DOCSLIB.ORG

Business Special Character Overlay in Lieu of the Precinct Overlay Proposed by the PAUP

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Business Special Character Overlay in Lieu of the Precinct Overlay Proposed by the PAUP BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 AND IN THE MATTER of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP ), Topic 081 – Precincts __________________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF SALLY BARBARA PEAKE (LANDSCAPE – PRECINCTS TOPIC 081) ON BEHALF SAVE OUR ST HELIERS (SOS) INC AND ST HELIERS / GLENDOWIE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION INC 10 FEBRUARY 2016 __________________________________________________________________________ Introduction 1 My full name is Sally Barbara Peake. I am a landscape architect in private practice, and a Principal of Peake Design Limited. I have over 30 years experience in design, assessment, and preparation of landscape analysis and development projects. I have qualifications in landscape architecture (Diploma in Landscape Architecture from Leeds, UK) and urban design (Diploma in Urban Design from Oxford, UK), and a Master of Architecture degree from Unitec, NZ. 2 I am a Fellow and Registered landscape architect with the New Zealand Institute of Landscape Architects, and immediate past -president of the institute. I am also a member of the Resource Management Law Association and Urban Design Forum (Auckland). 3 I am a former panellist on the Auckland City Urban Design Panel, and have represented the NZILA on a number of external advisory groups for the Auckland Plan and Proposed Unitary Plan. 4 This statement is prepared in support of the Save Our St Heliers (SOS) and St Heliers/ Glendowie Residents’ Association proposed Business Special Character overlay in lieu of the Precinct overlay proposed by the PAUP. 5 The statement is supplementary to my evidence provided to accompany the submission, dated 26 th February 2014. I adopt that evidence for this hearing and append it. 6 In particular, this statement of evidence provides additional evidence with regard to the urban design and landscape effects of the proposed changes following the preparation of Auckland Council’s evidence (Topics 080 and 081). 7 I am also aware that submissions were made by SOS and St Heliers/ Glendowie Residents’ Association in relation to Tamaki Drive (Topic 029) and Special Character and Pre-1944 Mapping (Topic 079) and I note that there is some overlap between these topics and Topics 080/081. 8 Background and summary 9 The original submission and urban design evidence sought that a Special Character overlay be applied to St Heliers Centre to afford more appropriate protection of its special character (compared with a Precinct overlay). 10 Key urban design issues (attributes) identified by SOS and the Residents’ Association and covered by the evidence are: • The importance of the centre as an historic seaside village (together with its relationship with Tamaki Drive) • Its importance as a local retail and community centre (in contrast to Mission Bay) • The retention of the form, character and heritage of the centre as an expression of community values 11 The evidence notes that the Auckland Plan and Orakei Local Plan seek to support centres as an expression of community values and maintaining local character. Supporting documents that set out and reinforce community values and local character include the Tamaki Drive Masterplan and Scenic Way heritage protection, St Heliers Village Centre Plan, and St Heliers Character/Heritage Study. 12 The evidence summarises the key urban design attributes and features with regard to these documents. 13 The spatial extent of the centre and precinct is very small (refer to figure 1 below), although a larger area is identified as a “zone of influence” (refer to figure 2) in my evidence, which recognises the importance of Tamaki Drive and Vellenoweth Green as well as some residential areas in relation to the centre and its character. Figure 1 Plan of Local Centre zone and Precinct overlay Figure 2 Proposed Special Character overlay and “zone of influence” 14 Consequently, limitations on development within this area would not adversely affect the overall aims of achieving intensification or a compact city. In contrast, it will promote a “quality” compact city. 15 The evidence also includes a discussion on the difference between historic heritage and heritage character, although I note that this has been subsequently covered in Panel Hearings and interim guidance issued by the Independent Hearings Panel (further discussed below). 16 The evidence also notes that St Heliers is the only one of the seven studies undertaken at the time not covered by a Business Special Character overlay, and concludes that the decision to make it a Precinct is not consistent with the St Heliers Character Statement and will result in adverse effects on its character and amenity, with respect to: • Proposed height • Proposed setback • Non- commercial development • Parking 17 I note, however, that the nature and magnitude of these effects varies within the centre, which is discussed later in my evidence. 18 I have reviewed the evidence of Mr Duguid, Mr Maxwell, Ms Mein and Mr Riley, and find no evidence that changes my view that the Special Character overlay is the most appropriate method to protect the special character values of St Heliers local centre. 19 Consequently, I do not support the proposed St Heliers Precinct changes and consider the single objective and two policies are completely inadequate to meet the purpose of the precinct. In addition, the development controls will enable a distinctly different character that fails to recognise or protect the heritage, special character and amenity of the environment and accordingly does not promote sustainable management of natural and physical resources. Assessment context 20 For the purposes of this assessment, the centre and proposed overlay is evaluated with regard to the existing environment and its urban design context. 21 Urban design is defined in the NZ Urban Design Protocol as follows: “Urban design is concerned with the design of the buildings, places, spaces and networks that make up our towns and cities, and the ways people use them. It ranges in scale from a metropolitan region, city or town down to a street, public space or even a single building. Urban design is concerned not just with appearances and built form but with the environmental, economic, social and cultural consequences of design. It is an approach that draws together many different sectors and professions, and it includes both the process of decision-making as well as the outcomes of design.” 22 From my reading of the evidence of Mr Duguid, Mr Matthews and Ms Mein (Topic 079), the Precinct overlay was essentially created as a result of legacy plan changes and Environment Court Decisions. 23 I also understand from legal counsel that Council may have erred when it decided that the Environment Court determined that St Heliers is not a special character area. 24 Although I was not involved in the previous case concerning Ancona properties and proposed redevelopment of Turua Street, I am aware that discussions largely centred on whether the existing 7 buildings on Turua Street had historic heritage significance. I am also aware that the majority of the buildings were all identified as ‘character-defining’ within the Operative St Heliers Centre Plan and the proposed development included the removal of two significant street trees (as well as other lesser trees). Council’s specialist urban designer was opposed to the demolition, stating that “the demolition.... is likely to cause adverse effects on the social, cultural and environmental wellbeing of St Heliers” and result “in a high level of visual and contextual change that is of major concern from an urban design perspective.”1 25 I also note that it appears that the difference between historic heritage and special character was not sufficiently addressed at that time and continues to be a challenging issue. 26 I note, for example, in paragraph 1.2 of Mr Matthews evidence he states “The Independent Hearings Panel (IHP) heard evidence from Auckland Council’s (Council) witnesses in November 2014 in relation to Topic 005 (RPS Issues) that proposed the term ‘special character’ be removed and the term ‘historic character’ be used to describe those areas whose character is primarily derived from historic values.” 27 While I agree that ‘historic character’ should be used for “areas whose character is primarily derived from historic values”, I do not consider the terms special character and historic character interchangeable and am concerned that some areas formerly identified 1 Request for urban design advice, Auckland City Environments, 24.11.08, 8-20 Turua Street, St Heliers – LUC 2007-511501, Nicola Williams as ‘Special Character’ have either been omitted because they do not meet the new ‘historic character ’ criteria or have been incorrectly renamed. 28 From my investigations, I consider St Heliers meets the criteria for Special Character because: • It is a place that retains and displays the characteristics of a particular era of human settlement and development 2; • It contributes to an understanding and appreciation of an area’s history and culture 3; • It demonstrates a measure of coherence based on a range of historic and physical qualities that contribute to an understanding of Auckland’s historic development 4; • It has a distinctive style or mix of styles and building types that reflect the development of an area 5; • It has a distinctive pattern of subdivision lot sizes, and street and road patterns 6; • It has a relationship of built form and natural landscapes to landscape context 7; • It has streetscape cohesiveness 8. 29 I also note that Ms Mein in her evidence states that historic heritage encompasses values that manage change and give effect to section 7 of the RMA as well as section 6(f), while Mr Matthews make a series of statements in relation to Eden Valley, Ponsonby and Upper Symonds Street that reinforce the interconnectedness of buildings to streetscape, the importance of building height in maintaining character, the potential 2 Para.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • No 38, 13 March 1986, 1113
    No. 38 1113 THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE Published by Authority WELLINGTON: THURSDAY, 13 MARCH 1986 CORRIGENDUM C.V.O. Notice of Approval of Sirens in Terms of the Traffic Regulations To be a Commander: 1976 Edward James BABE. L.V.O. N the notice with the above heading, which appeared in the New To be a Lieutenant: ~ealand Gazette, II April 1985, No.63, page 1588, line 3 of the ichedule, where it states: Miss Genevieve Margaret JORDAN, M.V,O. 2.12 volt 500 HZ 0320223002 'ead: M.V.O. 2.12 volt 500 HZ 0320223003 To be Members: (M.O.T. 17/13/6 and 17/13/6/1) Miss Helen Lorraine AITKEN. Ian Gordon Edward CODDINGTON, Chief Traffic 70 Superintendent, Ministry of Transport. Judith Anne, Mrs McCONWAY. CORRIGENDUM Lieutenant Anthony Jonathan PARR, R.N.Z.N. Ronald Edward TERRY. Declaring State Highway to be a Limited Access Road State THE QUEEN has been graciously pleased on the occasion of Her Highway No.2 Majesty's Visit to New Zealand, to approve the award of a Bar to the Royal Victorian Medal (Silver) to the undermentioned: N the notice with the above heading published in the New Zealand Bar to R.V.M. (Silver) ,azette, 16 January 1986, No.4, page 108, in title where "No.2" ppears, read "No. 29." Sergeant Peter Forbes ORR, R.V.M., Q.S.M., New Zealand Police. THE QUEEN has been graciously pleased, on the occasion of Her Dated at Wellington this 24th day of February 1986. Majesty's Visit to New Zealand, to award the Royal Victorian Medal (Silver) to the undermentioned: R.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule 6 Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule
    Schedule 6 Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule Schedule 6 Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule [rcp/dp] Introduction The factors in B4.2.2(4) have been used to determine the features included in Schedule 6 Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule, and will be used to assess proposed future additions to the schedule. ID Name Location Site type Description Unitary Plan criteria 2 Algies Beach Algies Bay E This site is one of the a, b, g melange best examples of an exposure of the contact between Northland Allocthon and Miocene Waitemata Group rocks. 3 Ambury Road Mangere F A complex 140m long a, b, c, lava cave Bridge lava cave with two d, g, i branches and many well- preserved flow features. Part of the cave contains unusual lava stalagmites with corresponding stalactites above. 4 Anawhata Waitākere A This locality includes a a, c, e, gorge and combination of g, i, l beach unmodified landforms, produced by the dynamic geomorphic processes of the Waitakere coast. Anawhata Beach is an exposed sandy beach, accumulated between dramatic rocky headlands. Inland from the beach, the Anawhata Stream has incised a deep gorge into the surrounding conglomerate rock. 5 Anawhata Waitākere E A well-exposed, and a, b, g, l intrusion unusual mushroom-shaped andesite intrusion in sea cliffs in a small embayment around rocks at the north side of Anawhata Beach. 6 Arataki Titirangi E The best and most easily a, c, l volcanic accessible exposure in breccia and the eastern Waitākere sandstone Ranges illustrating the interfingering nature of Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in part 1 Schedule 6 Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule the coarse volcanic breccias from the Waitākere Volcano with the volcanic-poor Waitematā Basin sandstone and siltstones.
    [Show full text]
  • 522 Bus Time Schedule & Line Route
    522 bus time schedule & line map 522 Schools View In Website Mode The 522 bus line (Schools) has 2 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Schools: 7:10 AM - 7:16 AM (2) Schools: 3:35 PM - 3:40 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest 522 bus station near you and ƒnd out when is the next 522 bus arriving. Direction: Schools 522 bus Time Schedule 42 stops Schools Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday Not Operational Monday 7:10 AM - 7:16 AM Stop B St Heliers 413 Tamaki Drive, Auckland Tuesday 7:10 AM - 7:16 AM Opp 81 St Heliers Bay Rd Wednesday 7:10 AM - 7:16 AM Saint Heliers Bay Road, Auckland Thursday 7:10 AM - 7:16 AM 124 St Heliers Bay Rd Friday Not Operational 124 St Heliers Bay Road, Auckland Saturday Not Operational Opp 151 St Heliers Bay Rd 151A St Heliers Bay Road, Auckland Opp 183 St Heliers Bay Rd 183 St Heliers Bay Road, Auckland 522 bus Info Direction: Schools 222 St Heliers Bay Rd Stops: 42 2 Ashby Avenue, Auckland Trip Duration: 50 min Line Summary: Stop B St Heliers, Opp 81 St Heliers 260 St Heliers Bay Rd Bay Rd, 124 St Heliers Bay Rd, Opp 151 St Heliers 260A St Heliers Bay Road, Auckland Bay Rd, Opp 183 St Heliers Bay Rd, 222 St Heliers Bay Rd, 260 St Heliers Bay Rd, 320 St Heliers Bay Rd, 320 St Heliers Bay Rd 358 St Heliers Bay Rd, 299 Kohimarama Rd, 255 320 St Heliers Bay Road, Auckland Kohimarama Rd, Kohimarama Rd Opp Southern Cross Rd, Opp 198 Kohimarama Rd, 255 Kepa Rd, 358 St Heliers Bay Rd Kepa Rd Outside Eastridge, Opp 182 Kepa Rd, 358 St Heliers Bay Road, Auckland Coates Ave Near Nehu
    [Show full text]
  • TOP MEDIAN SALE PRICE (OCT19—SEP20) Hatfields Beach
    Warkworth Makarau Waiwera Puhoi TOP MEDIAN SALE PRICE (OCT19—SEP20) Hatfields Beach Wainui EPSOM .............. $1,791,000 HILLSBOROUGH ....... $1,100,000 WATTLE DOWNS ......... $856,750 Orewa PONSONBY ........... $1,775,000 ONE TREE HILL ...... $1,100,000 WARKWORTH ............ $852,500 REMUERA ............ $1,730,000 BLOCKHOUSE BAY ..... $1,097,250 BAYVIEW .............. $850,000 Kaukapakapa GLENDOWIE .......... $1,700,000 GLEN INNES ......... $1,082,500 TE ATATŪ SOUTH ....... $850,000 WESTMERE ........... $1,700,000 EAST TĀMAKI ........ $1,080,000 UNSWORTH HEIGHTS ..... $850,000 Red Beach Army Bay PINEHILL ........... $1,694,000 LYNFIELD ........... $1,050,000 TITIRANGI ............ $843,000 KOHIMARAMA ......... $1,645,500 OREWA .............. $1,050,000 MOUNT WELLINGTON ..... $830,000 Tindalls Silverdale Beach SAINT HELIERS ...... $1,640,000 BIRKENHEAD ......... $1,045,500 HENDERSON ............ $828,000 Gulf Harbour DEVONPORT .......... $1,575,000 WAINUI ............. $1,030,000 BIRKDALE ............. $823,694 Matakatia GREY LYNN .......... $1,492,000 MOUNT ROSKILL ...... $1,015,000 STANMORE BAY ......... $817,500 Stanmore Bay MISSION BAY ........ $1,455,000 PAKURANGA .......... $1,010,000 PAPATOETOE ........... $815,000 Manly SCHNAPPER ROCK ..... $1,453,100 TORBAY ............. $1,001,000 MASSEY ............... $795,000 Waitoki Wade HAURAKI ............ $1,450,000 BOTANY DOWNS ....... $1,000,000 CONIFER GROVE ........ $783,500 Stillwater Heads Arkles MAIRANGI BAY ....... $1,450,000 KARAKA ............. $1,000,000 ALBANY ............... $782,000 Bay POINT CHEVALIER .... $1,450,000 OTEHA .............. $1,000,000 GLENDENE ............. $780,000 GREENLANE .......... $1,429,000 ONEHUNGA ............. $999,000 NEW LYNN ............. $780,000 Okura Bush GREENHITHE ......... $1,425,000 PAKURANGA HEIGHTS .... $985,350 TAKANINI ............. $780,000 SANDRINGHAM ........ $1,385,000 HELENSVILLE .......... $985,000 GULF HARBOUR ......... $778,000 TAKAPUNA ........... $1,356,000 SUNNYNOOK ............ $978,000 MĀNGERE .............
    [Show full text]
  • Visitor Strategy Research: Phase 1 Report Ōrākei Visitor Strategy 2013-2015
    Visitor Strategy research: Phase 1 report Ōrākei Visitor Strategy 2013-2015 Prepared for Ōrākei Local Board The New Zealand Tourism Research Institute Auckland University of Technology www.nztri.org February 2013 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2 Method and Approach ............................................................................................................... 3 Local Tourism Audit ................................................................................................................... 4 Web audit ............................................................................................................................... 4 On-Site Experience audit ........................................................................................................ 8 Visitor Surveys – findings ......................................................................................................... 14 Tamaki Drive ........................................................................................................................ 14 Remuera ............................................................................................................................... 26 Ellerslie ................................................................................................................................. 37 Immediate opportunities ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • St Heliers Are Maintained and Enhanced
    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 081e 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 BY ROSS EDWARD COOPER FOR SAINT HELIERS PRECINCT 26 JANUARY 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 3 PART A: OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND ......................................................................... 6 2. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 6 3. CODE OF CONDUCT ........................................................................... 6 4. SCOPE ................................................................................................. 6 5. INTERIM GUIDANCE FROM THE PANEL ............................................ 7 6. PAUP APPROACH TO PRECINCTS .................................................... 8 PART B: OVERVIEW OF SAINT HELIERS PRECINCT ....................................................... 9 7. CONTEXT ............................................................................................. 9 8. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK RELEVANT TO SAINT HELIERS PRECINCT .......................................................................................... 11 9. PAUP FRAMEWORK .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NEWSLETTER – AUGUST / HERE-TURI-KŌKĀ 2019 Greetings from the President
    P.O. Box 87291, Meadowbank, Auckland, 1742. Email: [email protected] President: Gay Williams Secretary: Janet Crawford Ph. 524-7221 Ph. 948-1192 www.u3ameadowbank.nz NEWSLETTER – AUGUST / HERE-TURI-KŌKĀ 2019 Greetings from the President Our July meeting was well attended (despite being the morning after the overnight Cricket World cup final!). We had a fascinating visit to the Southern Ocean among whales, penguins, seals and icebergs with our Vice president Cecilie Rushton. What a wonderful part of the world to visit. Several members mentioned they were inspired to consider going on a trip there too! Our main speaker was Professor Helen Danesh-Meyer who presented a fascinating overview of diseases of the eye – especially Cataract, and Glaucoma. With the aid of beautiful slides, she outlined the causes and treatment of these common conditions – Cataract surgery - the safest eye surgery, and Glaucoma, the silent disease – the leading cause of preventable blindness in New Zealand. Helen outlined some risks and lifestyle activities we can all take to manage these conditions, and there were handouts to help us understand the main points. Of concern she mentioned that over 50% of the population are unaware that they have Glaucoma and we all need to have Glaucoma checks regularly especially if there is a family history of Glaucoma. There were several Questions from the floor, and many members commented on the value of the presentation. For further information go to www. glaucoma.org.nz and join Glaucoma NZ (for free) to keep up to date with developments. Remember the U3A network meeting on 30 August – sharing transport and supporting two of our members presenting at this event.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimated Restoration Times Over Next 24 Hours
    Northcote Point Bayswater L a Vauxhall k e ´ R o y a a d w Stanley Point r Stanley Bay Cheltenham o t o M Devonport n r e h t Browns Island (Motukorea) r o N et tre S r W e e s m t a h H av en Dr ive t e t e B e r t e e a r S t c Freemans Bay t S r h Mechanics Bay e CBD u e n R n b o l t o B e K s v A e a a b e t u d A r h o p H t n Mission Bay S e H e i Ponsonby o S P t c T k r S w e a a t o n m ve r i t Kohimarama e e a r A n e r ki D r Saint Heliers t e e e e s S Orakei T e u o u 6 t n t n r 1 e e e Q Parnell l T b il a v e h u y v ta A R t S n r et e o a i re r a l N S Towai S t a d ay G t oad rw d g R d oto a re tt il Glendowie M a e A tern io S t n Cres ro K r es o treet dde c p ik -w o en K i rth R G t S d o d ad o a S N Grafton llA Ro h t Arch Hill y a Kepa i o re e r o m R e rn S R a y t Newton a tre i r a B e Sho e a P t re k m B o t a s R r a r n e oa ie d d e d O R l a Newmarket r t e o Eden Terrace t e o R S d e H e S u a t c t a e n r r n d S ra a o t e e e u p e R S v d s p E t l r l A a a Meadowbank e e o A e De H c ll Avenue R p B W o n i e d r e h a n a a a n p r o i e a t Jo a S Wai o Taiki Bay M R t hns d c a S R e d a i o A u r u a h u v L n u o V Remuera a e a t e p R R l n l e e d R Glen Innes y v e a e Saint Johns u a m n o e r R g i A v t i o e P a ro o u v r s e N l pe a s S R d D ct r e T d e t a i a erra e i c K l o R u p l oa a M i g S d n il r n ton Mount Eden a G Ro a o a ad R u P M t t e h s e v Point England D a iv i D is Halifa e r r ex ra x Avenue r E D y ter el n e D i a Ave St an e n r n d e ue et
    [Show full text]
  • NZHC 138 BETWEEN ALBANY NORTH LANDOWNERS Plaintiff A
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2016-404-2336 [2016] NZHC 138 BETWEEN ALBANY NORTH LANDOWNERS Plaintiff AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Defendant [Continued over page] Hearing: 28 November - 2 December 2016 Counsel: M Baker-Galloway for Albany North Landowers T Mullins for Auckland Memorial Park Ltd S Ryan for Franco Belgiorno-Nettis R Brabant and R Enright for Character Coalition Inc & Anor M Savage for Howick Ratepayers and Residents Assoc Inc & Anor R Enright for The Straits Protection Society Inc and South Epsom Planning Group Inc & Anor A A Arthur-Young and S H Pilkington for Strand Holdings Ltd R E Bartlett QC for Summerset Group Holdings Ltd A A Arthur-Young and D J Minhinnick for Valerie Close Residents Group H Atkins for Village New Zealand Ltd R Brabant for Wallace Group Ltd M Casey QC and M Williams for Man OʼWar Farm Ltd R J Somerville QC, K Anderson and W G Wakefield for Auckland Council C Kirman and A Devine for Housing Corporation New Zealand and Minister for the Enironment S F Quinn and A F Buchanan for Ting Holdings Ltd S J Simons and R M Steller for Property Council of New Zealand R M Devine for Ngati Whatua Orakei Whai Rawa Ltd Judgment: 13 February 2017 JUDGMENT OF WHATA J ALBANY NORTH LANDOWNERS v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2016] NZHC 138 [13 February 2017] This judgment was delivered by me on 13 February 2017 at 11.30 am, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules. Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date: ………………………… CIV-2016-404-2298 BETWEEN AUCKLAND MEMORIAL PARK LIMITED Plaintiff AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Defendant CIV-2016-404-2323
    [Show full text]
  • Orakei-Ward-Map.Pdf
    Auckland Council Ward Boundary Map Map T E E R T T E S E Y T R TO E E O E T LE S R Y Achilles L S ST T REE A S T WE N Point H SHA FAN O B Ladies Bay S E Q A U B FO AY RT A C S O S EET H TR TR N E H ET Judges Bay Takaparawha Bastion Point T Z R A O E Mission Bay West Tamaki C A Point D E I R A K IV D R A E Point V E M T A N D S Auckland Central N G T D U RA T L E Okahu Bay T A N T S D E A A O E E Point Saint Heliers Bay O H O E T D R S E T GR R L S O L V Resolution I R T Gower Point FF ER R E I O E L AD E T S T C Karaka Bay E C E U G N O VAL O S U S R RONAKI E RO O N RO E A N K N K T N AD D E T E S N S U A T E I T E C E V R R T E E N E E IV A POLYG A V E N A O R T I R E E N R E R R D N R E E A NIHIL V O I E N A U P T IV ITA A L A R R O R AR M O E S D O T N V P R R S T C E F D O I E A Q I N D E B K A S A S R S Y 6 A Y T F S M K P T R M 1 A NTO O M D T N S E A K D E T E H D H F S W E C P E O N S A T C L R A E GL A O P A M D C A E E I T H EN O E E O T L E I Y N AN G A P E V A E S H T I S A T ES T M C Orakei A T U O R R T P IA L U T S R E D N R Y I U O E AL W R R C R R L E N E T R E A S A A E S E NG EE W O E M A STR E HITI D R E R D L T I OAR AD N I T V T Parnell A N R N O RD P H G A V E G E W O R A O L S R E I T O M P P E K A O N T A E E L I S 6 T L Hobson Point I T N LE A A R A E A D L E S L E E C F R A T R I 1 R I O R E E A U T E E S N Y A E I V P E L N T S R K D R N N A T N O R A R E O O P L T A N R A AU S O L E N T I D D T AU Mission Bay T U I E H G E A T T T S A D DR E A E R N R K V A S S E D D RO T L S E R I E L E T G M A N L S V R
    [Show full text]
  • Ōrākei Local Board Meeting Held on 3/08/2017
    FINAL REPORT – JULY 2017 Auckland Council Meadowbank, Remuera and Ōrākei Community Needs Assessment and Facilities Investigation Report Prepared by Mobius Research and Strategy Ltd. 1 PROJECT | Meadowbank, Remuera, Ōrākei Community Needs Assessment Table of Contents 1: Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Background and objectives .................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Approach ............................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Key conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Meadowbank Community Centre: summary oF key Findings, and considerations .................................. 4 1.5 Tahapa Crescent Hall – summary oF key Findings, and considerations .................................................... 4 1.6 4 Victoria Avenue – summary oF key Findings, and considerations ......................................................... 4 1.7 Ōrākei Community Centre – summary oF key Findings, and considerations ............................................ 5 2: Project Background and Objectives ............................................................................................................. 6 3: Approach .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NZHC 138 BETWEEN ALBANY NORTH LANDOWNERS Plaintiff A
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2016-404-2336 [2017] NZHC 138 BETWEEN ALBANY NORTH LANDOWNERS Plaintiff AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Defendant [Continued over page] Hearing: 28 November - 2 December 2016 Counsel: M Baker-Galloway for Albany North Landowers T Mullins for Auckland Memorial Park Ltd S Ryan for Franco Belgiorno-Nettis R Brabant and R Enright for Character Coalition Inc & Anor M Savage for Howick Ratepayers and Residents Assoc Inc & Anor R Enright for The Straits Protection Society Inc and South Epsom Planning Group Inc & Anor A A Arthur-Young and S H Pilkington for Strand Holdings Ltd R E Bartlett QC for Summerset Group Holdings Ltd A A Arthur-Young and D J Minhinnick for Valerie Close Residents Group H Atkins for Village New Zealand Ltd R Brabant for Wallace Group Ltd M Casey QC and M Williams for Man OʼWar Farm Ltd R J Somerville QC, K Anderson and M J L Dickey for Auckland Council C Kirman and A Devine for Housing Corporation New Zealand and Minister for the Enironment S F Quinn and A F Buchanan for Ting Holdings Ltd S J Simons and R M Steller for Property Council of New Zealand R M Devine for Ngati Whatua Orakei Whai Rawa Ltd Judgment: 13 February 2017 JUDGMENT OF WHATA J ALBANY NORTH LANDOWNERS v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2017] NZHC 138 [13 February 2017] This judgment was delivered by me on 13 February 2017 at 11.30 am, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules. Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date: ………………………… CIV-2016-404-2298 BETWEEN AUCKLAND MEMORIAL PARK LIMITED Plaintiff AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Defendant CIV-2016-404-2323
    [Show full text]