Revised Topic 081 Mangere Puhinui Existing Precincts Report

BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL

IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010

AND

IN THE MATTER of TOPIC 081f Rezoning and Precincts (Geographical Areas)

AND

IN THE MATTER of the submissions and further submissions set out in the Parties and Issues Report

EVIDENCE REPORT ON SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL BY DAVID ALAN WONG

MANGERE PUHINUI PRECINCT

27 JANUARY 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.! SUMMARY ...... 3! PART A: OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND ...... 5! 2.! INTRODUCTION ...... 5! 3.! CODE OF CONDUCT ...... 5! 4.! SCOPE ...... 5! 5.! INTERIM GUIDANCE FROM THE PANEL ...... 6! 6.! PAUP APPROACH TO PRECINCTS ...... 6! PART B: OVERVIEW OF THE MANGERE PUHINUI PRECINCT ...... 7! 7.! CONTEXT ...... 7! 8.! STATUTORY FRAMEWORK ...... 8! 9.! PAUP FRAMEWORK ...... 8! 10.! PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF SUBMISSIONS ...... 10! PART C: OVERVIEW OF SUBMISSIONS ...... 10! 11.! SUBMISSION THEMES ...... 10! PART D: ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS ...... 12! 12.! PRECINCT ASSESSMENT ...... 12! 13.! AUCKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED (AIAL) ...... 13! 14.! HORTICULTURE NEW ZEALAND – PUKEKOHE VEGETABLE GROWERS ASSOCIATION AND TE AKITAI WAIOHUA WAKA TAUA TRUST ...... 14! 15.! MAKAURAU MARAE MAORI TRUST INCORPORATED AND THE TE KAWERAU IWI TRIBAL AUTHORITY ...... 18! 16.! CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO OTHER PARTS OF THE PAUP ...... 20! 17.! CONCLUSIONS ...... 20! ATTACHMENT A: CV of Report Writer ...... 21! ATTACHMENT B: Planning Maps ...... 22! ATTACHMENT C: Track Changes for the Mangere Puhinui Precinct ...... 23!

1. SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of this Evidence Report (Report) is to consider submissions and further submissions to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts Geographic (Topic 081). This Report considers submissions and further submissions received by Auckland Council (the Council) in relation to the Mangere Puhinui precinct.

1.2 The Report includes proposals on whether, in my opinion, it is appropriate to support or not support the submissions, in full or in part, and what amendments, if any, should be made to address matters raised in submissions.

1.3 In the notified PAUP, the Mangere Puhinui precinct applies to areas of Mangere and Puhinui, located outside of the rural urban boundary (RUB). In the PAUP, the underlying zoning of the land within the precinct is Rural Production (RP), Public Open Space – Informal Recreation, Coastal Transition, and Special Purpose – Cemetery.

1.4 The precinct seeks:

(a) To recognise the relationship and values that tangata whenua have with the area;

(b) To maintain an open rural character and areas for food growing;

(d) To protect the significant geological features that remain in the area from damage or further development, including Pukaki Lagoon, Crater Hill, Mangere Lagoon Explosion Crater, Puketutu Island, and the remnants of Maungataketake.

The main differences between the precinct and the relevant overlays, zones or Auckland-wide rules are set out in Table 1 below:

Table 1

Main precinct provision or group of Difference from PAUP provisions changes

The objectives of the precinct provide In relation to objectives, the precinct is more

4 for the: restrictive than the underlying Rural Production zone. • Protection of the natural and cultural heritage resources; There are no objectives in the Rural Production zones that relate to these • Recognition or provision of the matters. relationship of tangata whenua and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga;

• Preservation of the natural coastal environment of the Manukau Harbour coastline and its tributaries.

The policies of the precinct seek to In relation to policies, the precinct is more ensure that development avoids restrictive than the underlying Rural adverse effects on the rural character, Production zone. visual amenity, high quality There are no policies in the Rural landscapes, and natural heritage Production zone that relate to these resources including geological matters. features and high class soils.

Additionally, the policies of the precinct require development to avoid adverse effects on the relationship of tangata whenua with their lands; and on any sites of historic, cultural or spiritual significance to tangata whenua.

Activity Table of the precinct provides The precinct is more restrictive than the for intensive farming, forestry within underlying Rural Production zone. 500m of Puhinui Road or MHWS, The Rural Production zone provides for animal breeding or boarding without intensive farming, forestry, animal breeding dogs, and rural industries as or boarding as permitted activities; and rural discretionary activities; and animal industries as restricted discretionary breeding or boarding with dogs as a

non-complying activity. activities.

PART A: OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 The purpose of this Report is to consider submissions and further submissions received by the Council in relation to the Mangere Puhinui precinct.

2.2 The Report includes proposals on whether, in my opinion, it is appropriate to support or not support the submissions, in full or in part, and what amendments, if any, should be made to address matters raised in submissions.

2.3 This Report has been prepared by David Alan Wong. The qualifications and experience of the Report writer are attached in Attachment A.

3. CODE OF CONDUCT

3.1 I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014 and that I agree to comply with it. I confirm that I have considered all the material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express, and that this evidence is within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person.

4. SCOPE

4.1 I am providing planning evidence in relation to the Mangere Puhinui precinct. In this Report I address submissions in relation to the Mangere Puhinui precinct which seek:

(a) To remove the site at 260 Ihumatao Road, Mangere from the Mangere Puhinui precinct, and place the site within the Auckland Airport precinct;

(b) To retain the Mangere Puhinui precinct;

(c) The reinstatement or inclusion within the precinct of the provisions from the Environment Court decision, Gavin H Wallace Ltd and Ors v Auckland Council [2012] NZEnvC 120 (the Wallace decision) and that additional protections are put in place to address Makaurau Marae and Te Kawerau a Maki Iwi status as identified in the Wallace decision above; and

(d) That objectives, policies, and methods be amended to:

i. Ensure that the mana whenua and kaitiaki roles of Te Kawerau a Maki are recognised in relation to development and activity within the Ihumatao Peninsula;

ii. Protect and enhance the amenity and character of the papakainga; and

iii. enhance the economic autonomy and development opportunities for Te Kawerau a Maki in the Ihumatao Peninsula.

4.2 In preparing this statement of evidence I have relied on the Auckland-wide evidence of John Duguid for Topic 080 Rezoning and Precincts (General) and Topic 081 which set out the statutory framework, methodology, principles and section 32 evaluations used to guide the development and application of zones and precincts.

5. INTERIM GUIDANCE FROM THE PANEL

5.1 I have read the Panel’s Interim Guidance directions and in particular those relating to:

(a) Chapter G: General Provisions, dated 9 March 2015;

(b) Best practice approaches to re-zoning and precincts, dated 31 July 2015;

(d) Chapter G: Regional and District Rules, dated 9 October 2015.

6. PAUP APPROACH TO PRECINCTS

6.1 The approach to precincts is detailed in the evidence of Mr Duguid. In particular Mr Duguid outlines the Plan structure and the relationship between overlays, zones, Auckland-wide and precinct provisions. Mr Duguid also provides an overview of the methodology for applying precincts and the types of precincts identified in the PAUP. I have read and agree with this evidence.

Section 32 and 32AA

6.2 As outlined in the Auckland Unitary Plan Evaluation Report (the Evaluation Report), the Council has focused its section 32 assessment on the objectives and provisions within the PAUP that represent significant changes in approach from those within the current operative Auckland RMA policies and plans. Whilst the Evaluation Report applies to the entire plan, the report targets the 50 topics where the provisions represent a significant policy shift.

6.3 No specific Evaluation Report was prepared in relation to the provisions relating to the Mangere Puhinui precinct as they did not represent a significant policy shift from the current operative provisions in the legacy plans.

PART B: OVERVIEW OF THE MANGERE PUHINUI PRECINCT

7. CONTEXT

7.1 The Mangere Puhinui precinct is located outside the RUB and includes areas of Mangere and Puhinui. The location and extent of the precinct as notified in the PAUP is shown in Map 1A contained in Attachment B.

7.2 The purpose of the precinct is:

(a) To recognise the relationship and values that tangata whenua have with the area;

(b) To maintain an open rural character and areas for food growing;

(d) To protect the significant geological features that remain in the area from damage or further development.

7.3 The PAUP precinct provisions are contained in Attachment C.

7.4 The underlying zoning of land in the Mangere Puhinui precinct is RP, Public Open Space – Informal Recreation, Coastal Transition, and Special Purpose – Cemetery.

7.5 The following key overlays apply to the Mangere Puhinui precinct:

(a) Outstanding Natural Features - Crater Hill, Pukaki Lagoon Volcano, Mangere Lagoon Explosion Crater, and the Puketutu Island Volcano;

(b) Sites and places of significance and value to Mana Whenua;

(d) Designation for Watercare Services, Odour Buffer Area and Application of Biosolids for Mangere Wastewater Treatment Plant;

(e) Designation for Watercare Services, Puketutu Island Rehabilitation;

(f) Designation for Auckland International Airport, Airspace Restrictions;

(g) Auckland International Airport, Aircraft Noise Areas;

(h) Air Quality Transport Corridor Separation;

(i) Significant Ecological Areas; and

(j) Coastal Inundation, natural hazards.

7.6 The precinct does not override the overlays or spatial controls listed at 7.5(a) to (j) above.

7.7 The surrounding area is characterised by its rural character, food growing activities, and important geological features. These features include Pukaki Lagoon, Crater Hill, Mangere Lagoon Explosion Crater, Puketutu Island, and the remnants of Maungataketake. Most of these have been modified through quarrying, but the remnants still remain.

8. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

8.1 The general statutory and PAUP framework is detailed in Mr Duguid’s evidence. I agree that the matters he discusses provide the relevant statutory framework for Topic 080 matters, and therefore do not repeat them here.

9. PAUP FRAMEWORK

Regional Policy Statement

9.1 The PAUP Regional Policy Statement (RPS) objectives and policies in relation to Chapters B4.1 Historic Heritage, B4.3.2 Landscape and Natural Features, B8.1 Rural Activities, and B8.2 Land with High Productive Potential are relevant to the Mangere Puhinui precinct.

9.2 Specific historic heritage objectives (B4.1) that relate to the Mangere Puhinui precinct include:

1. Auckland’s significant historic heritage places are identified and protected.

2. Significant historic heritage places are used appropriately and owners and the community are encouraged to actively protect and conserve these places.

9.3 Specific landscape and natural features objectives (B4.3.2) that relate to the Mangere Puhinui precinct include:

1. Auckland’s ONLs and ONFs are protected from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development. 2. The ancestral relationships of Mana Whenua with, and their perspectives on, the landscapes and natural features of Auckland is identified and provided for. … 4. The visual and physical integrity and values of Auckland's volcanic features that are of local, regional, national and/or international significance are protected and where practicable enhanced. … 7. The role of existing rural production is recognised in the management of landscape values. 9.4 Specific rural activities objectives (B8.1) that relate to the Mangere Puhinui precinct include:

… 2. Rural communities undertake rural production and other activities that support them while rural character is maintained. 3. Auckland’s rural areas outside the RUB, and rural and coastal towns and villages, are protected from inappropriate subdivision, urban use and development.

9.5 Objectives concerning land with high productive potential (B8.2) that relate to the Mangere Puhinui precinct include:

1. The subdivision, use and development of elite and prime land is managed to maintain its capability, flexibility and accessibility for primary production.

Mangere Puhinui Precinct

9.6 The Mangere Puhinui precinct provisions provide for a range of activities within the underlying RP zone as discretionary activities. These activities are intensive farming, forestry within 500m of Puhinui Road or MHWS, animal breeding or boarding without dogs, rural industries, and buildings > 300m2 GFA. Animal breeding or boarding with dogs is a non-complying activity requiring assessment under section 104D of the Resource Management Act 1991.

9.7 The matters for discretion and assessment include consideration of the adverse effects of development on the natural environment, cultural heritage values of

significance to tangata whenua, and the rural character and landscape amenity values.

10. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF SUBMISSIONS

10.1 As outlined in Mr Duguid’s evidence, a number of amendments are proposed which are, or may be out of scope of the submissions. This is to ensure:

(a) That the most appropriate PAUP method is used to address the precinct matters;

(b) The removal of duplication following a comparison review of the precinct with the amended PAUP position as proposed in the Council’s closing statements to the Panel; and

10.2 I have proposed a number of amendments to the precinct to correct minor technical or editorial errors, and to ensure consistency with the PAUP. There are no particular submissions to which these amendments respond. All amendments are shown in my track changes attached as Attachment C.

PART C: OVERVIEW OF SUBMISSIONS

11. SUBMISSION THEMES

11.1 A total of nine submission points have been received requesting relief in relation to the precinct. Of the nine submission points received:

(a) One submission point was received from Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL) (submission point number 5294-347), seeking to remove the site at 260 Ihumatao Road, Mangere from the Mangere Puhinui precinct and place the site within the Auckland Airport precinct. Two further submissions in support and one further submission partially opposing the primary submission were received;

(b) Two submission points were received from the Horticulture New Zealand - Pukekohe Vegetable Growers Association (Horticulture NZ) (submission point number 5431-376) and Te Akitai Waiohua Taua Trust (Te Akitai Waiohua) (submission point number 6386-16) seeking that the Mangere Puhinui precinct be retained. 12 further submissions in support, one further

submission partially supporting, and two further submissions partially opposing the primary submission were received;

(c) Two submission points were received from the Makaurau Marae Maori Trust Incorporated (submission point numbers 5802-2 and 5802-4) seeking:

i. That the provisions from the Wallace decision be reinstated within the precinct. Two further submissions in support, one further submission partially supporting, and one further submission partially opposing the primary submission were received; and

ii. That additional protections are put in place to address the status of Makaurau Marae and Te Kawerau a Maki as identified in the Wallace decision, such as a more restrictive zoning which does not allow for the commencement of intensification or urban activity until appropriate protections are put in place. Two further submissions in support, one further submission partially supporting, and one further submission partially opposing the primary submission were received;

(d) Four submission points were received from the Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority (submission point numbers 5814-2, 5814-4, 5814-7, and 5814-9) seeking:

i. That the provisions from the Wallace decision be included within the precinct. One further submission partially supporting the primary submission was received;

ii. Additional or further protections to address the status of Makaurau Marae and Te Kawerau a Maki Iwi within the rohe as identified in the Wallace decision. No further submissions were received to this submission;

iii. Additional objectives, policies and methods to ensure that the mana whenua and kaitiaki role of Te Kawerau a Maki is recognised in relation to development and activity within the Ihumatao Peninsula. One further submission partially supporting the primary submission was received to this submission; and

iv. Additional objectives, policies and methods to protect and enhance the amenity and character of the papakainga, and enhance the economic autonomy and development opportunities for Te Kawerau a Maki in the

Ihumatao Peninsula. One further submission partially supporting the primary submission was received.

PART D: ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS

12. PRECINCT ASSESSMENT

12.1 The main differences between this proposed precinct and the relevant overlays, zone or Auckland-wide controls/Chapter G provisions are outlined in Table 1 above.

12.2 Having regard to the requirements of section 32 and 32AA of the RMA and the other statutory criteria of the RMA outlined in the evidence of Mr Duguid and the matters raised by submitters, I consider that Map 1B within Attachment B and Attachment C is appropriate because the changes reflect:

(a) The Council’s position of extending the RUB to include 260 Ihumatao Road and 619 Oruarangi Road, rezoning this land to Future Urban zone, and applying the Mangere Gateway precinct over this land. The Mangere-Puhinui precinct is no longer applicable as the precinct applies only to land outside the RUB. Therefore, while the extent of the Mangere Puhinui precinct has been amended, the Council is not proposing any substantive changes to the provisions of the Mangere Puhinui precinct. I am, however, proposing some minor amendments to correct technical or editorial errors and to ensure consistency of terminology across the PAUP;

(b) The Council’s position of extending the RUB at Puhinui, rezoning this land to Light Industry and Large Lot zone, and applying the proposed Puhinui precinct to manage the effects of development on the cultural landscape values of the entire Puhinui peninsula for parts of the area within the RUB, and other parts which sit outside the RUB i.e. Pukaki peninsula and the Crater Hill area, which have an underlying Rural Production zoning. This will ensure that an integrated and consistent approach is taken to managing the effects of development on cultural landscape values across the Puhinui peninsula. It is proposed that the Puhinui precinct replace the Mangere Puhinui precinct over the Puhinui peninsula. This is discussed further in the joint evidence statement of Nicholas Lau and myself on behalf of the Council for Topic 081 in relation to the Puhinui precinct;

(c) The need to retain the remainder of the Mangere Puhinui precinct as it is appropriate for the on-going use and development of the underlying Rural

Production zone, located outside the RUB, subject to minor amendments and to provide clarity.

12.3 I discuss the various submission points in relation to the Mangere Puhinui precinct by submitter below.

13. AUCKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED (AIAL)

Remove the site at 260 Ihumatao Road, Mangere from the Mangere Puhinui precinct

13.1 AIAL (submission point number 5294-347) seeks that the site at 260 Ihumatao Road, Mangere, be removed from the Mangere Puhinui precinct, and be placed within the Auckland Airport precinct (refer Map 2).

Map 2 – 260 Ihumatao Road, Mangere as notified (RP zone) in the PAUP

Discussion

13.2 The Council supports the inclusion of the subject site within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D, with underlying Future Urban (FU) zoning.

13.3 I consider that the application of the Mangere Puhinui precinct to the site at 260 Ihumatao Road is no longer appropriate in light of the Council’s position to:

• Include the site within the RUB;

• Rezone the site from RP to FU zone; and

• As a consequence of the above, the site has been included within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D.

13.4 AIAL’s submission was allocated to Topic 080 Special Purpose – Airport zone, and is addressed in the evidence of Sukhdeep Singh dated 3 December 2015.

Conclusion

13.5 I consider that the application of the Mangere Puhinui precinct to the site at 260 Ihumatao Road is no longer appropriate in light of the Council’s position to include the site within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D, with underlying FU zoning.

14. HORTICULTURE NEW ZEALAND – PUKEKOHE VEGETABLE GROWERS ASSOCIATION AND TE AKITAI WAIOHUA WAKA TAUA TRUST

Retain the Mangere Puhinui precinct

14.1 Horticulture NZ (submission point number 5431-376) and Te Akitai Waiohua (submission point number 6386-16) seek that the Mangere Puhinui precinct be retained.

14.2 Horticulture NZ supports the Mangere Puhinui precinct, particularly its purpose being to recognise the relationship and values that tangata whenua have within the area, and maintaining the open rural character and areas for food growing.

14.3 Te Akitai Waiohua generally supports the application and extent of the Mangere Puhinui precinct and supporting planning framework.

Discussion

14.4 As noted in 12.2 above, the extent of the Mangere Puhinui precinct has been reduced, but there are no substantive changes proposed to be made to the provisions. In the notified PAUP, the Mangere Puhinui precinct is applied to land located outside the RUB, generally zoned RP and Public Open Space. It is my view that the retention of the Mangere Puhinui precinct is no longer appropriate in light of the Council’s position to include the following areas within the RUB:

(a) The site at 260 Ihumatao Road, Mangere;

(b) The land along Retreat Drive, Mangere located directly to the east of Pukaki Crater;

(d) All the land located to the south of Waokauri Creek; and

(e) Apply a new precinct to the entire Puhinui area to ensure that the effects of development on the cultural landscape values apply equally to land within and outside the RUB.

14.5 I have discussed the Council’s position to include 260 Ihumatao Road within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D in 13.1 to 13.5 above.

14.6 The Council has undertaken structure planning for the Puhinui area, which has informed the Council’s position to include the areas identified in 14.4(b) to (d) above within the RUB, and to respond to the issues raised in submissions to the PAUP regarding the RUB and land use provisions for the Puhinui area. This is discussed further in my evidence for Topic 017 RUB (South – Puhinui) (Topic 017) dated 16 October 2015.

14.7 As part of the structure planning work undertaken for Puhinui, the Council has been working in partnership with Te Akitai Waiohua to identify the cultural landscape values of importance to them, and translating these values into planning provisions for a new Puhinui precinct. The Puhinui precinct seeks to manage the effects of future development on the cultural landscape values of the area. Te Akitai Waiohua are recognised as mana whenua for the Puhinui area.

14.8 In my opinion, the application of the Mangere Puhinui precinct is no longer appropriate for the reasons set out in 14.4 above. It is my view, that there is a need to apply a new precinct over the Puhinui peninsula for the areas within and outside the RUB (known as the Puhinui precinct). Key objectives proposed for the new precinct include:

(a) Mana Whenua cultural, spiritual and historical values and their relationship associated with the Māori cultural landscape, including ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga, in the Puhinui precinct are identified, recognised, protected, and enhanced. These values include but are not limited to:

i. Pūkaki Marae and its connections within the Māori cultural landscape;

ii. Identified sites, places and areas, waahi tapu and other taonga;

iii. Identified views and connections between existing or historical cultural sites, places and areas;

iv. Coastal edge and waterways;

v. Fresh water streams;

vi. Mauri, particularly in relation to freshwater and coastal resources; and

vii. Identified historical physical connections through landscape including Portage routes.

(b) Subdivision, use and development is managed in an integrated manner to avoid where practicable, or otherwise remedy or mitigate, adverse effects on the natural coastal environment, and significant ecological areas within the Manukau Harbour, as well as its tributaries.

(c) Subdivision, use and development is managed to maintain or enhance water quality within the Puhinui freshwater catchment and receiving coastal environment, including the integration of Mana Whenua values, mauri, matauranga and tikanga associated with fresh water and coastal water resources.

(d) Subdivision, use and development is designed and located to avoid, or otherwise remedy or mitigate, adverse effects on those landscape features identified as Outstanding Natural Features, and areas with high levels of sensitivity to landscape modification in the cultural landscape, which contribute to the ecological, geological, cultural, spiritual and amenity values of the precinct.

(e) The location, scale and form of development is managed within the precinct to recognise, avoid, remedy or mitigate any potential for significant adverse effects on the Auckland International Airport which may affect airport operations.

(f) Puhinui Road (State Highway 20B) is developed as a southern gateway connection to Auckland International Airport, to avoid where practicable, or otherwise remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the environment while having regard to the following matters:

i. High quality urban design, infrastructure and landscaping within and alongside the gateway, to enhance the sense of arrival and departure from Auckland and to reflect the cultural significance of the Puhinui area to Mana Whenua;

ii. Improvements in connectivity and accessibility to the surrounding transport network in the precinct, for all transport modes;

iii. Other operational requirements of the Auckland International Airport, existing designation, and future transport infrastructure requirements; and

iv. The need to avoid or otherwise remedy or mitigate any adverse impacts of infrastructure development, on mana whenua values, including the Mana Whenua Management precinct, and coastal margins which are receiving environments.

(g) Subdivision and development of land is staged to ensure adequate transport infrastructure capacity is in place prior to development.

14.9 I note that the structure planning work for the Puhinui area has also informed the Council’s position to retain the Pukaki Peninsula and Crater Hill area outside the RUB due the peninsula’s elite soils, and the significant environmental and cultural heritage values of both areas. The Council is not seeking to change the underlying RP zoning of the Pukaki Peninsula and Crater Hill area or their use for productive rural uses.

14.10 A separate joint statement of evidence of Nicholas Lau and myself on behalf of the Council in relation to the proposed Puhinui precinct will be presented in Topic 081.

Conclusion

14.11 For the Puhinui area located adjacent to the South-Western Motorway to the east and in close proximity to Auckland International Airport to the west, I consider that replacing the Mangere Puhinui precinct with the Puhinui precinct will enable the adverse effects of future development to be avoided, remedied or mitigated on the cultural landscape values, and enable staging of development of land with infrastructure.

15. MAKAURAU MARAE MAORI TRUST INCORPORATED AND THE TE KAWERAU IWI TRIBAL AUTHORITY

15.1 Submission points from the Makaurau Marae Maori Trust (submission point numbers 5802-2 and 5802-4) and the Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority (submission point numbers 5814-2, 5814-4, 5814-7, and 5814-9) seek:

(a) That the provisions from the provisions from the Wallace decision be reinstated within the precinct;

(b) That additional protections are put in place to address the status of Makaurau Marae and Te Kawerau a Maki Iwi within the rohe identified in the Wallace decision;

(d) That additional or further protections be included to address Makaurau Marae and Te Kawerau a Maki Iwi status within the rohe identified in the Wallace decision;

(e) Additional objectives, policies and methods be included to ensure that the mana whenua and kaitiaki role of Te Kawerau a Maki is recognised in relation to development and activity within the Ihumatao Peninsula; and

(f) Additional objectives, policies and methods be included to protect and enhance the amenity and character of the papakainga, and enhance the economic autonomy and development opportunities for Te Kawerau a Maki in the Ihumatao Peninsula.

Discussion

15.2 The submissions of the Makaurau Marae Maori Trust and the Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority seek that the Mangere Puhinui precinct be managed in accordance with the Wallace decision.

15.3 In that decision, the Court held that the land in the Ihumatao area should be brought within the Metropolitan Urban Limit and that the development of a structure plan for the subject area, including consultation with Mana Whenua, would adequately recognise the significant cultural heritage and landscape values, and provide for more future development of the land.

15.4 In giving effect to this decision in the PAUP, the Council has included the subject land within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D, with an underlying FU zone. I note that the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D excludes the Makarau Marae and papakainga, which are located within the Special Purpose – Maori Purpose zone (refer Map 3).

Map 3 - Land within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D, zoned FU in the notified PAUP

Land in the Mangere Gateway Sub- precinct D, zoned Future Urban zone Sub-precinct D

619 Oruarangi Road

15.5 The Council is considering changes to zoning and precinct boundaries to address the submissions from Makaurau Marae Maori Trust and the Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority and that it is more appropriate to consider these submissions in the broader context of the Mangere Gateway precinct.

15.6 As part of these changes, the Council supports changing the zoning of 619 Oruarangi Road from RP to FU zone, and including the site within the Mangere Gateway Sub- precinct E (refer Map 3 above).

15.7 The submissions of the Makaurau Marae Maori Trust and the Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority, including the relief sought in 15.1(a)-(f) above and the matters addressed in 15.5 above will be covered in the evidence of Todd Webb on behalf of the Council in relation to the Mangere Gateway precinct for Topic 081.

16. CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO OTHER PARTS OF THE PAUP

16.1 The consequential amendments required to other parts of the Plan as a result of my evidence are provided in Map 1B of Attachment B showing the Mangere Puhinui precinct with revised precinct extent.

17. CONCLUSIONS

17.1 I have considered the submissions received in relation to the Mangere Puhinui precinct. Overall, I support a reduction in the extent of the Mangere Puhinui precinct is necessary as a consequence of the Council’s position to include:

• 260 Ihumatao Road within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct D; and

• 619 Oruarangi Road within the Mangere Gateway Sub-precinct E.

17.2 The Council has been working with Te Akitai Waiohua to prepare a set of provisions for the Puhinui precinct. It remains my view that these provisions will address Te Akitai’s concerns, while managing the effects of future development on the cultural landscape values of Puhinui.

17.3 The submissions of Makaukau Marae Maori Trust Incorporated and the Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Trust Authority are addressed in the evidence of Todd Webb for the Mangere Gateway precinct.

17.4 In my opinion, the remaining part of the Mangere Puhinui precinct appropriately provides for the on-going use and development of the underlying Rural Production zone located outside the RUB, and should be retained, subject to minor amendments of the provisions to provide consistency and clarity (refer Attachment C).

17.5 I consider that the changes outlined in my evidence, and as provided in the Attachments most appropriately meet the purpose of the RMA and the objectives of the PAUP.

David Alan Wong

27 January 2016

ATTACHMENT A: CV of Report Writer

Career Summary

Career Period Role Organisation

2010 to present Principal Planner Auckland Council

2000 to 2010 Senior Planner Auckland Council

1991 to 2000 Planner Manukau City Council

Qualifications

Bachelor of Planning, University of Auckland, 1992.

Bachelor of Arts, University of Auckland, 1989.

Affiliations

Full member of the New Zealand Planning Institute.

Career Summary

I have over twenty years’ experience working in the former Manukau City Council, the former Auckland City Council, and Auckland Council on designations, plan changes, and spatial plans. For the last two years I have been Lead Planner for the Otara-Papatoetoe Area Plan, and contributed to the development of the rural urban boundary at Puhinui in the PAUP.

ATTACHMENT B: Planning Maps

Map 1A – Mangere Puhinui precinct as notified in the PAUP

Map 1B – Mangere Puhinui precinct with revised application of the precinct

ATTACHMENT C: Track Changes for the Mangere Puhinui Precinct

Editorial notes:

Council's proposed changes are shown in strikethrough and underline

Black text changes record amendments proposed in track changes version

Yellow highlighted text changes record amendments that are considered to be outside the scope of submissions

Grey highlighted text changes records amendments that are consequential amendments from previous hearings/evidence. Any additional changes to consequential amendments are highlighted in pink.

Numbering of this precinct will be reviewed as part of the overall review of the UP numbering protocols.

6.1 Māngere Puhinui

The objectives and policies of the underlying Rural Production zone, Public Open Space - Comment [1]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency Informal Recreation zone, Coastal Transition zone and Special Purpose Cemetery zone with the PAUP. apply in the following precinct unless otherwise specified. Refer to planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct.

Precinct description

The Mangere Puhinui precinct is comprised of land to the north and east of the Auckland International Airport, outside of the rural urban boundary. It includes areas of Mangere and Puhinui which were once main areas of Māori settlement (c1000AD – 1860s) as documented in the Report of the Waitangi Tribunal on the Manukau Claim 1985, and which are now largely in rural or public open space use today.

Mangere and Puhinui were strategic areas for settlement by early Māori due to their proximity to the coast (Manukau Harbour and its tributaries) for collecting kaimoana and access, fertile soils for food growing, and maunga for defense purposes. Evidence of Māori settlement has been and continues to be identified through the large number of archaeological sites found within the Mangere and Puhinui areas, and documenting of history passed through the generations of local iwi.

The area contains important geological features, including Pukaki Lagoon, Crater Hill, Mangere Lagoon Explosion Crater, Puketutu Island, and the remnants of Maungataketake. Most of these have been modified through quarrying, but the remnants still remain. The volcanic soils of Mangere and Puhinui are well known as a prolific food growing area, particularly compared to other areas around the region, due to the highly fertile soils, moderate climate and gentle topography.

Mangere Mountain, Pukeiti, and Otuataua also form part of the Mangere volcanic field in the locality, however these are protected via the Public Open Space - Conservation zone controls. Waitomokoia which is located within the Villa Maria Estate and within the urban boundary sits outside of the precinct. The purpose of the precinct is to recognise the relationship and values that tangata whenua have with the area, maintain an open rural character and areas for food growing, and to protect waahi tapu from being destroyed during site development. The purpose of the precinct is also to protect the significant geological features that remain in the area from damage or further development.

The underlying zones zoning of land within this precinct are Rural Production, Public Comment [2]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency Open space – Informal Recreation, Coastal Transition, and Special Purpose – Cemetery with the PAUP. zones. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct. Comment [3]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency The precinct should also be read in conjunction with the Mangere Gateway Precinct. with the PAUP.

Objectives

The underlying zones and Auckland-wide objectives apply to this precinct, in Comment [4]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency addition to those objectives are as listed in the Rural Production zone, Public Open Space with the PAUP. – Informal Recreation zone, Coastal Transition zone, and Special Purpose – Cemetery zone except as specified below:

1. Landscape features, areas of high landscape quality, and areas with high levels of sensitivity to landscape modification are protected.

2. The open rural character of the Mangere Puhinui area is maintained, and soil resources are managed in a way that retains their productive potential.

3. Natural and cultural heritage resources are protected.

4. Recognition or provision is made for the relationship of tangata whenua and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga.

5. The natural coastal environment of the Manukau Harbour coastline and its tributaries is preserved.

Policies

The underlying zones and Auckland-wide policies apply in this precinct, in addition Comment [5]: Amendment to correct minor to those policies are as listed in the Rural Production zone except as specified below: editorial or technical error to ensure consistency with the PAUP. 1. Require buildings to be sited and designed to avoid any adverse effects on the rural character and visual amenity values of the Mangere Puhinui area.

2. Require development to avoid adverse effects on the landscape amenity values of the area, particularly in areas of high quality landscapes.

3. Avoid adverse effects on natural heritage resources, including geological features and high class soils.

4. Require the use or development of land to avoid adverse effects on the relationship of tangata whenua with their lands.

5. Require development to avoid adverse effects on any sites of historic, cultural or spiritual significance to tangata whenua.

6.16 Māngere Puhinui

The activities, controls and assessment criteria in the underlying Rural Production zone, Public Open Space – Informal Recreation zone, Coastal Transition zone, Special Purpose – Cemetery zone and Auckland-wide rules apply in the following precinct unless otherwise specified below. Refer to planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct. Comment [6]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency with the PAUP. 1. Activity table

The underlying activities in the Rural Production zone and Auckland-wide activity tables Comment [7]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency apply in this the Mangere Puhinui precinct unless otherwise specified in the activity table with the PAUP. below. Comment [8]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency Activity Activity with the PAUP. Status Comment [9]: Amendment to correct minor editorial or technical error to ensure consistency Rural with the PAUP.

Intensive farming D

Forestry within 500m of Puhinui Road or MHWS D

Animal breeding or boarding without dogs D

Animal breeding or boarding including dogs NC

Rural industries D Buildings >300m² GFA D

1. Assessment - Discretionary activities

The council, while not limiting the exercise of its discretion, may consider the Comment [10]: Amendment to ensure consistency with the PAUP. Assessment particular matters specified below for all discretionary activities in the Mangere criteria for discretionary activities are not Puhinui precinct: specified in the PAUP.

1. Maori culture and heritage a. The proposal should not adversely affect the mana or amenity values of marae and papakainga housing in the vicinity.

b. The applicant should consider the cultural, historical and spiritual significance of the area to tangata whenua.

c. The proposal should not adversely affect sites and features of cultural, historical and spiritual significance, including waahi tapu.

d. The proposal should not have any adverse effect on water bodies, including the Manukau Harbour, coastal environment, streams or its tributaries.

2. Landscape and amenity values a. The proposal should not adversely affect the open rural character of the surrounding area.

b. The proposal should not modify sensitive landscapes or geological features.

c. The proposal should not detract from high quality landscapes and significant landforms.