity:
a.
ground floor parking located adjacent to the street frontage within a building, provided that it does not
occupy more than 20 per cent of the street frontage of that site.
3.5 Landscaping
1.
Sites in sub-precinct D must provide minimum landscaped areas as follows:
Table 2
Activity area
Office
Minimum landscaped
area
20%
Light commercial/Office
10%
Retail/Mixed use retail
No minimum
4. Assessment – Restricted discretionary activities
4.1 Matters of discretion
For development that is a restricted discretionary activity in the Albany Centre precinct, the council will restrict its
discretion to the following matters, in addition to the matters specified for the relevant restricted discretionary activities
in the underlying zone.
1. Sub-precinct A: entertainment facilities, food and beverage greater than 200m2 GFA per tenancy, light
manufacturing and servicing, repair and maintenance services, warehousing and storage
a. Intensity and scale
b. Noise, lighting and hours of operation
c. Sub-precinct A amenity
d. Residential displacement
2. Sub-precinct B: dwellings, retirement villages, supported residential care, entertainment facilities, food and
beverage greater than 200m2 GFA per tenancy, light manufacturing and servicing, repair and maintenance
services, warehousing and storage
a. Intensity and scale
b. Displacement of high density employment generating activities
c. Sub-precinct B vitality
3. Sub-precinct C: dwellings, retirement villages, supported residential care, offices greater than 500m2 per site,
service stations
a. Reverse sensitivity and displacement of car-oriented commercial and entertainment activities
4. Sub-precinct D: retail greater than 450m2 within the retail/mixed use retail activity area
a. Centre vitality
4.2 Assessment criteria
For development that is a restricted discretionary activity, in the Albany Centre precinct, the following assessment
criteria apply, in addition to the criteria specified for the relevant restricted discretionary activities in the underlying
zone:
1. Sub-precinct A: entertainment facilities, food and beverage greater than 200m2 GFA per tenancy, light
manufacturing and servicing, repair and maintenance services, warehousing and storage
a. Intensity and scale
i.
Refer to 6.2.1a of the Business zone rules
b. Noise, lighting and hours of operation
i.
Refer to 6.2.1b of the Business zone rules
c. Sub-precinct A amenity
a. Retail and industrial activities should:
 Not have a substantial adverse effect upon the amenity values and functions of sub-precinct
A, having regard to:
- the activity’s proposed size, composition and characteristics
- the area’s on-going ability to provide for the future needs of communities
 Provide a net positive benefit in terms of the community’s convenient access to retail and
industrial activities, including having regard to whether the failure to locate in sub-precinct A
would result in adverse environmental effects on the form, function or on-going capacity of
the area
K9
d.
2.
Residential displacement
a. Non-residential activities in sub-precinct A should not reduce the ability of residential activities
to establish and operate within sub-precinct A
Sub-precinct B: dwellings, retirement villages, supported residential care, entertainment facilities, food and
beverage greater than 200m2 GFA per tenancy, light manufacturing and servicing, repair and maintenance
services, warehousing and storage
a. Intensity and scale
i. The intensity and scale of the land use activity should be compatible with the planned future
form and character of the surrounding area
b. Displacement of high density employment generating activities
i. Low density development in sub-precinct B should not reduce the ability of high density
employment generating activities to establish and operate within sub-precinct B
c.
3.
4.
Sub-precinct B vitality
i. Residential, retail and industrial activities should:
 Not have a substantial adverse effect upon the amenity values and functions of sub-precinct
B, having regard to:
- the activity’s proposed size, composition and characteristics
- the area’s on-going ability to provide for the future needs of communities
 Provide a net positive benefit in terms of the community’s convenient access to residential,
retail and industrial activities, including having regard to whether the failure to locate in subprecinct B would result in adverse environmental effects on the form, function or on-going
capacity of the area
Sub-precinct C: dwellings, retirement villages, supported residential care, offices greater than 500m2 per site,
service stations
a. Reverse sensitivity and displacement of car-oriented commercial and entertainment activities
i.
Residential, offices greater than 500m2 per site and service stations should not create reverse
sensitivity effects or reduce the ability of car-orientated commercial and entertainment activities
to establish and operate within sub-precinct C
ii.
The scale and design of the activities should not be likely to attract further similar or supporting
activities
Sub-precinct D: retail greater than 450m2 per tenancy within the retail/mixed use retail activity area
a. Centre vitality
i.
Refer to 6.2.2b Centre Vitality in the Business zone rules.
5. Assessment - Development control infringements
5.1 Matters of discretion
In addition to the general matters set out in clause G2.3 of the gGeneral pProvisions and the relevant
assessment criteriaspecific matters set out for infringements in the Metropolitan Centre zone, the council
will restrict its discretion to the relevant matters listed below for the relevant when infringing a development
control infringement in the precinct:
1.
Compliance with Precinct Plan 1
a. Amenity and connectivity
b. Location of reserves and open space
2.
Front yard.
a. Amenity
b. Safety
Maximum building setbacks on collector (main street) or local (main street)
a. Amenity and provision of public access
b. Stormwater
Buildings on sites fronting arterials or local streets (commercial)
a. amenity
Ground floor parking adjacent to street frontage within a building
a. building design and adaptability
3.
4.
5.
5.2 Assessment criteria
In addition to the general assessment criteria in clause G2.3 of the General Provisions and the specific assessment
criteria for the infringement in the underlying zone and Auckland-wide rules, the council will consider the relevant
assessment criteria below for the development control infringement.
1.
Compliance with Pprecinct Pplan 1: Albany Centre
a.
Local streets should be provided to ensure good amenity and the same level of connectivity for
pedestrians and motorists as that indicated on Pprecinct Pplan 1: Albany Centre.
K10
b.
2.
Reserves and open spaces should be in a similar location and of a similar scale to those indicated in
Precinct Plan 1.
Front yard
a.
Any reduction of the front yard should ensure that:
i.
The privacy of residents is protected
ii.
The safety and amenity of the street is maintained.
b.
3.
4.
5.
On sites adjacent to Oteha Valley Road, any reduction of the front yard should ensure that a visually
appealing frontage to Oteha Valley Road is achieved.
Maximum building setbacks on collector (main street) or local (main street)
a. Amenity and provision of public access
i. The assessment criteria in clause 6.2.5c of the Business zone rules apply as if the area is a public
open space
b. Stormwater
i. The raingardens should be designed so as to enhance the amenity of the area and should adequately
mitigate the effects of stormwater runoff
Buildings on sites fronting arterials or local streets (commercial)
a. Amenity
i. The setback should enhance the amenity of the site and the street, and ensure that a visually
appealing frontage to the road is achieved
Ground floor parking adjacent to street frontage within a building
a. building design and adaptability
i. at ground floor, the building should be of a sufficient height and design (including windows if possible)
so that it can be adaptable to other uses.
K11
5. Precinct Plans
Precinct Plan 1: Albany Centre
Comment [BC1]: Delete this diagram
and replace with new Precinct Plan1 which
does not include indicative road between
Civic Crescent and Don McKinnon Drive.
K12
Precinct Plan 2: Sub-precincts
K13
Precinct Plan 3: Sub-precinct D activity areas
K14
Precinct Plan 4: Sub-precinct D building setbacks
K15