Original submission number 2705. FS 216 Name of person submitting evidence:-Gayleen Mackereth (Chairperson, Howick Ratepayers and Residents Association Inc).

Organisation: Howick Ratepayers and Residents Association Inc Address PO Box 38-370 Howick

Email: [email protected] : Phone 5358098 We live in the following local board area: Howick Local Board

We wish to be heard.

Person presenting evidence:

Gayleen Mackereth M.A.(Hons) Dip ELT, GDITE, Efellow 2004.

Howick resident for 36 years. ------

Introduction to Heritage:PAUP

Auckland has a rich historic heritage. Our historic heritage is unique to ; it cannot be duplicated or replaced. Auckland’s historic heritage manifests in many different ways, and exhibits a range of values, which may evolve over time. Historic heritage places can range from individual features or structures to areas and landscapes. They can encompass multiple features, including buildings and structures, archaeological and maritime sites, gardens and plantings, places of historical or cultural importance, including sites and places of significance to Mana Whenua (see appendix1) , areas, townscapes, streetscapes, landscapes, and other places of heritage value.

Historic heritage is important to Auckland because it helps us understand and appreciate our history, culture and identity. Our heritage contributes to Auckland’s distinctiveness as a visitor destination and to its economic vitality. (See appendix2)

------2705-16 FS 216 Special Character Overlay - Business and residential Overlay E3.1 Bus. & Res. special character areas ( Pt 3 Ch J 3.6.5) )We applaud Heritage status allotted to buildings in the Howick Town Centre

We are tired and we are angry. We are exhausted by the continually changing sands of the Council's track changes and changing evidence.

One minute we have Howick as a Special Historic Character area, next we are informed that Special Historic Character is to be deleted and Historic Character is the buzz word and the Council wishes to obliterate any mention of Special Character or local amenity-all of which are the notified version of the Unitary Plan for Howick.

Next we have track changes which caused so much anger

3. Development controls

3.1 Building height 1. Buildings in the Special Character business overlay - Howick, must not exceed the height limits shown on Figure 1 below. 2. Buildings that do not comply with this control are a discretionary activity.

Comment: Removed as Howick does not meet the criteria for Historic Character – Howick could be relocated within the Built Environment section, or become a Precinct

Figure 1: Howick Town Centre and surrounds height controls Comment: Removed figure 1 as does not meet the criteria for Historic Character

However as a result of our evidence for topics 029-030, we are delighted to have received the interim guidance from the Commissioners that Howick should remain a Special Character Area.

Not content with this advice the Council then brought out the changes in the map below showing Special Character deleted for Howick Village (business area), and, from a limited area surveyed by the Council, most of the pre 1944 buildings in the small area on the map-deleted, except for some listed buildings. (we will give further information on this later in this evidence)

No survey was done of the larger area such as Bleakhouse Road and Sale St where a lot of the original Fencible Officers had their homes, a number of which are listed "Historic B" buildings now.

Next we submitted our survey saying we wanted to be heard and were called to a meeting at the Council with planners supposedly "independent" yet part of the Council team.

The evidence from these "independent" planners relegates Howick Village to a "Precinct" with a number of protections transferred from the original City documents.

And to our delight the original height map has been re-instated.

BUT next thing we learnt from the media was that in fact, that this has been changed in secret by Council and we are looking at buildings over 10 metres (3 storeys high) (previous limit 9 metres) on the most scenic ridge in Howick ruining the magnificent views and streetscape. This means the latest Council map above is out again, or redrawn.

Is it then surprising that we feel very suspicious of the idea of a Precinct and believe it will not over time protect Howick Village from undue and detrimental exploitation?

The juxtaposition of two articles in our local newspaper, both on the same date, the first about the Council's proposed increases in height in the Village and the intensification of the northern side of the village into apartments and terrace housing, blocking our world renown views, and the other article from another arm of the Council extolling the virtues of quaint Howick Village for tourism. This made sad and confusing reading. (See Appendix 2)

Then a week later we had a NZ- Chinese film made at Howick beach and in China, set to air to millions and the British Director enthusing over the quaint Howick Village and the thousands of tourists who will want to flock here. (Appendix 2)

Is the PAUP and the Council missing something about Howick which we all know??

What then is the reality?

In the notified PAUP the Howick Village and immediate surrounds show an area covered by a Special Character Business overlay. This overlay included height restrictions to preserve the Village low rise character and a number of other protections of our heritage, mainly transferred from the Council Heritage Plans.

The omission, currently, of Howick as an Historic Character Area (unnotified changed terminology and criteria) stems from the very poor survey done on Howick originally amongst the raft of excellent surveys done on Auckland's Heritage by the legacy councils. In comparison with the full and creditable surveys done on other areas, the Howick survey, HRRA believes was a disgrace.

Howick as the oldest settled European village in Auckland deserves a special status. The Fencible Soldiers rowed ashore at Howick beach on 14th November 1847, saw the first building erected in Howick the Selwyn church, under Bishop Selwyn himself, then constructed their "wet canteen " now Shamrock Cottage. It was later that they then fortified the hill at the end of the (now) main street in 1860* which became Stockade Hill used to protect the early settlers. (Verified by Alan La Roche, historian ) That is early history in Auckland! (* this is probably what lead Mr Mathews to lump Howick with Panmure as 1860 settlement .)

Anthony Mathews (Council) in his evidence for 010 speaks of the benchmark Washington Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban areas. "These places are a finite non- renewable resource that cannot be replaced once destroyed." Key points: (his emphasis) a) Urban patterns as defined by lots and streets; b) Relationships between buildings and green and open spaces; c) The formal appearance, interior and exterior, of buildings as defined by scale, size, style, construction, materials, colour and decoration; d) The relationship between the town or urban area and its surrounding setting, both natural and man-made; and e) The various functions that the town or urban area has acquired over time.

Mr Mathews then goes on to mention in the PAUP 6.12 "Historic Character Areas will meet a lower threshold when assessed against heritage values set out in B4.2, as distinct from Historic Heritage Areas, which are assessed against criteria set out in B4.1."

Unfortunately he then decides that both of these definitions should be lumped together under Historic Character areas and that the defining characteristic of Historic Character is that the old buildings must be in groups.

In this we feel there is a grave error and leads to the singling out of small areas of townships of a later build, even a century later than Howick, for Historic Character status yet they have no nationally listed Historic buildings, and in the minds of the people, are not historic towns in a way that Howick resonates with all people.

In our previous evidence we provided the sites which we believed had historic status in Howick Village (See Appendix 1). We note that the Planners we spoke to in a recent meeting on this topic including Anthony Mathews and Lisa Mein, only verified the sites listed Historic A or B, but our information also came from the records and dates of significant historic heritage sites such as the research of Alan la Roche a noted Howick author and historian (author of the history of Howick (Grey's Folly) and founder of the Howick Historic Village.

The most important thing about Howick is that is different from almost all other areas retaining their Historic Character status. It is the actual history of the area and the listed Historic A and B

buildings and the recognized historic status which is ingrained in the history of the Howick area and marked by re-enactments and events in the Village and by the type of businesses building on this status.

It is that unique view of the strategically placed oldest Selwyn church in NZ dominating the streetscape which draws the eye and defines the town as historic. This must be recognized as unique and we applaud the interim guidance that Howick should retain its Special Character

status.

Bishop Selwyn knew what he was doing when he sited the church. It was a beacon for travellers making their way overland, but most importantly it had sweeping views down to the sea and the beach and any strategic routes for ships or hostilities.

This view has now been blocked in part by an apartment block on the side opposite the church. This is the type of sacrilege we want avoided and it must be noted that only action by Howick Residents and Ratepayers at the time the building was proposed prevented it going any higher and also dominating the streetscape totally. We are determined to prevent this reoccurring as it appears exactly the same mistakes are being made in the latest "secret" Spatial Planning maps.

We believe that the sight line from the spire of old Selwyn church must regulate all other height limits in the Village to retain a cohesive streetscape. Clearly then incongruous "Blokhaus" style buildings and apartments must not be permitted to grow and overshadow or dominate and MUST NOT be VISIBLE in the context of the Howick Village

HRRA totally reject the Spatial Planning maps released in the news .Unbelievably foolishly, the Council proposes numerous multistorey apartment buildings obstructing the amazing and extensive views from Howick Village and Stockade Hill. THIS NEW PROPOSAL MUST BE STOPPED. HOWICK PEOPLE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS. APARTMENTS CANNOT BE BUILT ON THE SEAWARD SIDE of the Village WE DEMAND A SITE VISIT!

We must not allow, by even a single building, a change in the Special Character of Howick, by permitting unsympathetic three or four storey block type apartments and commercial buildings which could detrimentally affect views and viewshafts on the northern, sea side of Howick Village.

Our existing stunning views as one comes over the hill to enter Howick Village at Stockade Hill

Views to Beachhaven Marina, the Hunua Ranges and Coromandel peninsula Standing at the site of proposed new apartment blocks of 3 storeys or above blocking these views

Looking at Waiheke from main street Standing at the site of proposed new apartment blocks of 3 storeys or above blocking these views

Compare this The "Selwyn apartments"corner of Selwyn Road built well below the road yet ruining the vistas Their place is on the South side not the Northern, SEA side of the Village!!!

View from Selwyn Church as Bishop Selwyn sited it. This was the magnificent view right round the from the Church corner, enjoyed by all from the main road.

Glimpse only of sea View now blocked by the Selwyn apartments on the same corner

How can any Planner plan to deliberately obstruct our views by more and larger apartment blocks on this SEA side of the Village the whole length of Howick from Stockade Hill till way past here !!!WE SAY NO!!! Significant Precedent-The Environment Court Decision of 2004 (see attached Zip file)

Resultant from a previous action brought by Howick Residents and Ratepayers Assn Inc. and W.K. and H.L. Moffat against Manukau City Council and the developers, Vector Holdings, a precedent has been set in the Environment Court in November 2004, which can only be overturned by a higher court. In his decision Judge C.J. Thompson, judged that buildings of height and bulk which did not fit in with the low rise nature of Howick Village, should not be permitted. The Judge expressed an understanding of intensification and the needs of the Village but totally rejected the proposed building on height, bulk and coverage. (zip file appended to evidence)

In that judgement it was also stated that there seemed to be a clear difference between the perceptions of what the people of Howick wanted in their Village and the perceptions of the developers.

It is notable to that the judgment spoke of all the qualities which have always been part of the psyche of Howick and were incorporated in district plans after consultation with residents

THIS IS THE CRUX OF THE MATTER STILL TODAY. WE KNOW WE ARE HISTORIC, WE KNOW WE ARE UNIQUE AND WE WANT EXCEPTIONAL RULES FOR HOWICK AND TOTALLY REJECT THE ONE SIZE FITS ALL APPROACH OF THE UNITARY PLAN.

WHY DESTROY A GEM?

IF THE PAUP AND MR MATHEWS' NEW DEFINITIONS OF HISTORIC CHARACTER DO NOT FIT THE DISPERSED NATURE OF HOWICK'S HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND VISUALLY NOTABLE BUILDINGS, AND STUNNING VISTAS, THEN A SEPARATE CATEGORY WITH SPECIAL CHARACTER STATUS AS PER THE PAUP WITH DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS FOR HOWICK MUST BE WRITTEN.

OUR BOTTOM LINES ARE RECOGNITION AND PROTECTION OF: (Special Character status; recognition of Howick as Historically SIGNIFICANT; geographically unique (seaside village, stunning panoramic views) and essential low rise streetscape) and AMENITY value (WHICH SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN A DELETED QUALITY) and RETENTION OF THE SPECIFIC HEIGHT LIMITS SHOWN IN THE MAP BELOW.

HOWICK VILLAGE IS A GEM. IT IS NESTLED UNDER THE HUNUA RANGES YET OCCUPIES A RIDGE SO THAT the views from Howick are breathtakingly beautiful and extensive from the Skytower and Rangitoto one direction, to Waiheke and the outer Gulf to Great Barrier in the other direction.

The latest Spatial Mapping proposals making changes and allowing apartment buildings of greater height and bulk than the map (above left) on the most scenic ridge in Howick, the entire way along the buildings facing the street (northern side of Village)from Stockade Hill, will totally and permanently ruin these magnificent viewshafts to the sea.

Below is a view of the same mapped area as the one above showing the latest change in zoning and the enormous increase in apartment buildings proposed.

This zoning could mean a developer could block the magnificent sea views and ruin the low rise streetscape of the Village with multi-storey incongruous dwellings. (Is this all to accommodate one developer who has already started plans to build such a block??? on Parkhill Road) PLEASE COME AND SEE!

New map released in news last night! Brown areas edged in blue indicate new zoning apartment buildings and terraces

Howick people say NO! NO! NO! to this!

It is paramount that we keep ALL buildings under the height of the Selwyn church spire. This is the benchmark for retaining the unique streetscape of the Village and a semblance of Village atmosphere - church, pub, village green etc

SPIRE HEIGHT

If the heights of the new spatial planning maps allowing highrise on the northern side of the village in are not ruled out for Howick the whole streetscape will be lost and the historic buildings overwhelmed by incongruous apartments

It is very difficult to render the actual dominating look of the possible new apartments if the new zoning in the maps released last night is permitted.

We beg the Commissioners to see the detrimental effect of allowing such poor planning in Howick and beg you to strike this out in your final recommendations.

How can other places retain Historic Character status yet Howick be omitted?

Mt Roskill or Ellerslie may have some Edwardian buildings but no Listed A or B Historic Places buildings and no connection to views and the sea. (See the unprepossessing views attached.) This is a travesty and must be righted.

St Heliers has one 1920's building, the Library, which is a listed category B building yet this area may yet be moved from Precinct back to Special Character according to the evidence we have read.

The Precinct Plan: Lisa Mein (planner) for the Council has recognized the uniqueness of Howick in her proposed Precinct and states those two new sections within the Precinct F6: objectives and policies and K6 rules be created respectively for Howick Town Centre (not Village as it is known?). Many of the protections have been transferred from the Manukau District Plan (2002). We applaud this, but we are not convinced that this is the correct status for Howick.

While we recognize that Lisa Mein's proposed Precinct for Howick includes the protections we wish to see in place, plus references to historic associations and the unique structure of the Village's main "Picton Street" which is bookended by two historic landmarks: Stockade Hill and All Saints Church (the Selwyn Church), her work also contains references to the use of sympathetic materials, local species vegetation, maintenance of streetscape and control of building height and bulk. We object strongly to the zoning of MHU and Town Centre which seem particularly inappropriate for Howick

Other objections: We also have severe reservations over the limited scale of criteria under the Precinct about the "RD" Restricted Discretionary criteria by which new developments can be judged under the proposed Precinct Plan. (Discretionary criteria give greater flexibility to the decisions.)

Already in leaked information after the "secret" spatial planning maps fiasco in November at the Council, the height limits for Howick proposed in the PAUP and endorsed by Lisa Mein appear, from information, to already have been disregarded in the final version released to Councillors.

How then can we trust that by becoming a "precinct" like the airport, we will be adequately protected as a Historic Village with Special Character?

Why in Lisa Meins' evidence were all the many submissions of St Heliers residents noted and she suggests possibly moving St Heliers later to a Special Character area, at the same time not one submission from Howick was listed and she suggests moving Howick from Special character to Precinct? A co-incidence?

Conclusion: We applaud the height limits reinstated from the PAUP in planner Lisa Mein's evidence and applaud the details of protection sought for Howick Business area in her Precinct proposals. We believe all of these must be bottom lines incorporated in the final Unitary Plan for Howick yet we reject the unnotified change of Howick to Precinct and believe that "Precinct” under "Built Form" in the Unitary Plan is not the way Howick must be recognised. "Built Form" to us is totally incorrect as the whole unique package Howick represents is exactly Historic Character as the introduction to the PAUP and the Washington Charter state in their definitions.

We totally reject the newest changes proposed by the Council in the "secret" Spatial Planning maps CHANGING THE ZONING to apartment buildings of greater height and bulk to the northern side of the Village to destroy the breathtaking views from Stockade Hill and from all the roads leading to the sea. This CHANGE MUST NOT BE ALLOWED AND THE VILLAGE MUST BE PROTECTED FROM THIS EXPLOITATION WHICH WILL RUIN THE WORLD CLASSS VISTAS FROM THE VILLAGE.

Howick must retain its Special Character status. It is clear that our problems of not being considered of Special Historic Character status stem firstly from the very inadequate survey done for Howick under Manukau City as compared with the multidisciplinary teams involved in the analyses of many of the other areas which are now listed as Historic Character areas but to us, and to virtually all residents of Auckland, are of much lesser significance than Howick yet have remained listed as Historic character areas.(see attached photos Appendix 5)

The second part of our problem has arisen after Anthony Mathews (another planner) following on from mediation and discussion rewrote his original Topic 010 evidence where he made a distinction between 6.12 "Historic Character Areas will meet a lower threshold when assessed against heritage values set out in B4.2, as distinct from Historic Heritage Areas, which are assessed against criteria set out in B4.1". In his new definition, he insisted on groupings of last century buildings as the criteria defining the newer designation of Historic Character areas which lumps the former 2 categories together. He also made the mistake in one part of his evidence of claiming that Howick was of the same period of the 1860s and a number of other Auckland settlements such as Panmure - a grave error.

Howick is bookended by 2 listed category A monuments: Stockade Hill and Bishop Selwyn's "All Saints church", the focal point of the Village and opposite the listed McInnes Building and highlighted by the warm brick of the Category B "Prospect of Howick" building in the centre, all of which draw the eye and clearly define this historic settlement in a way no other Auckland Village does, long before the visitor enquires about its past.

THREE PRONGED HISTORIC LISTED BUILDINGS SEEN FROM WHEELCHAIR HEIGHT DRAW THE EYE AND ARE much more ARRESTINGLY VISIBLE FROM NORMAL HEIGHT FOR ALL WHO COME TO HOWICK VILLAGE

This factor alone makes the need for grouped buildings immaterial. A set of contiguous buildings in strip formation elsewhere make little visual impact .Nothing compares with the defining nature of the view as one comes over the hill into Howick - stunning sea on the left and the view of the Village, and, to the centre, the gleaming white of the Selwyn church with its grey Kauri tiles and 1847 Cypress trees (planted by Reverend Lush) and now almost 200 years old!

Once Howick Village is allowed by limited restricted discretionary criteria to be hedged in by modern higher and bulkier apartments of square block design the magic which ATEED and Film makers are extolling as a gem, will be lost. That View and that Magic can never be recovered or reconstructed.

Once deleted from the list of historic areas of Auckland Howick will have no ongoing status and be soon forgotten in official documents, never to recover its important place in Auckland's past.

The PAUP notified Howick Village as a Special Historic Character area. We object to the change by planners without any wider public consultation to this category which has morphed during the process into Historic Character not even retaining the original distinction between Historic Character and Historic Heritage areas.

People in Howick are very indignant. They know and believe they are living in a Historic Village they demand this is recognised and that the Special Character status of the PAUP, as notified, be retained including the hard-won protections the Village was given under the Manukau District Plan 2002. They believe that all the protections originally in place under the Manukau District Plan must be spelt out as the basis for the protection of this historic Village. We applaud the protections set out in Lisa Mein's Precinct plan but want ALL protections transferred and Howick granted clear recognition as a Special Historic Character Area as per the originally notified PAUP. The people feel very, very angry that their rights have been removed by this process and have been denied natural justice of making their voices heard unless they made an original submission on the PAUP (Yet most had submitted on the Draft UP and thought this was to be carried over) We all exclaim EVERY TIME we come over Stockade Hill and see the sea and the Village nestled in the valley under the shadow of the Hunua Ranges "I love this view!"

Will the planners the PAUP and the developers (often foreign with no sense of local history) be allowed to build their 3 storey and much higher box like apartments of great bulk and coverage here and obliterate this forever? It is up to you, the Commissioners to listen to our people and to recommend the right status for Howick be it even a special name to distinguish it from all other areas of Auckland. To deny this to Howick as the Unitary Plan's one size must fit all mantra insists, is a grave error which Aucklanders will look back on forever with severe regret.

Additional:

Howick East Overlay.

We believe that the former Heritage 7 Zone of the Operative Manukau District Plan must be retained in this Topic 079 . It is in itself a special area as set out on our previous submissions for 029-031 and should be recognised for its unique character, numerous historic sites, large areas of significant wildlife and vegetation and seaside historic and pre 1944 character. It adjoins the Special Character Business area and is a significant part of the allure or the area for tourism and film making. SEE APPENDIX 2 for historic sites in the East Howick Overlay area. The overlay provisions of 700 sq metre sites allowing limited building should be retained due to geological slope instability and for the retention of large treed areas forming significant wildlife corridors linking the area with the Hunua Ranges, Mangamangaroa wildlife reserve and even Waiheke (opposite) and allowing the presence of the rare Kaka, plus nesting sites for other significant native birds.

These facts together with the number of pre1944 buildings (below) and the listed historic monuments and historic trees on the seaside slopes mean that the area needs to be regarded, as recognized by Manukau City Council, as a holistic and complementary Special Historic Character whole.

Pre1944 Protection overlay Although we do not intend to ask for a special pre1944 overlay reinstatement in the Howick East Overlay area we bring the following omissions to the Commissioners' attention.

If we take a look at the latest spatial map we have been provided with at this point we find that a number of pre1944 buildings have been omitted from the list of significant buildings worth some form of protection in the Cockle Bay /Howick areas.

Herewith a list of some of these homes which we feel should be included

A member has undertaken a survey of just the main Selwyn, Uxbridge and Mellon's Bay and Beach Roads with these results

"The 30th Oct Historic Character overlay Map identifies 8 protected dwellings in the Sale St area, 10 in Beach Road and 3 in Laplau Cres., so based on my survey result for Selwyn and Uxbridge I suspect that there could well be many more in the area that have been missed.

In Uxbridge and Selwyn Roads the Map identifies only 5 Buildings in Selwyn Road, Including All Saints and 3 in Uxbridge Road.

In Selwyn Road those identified and protected are: Those missed according to my survey are:

All Saints Church 1944 23 Selwyn 26 Selwyn Rd 1915 30 Selwyn 71 Selwyn Rd 1935 32 Selwyn 73 Selwyn Shamrock Cottage 1940 36 Selwyn 81 Selwyn Rd 1915 58 Selwyn 98 Selwyn Rd 1914 64 Selwyn

In Uxbridge Road those identified and protected are: Those missed according to my survey are:

42 Uxbridge Rd 1944/5 38 Uxbridge 64 Uxbridge Rd 1912 56 Uxbridge 98 Uxbridge RD 1925 57 Uxbridge 1912 58 Uxbridge 1930 61 Uxbridge 1910 67 Uxbridge 1945 89 Uxbridge 1935 96 Uxbridge

Mellon’s Bay Road Those Missed 1933 41 Mellons Bay 92 Mellons Bay

In Beach Road those identified and protected are: Those missed according to my survey are:

61 Beach Rd 1910 72 Beach Road 62 1925 1946 66 1933 74 1924 68 1945/46 78 1945/46 71 1912 80 1928 92 1942 82 1925 1/85 1944/45 93 1923

107 1940 98 1944

99 1930

Beach Road

We note that Masefield, Abercrombie and Tanglewood Streets have listed dwellings, plus Ridge Road, Bleakhouse Road and Granger Road which are all outside the limited area surveyed by the Council Planners in their survey.

------

Appendix 1

Appendix: list of historic sites and buildings in Howick Village A number of heritage buildings and sites dot the business area 1. Stockade Hill (Site of defence and shelter from Maori invasion/retribution) 2. “All Saints” Church 9 Selwyn Road/Cook St Howick. 3. “All Saints” Graveyard 9 Selwyn Road/Cook St, Howick 4. Site: Our Lady Star of the Sea catholic church (1960) replacing original building 1854 5. ‘Star of the Sea’ Graveyard 28 Picton Street, Howick 6. Prospect Of Howick” Hotel Tavern 78 Picton Street, Howick 7. McInness Building 127 Picton Street, Howick 8. Old Presbyterian church 35 Uxbridge Road 9. Fencible Court Well 35 Cook Street, Howick 10. Rice's Bakery building 67 Picton St ( behind Baker's Delight) 1920 ( Intergenerational business) 11. Bells Butchery (1922) an intergenerational business 12. Back part of present Post Office, Picton St 13. Road names leading from the township are all named after Fencible Officers or British military heroes or battles.. Wellington St, Moore St, Waterloo St, Fencible Drive and so on 14. Howick Coat of Arms (bus shelter Picton St) 15. Old Concrete road to Stockade Hill. 16. Bluestone kerbs

Note: the different street names above should not cause the Commissioners confusion as they are all one and the same street, but with name changes within just a few hundred metres.

------

Appendix 2 Why spoil the GEM ? 1a) Tourism potential in Howick. The Howick and Times 5/12/15

According to Brett O’Reilly, who heads ATEED (Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development, Howick rates alongside Waiheke, Piha and Matakana, as a tourist destination.

“I know how significant the opportunity is here he said, "There are untold stories and opportunities... “I believe we have it all before us in a significant way here.”

ATEED were keen support Howick initiatives, he said. ” The tourism plan provides a framework to develop initiatives in an integrated approach in Howick for the next three to five years. It a mechanism for the HLB to support local tourism operators or by overcoming key constraints."

ATEED staff members are expected to report back to the HLB by the second quarter of 2016 to seek approval of project scopes and a budget to implement the Howick Tourism Plan.

1B) Rezoning provokes Fierce Fight H&P Times 5/12/15

Maps of up-zoning decisions made behind closed doors and the possibility that Howick Village could in time be hemmed in along its northern side by three-storey residential buildings is expected to create widespread anger, according to Howick Ward councillors, and Sharon Stewart who have taken no part in the plan change.

2) Film making in Howick

Why Howick has "Special Character" Howick and Pakuranga Times 10/12/15 British film director, Norman Stone, was full of admiration for Howick Village and its beachside setting. “This movie will show in 37,000 cinemas in China. People will flock here" he said.

He was under no illusion that once people saw the movie, a 3D sci-fi, action adventure movie, "The Wonder", they would be flocking to find the "The Sea Store" a cafe on the set at Howick Beach where he was filming. It is the first /China coproduction.

------

Appendix 3

The Eastern slopes of the "Village' leading down to the sea have the following historic sites and buildings of note plus large areas of pre1944 buildings. This area is also an area of significance to Maori. Evidence of Historic sites, buildings and Places of Significance to residents.

1. ‘Shamrock Cottage’ 73R Selwyn Road, Howick 2. ‘Shamrock Cottage’ Well 73R Selwyn Road, Howick 3. Uxbridge old Presbyterian church 35 Uxbridge Road 4. Howick Wharf Steps, Howick Beach 110R Beach Road, /4R Granger Road Howick 5. Star of the Sea Convent and Chapel 129 Granger Road, Howick 6. World War II Gun Emplacements 181R Mellons Bay Road 7. World War II Gun Emplacements World War II Gun Emplacements (two - one north and one south end Howick Beach 110 Beach Road and 1 Marine Parade, Howick 8. World War II Gun Emplacements World War II Gun Emplacements (two - one north and one south end Cockle Bay Beach , Cockle Bay) 9. Hawthornden reserve (now called "Green Gables" reserve) Cook St site of original Fencible captain's home 10. Mellons Bay Beach 181R Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay 11. House - ‘The Cliffs’ 13 Rangitoto View Road, Howick 12. Howick Beach ( site of 804 Fencible Soldiers' landing to protect the fledgling Auckland and site of 2 year occupation by pioneer families awaiting own houses. 13. Old Presbyterian Church (Uxbridge Creative Centre) 14. Stevens Homestead - Well and Barn 185 Bleakhouse Road, Howick 15. McMillan Homestead 159 Bleakhouse Road, Howick 16. Fowrey Lodge 215 Bleakhouse Road 17. Captain Irvines Homestead 40 Ridge Road Howick 18. Brickell Homestead 174 Ridge Road 19. Owhanga House 47R Shelly Beach Parade, Cockle Bay 20. Keppoch Lodge Well 1 Tanglewood Place, Howick 21. Policeman's Lodge 44 Uxbridge Road 22. Webster's Store (the "Beach Store "- rare example of this typical architecture) 96 Selwyn Road 23. Page Cottage 18 Page Point Mellons Bay 24. Howick Beach 1896 Wharf Piles 25. Emelia Maud Nixon's Home and "Retreat" 37 Uxbridge Road &Garden of Memories-a tribute to Maori and Pioneering history 26. Te Raukoheke -Heritage Museum, Garden of Memories 37 Uxbridge Road 27. Selwyn Road "The Pilgrims ' Way" the route of the early settlers after months in raupo huts on the beach. Past Shamrock Cottage and on to "All Saints" Selwyn Church 28. Sacred Pohutukawa at the eastern end of Cockle Bay

Thank you for listening

Gayleen Mackereth (Chairperson Howick Residents and Ratepayers Assn Inc.)

Please find attached zip file of the Environment Court decision re Howick 2004