Martins Bay and Adjacent to the Scandrett Regional Park, Which Is to the South East of Snells Beach, and Comprises a Small Batch Community and Associated Open Space

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 081b 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 AUSTIN DANIEL FOX

MARTINS BAY PRECINCT

26 JANUARY 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.! SUMMARY ...... 3! PART A: OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND ...... 4! 2.! INTRODUCTION ...... 4! 3.! CODE OF CONDUCT ...... 4! 4.! SCOPE ...... 5! 5.! INTERIM GUIDANCE FROM THE PANEL ...... 5! 6.! PAUP APPROACH TO PRECINCTS ...... 5! PART B: OVERVIEW OF MARTINS BAY PRECINCT ...... 6! 7.! CONTEXT ...... 6! 8.! STATUTORY FRAMEWORK ...... 7! 9.! PAUP FRAMEWORK ...... 7! PART C: OVERVIEW OF SUBMISSIONS ...... 8! 10.! SUBMISSION THEMES ...... 8! 11.! PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF SUBMISSIONS ...... 8! 12.! INCORRECTLY CODED SUBMISSION POINTS ...... 9! PART D: ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS ...... 9! 13.! MERIT ASSESSMENT OF NEW PRECINCT REQUESTS ...... 9! 14.! ANALYSIS OF PRECINCT PROVISIONS ...... 10! 15.! CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO OTHER PARTS OF THE PAUP ...... 11! 16.! CONCLUSIONS ...... 11! ATTACHMENT A: CV of Report Writer ...... 12! ATTACHMENT B: Planning map ...... 13! ATTACHMENT C: Track changes for Martins Bay precinct ...... !

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 Martins Bay 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, I consider should be made to address matters raised in submissions.

1.3 The purpose of the precinct is to ensure the scale and intensity of the existing development is maintained. The precinct seeks to enable small scale new development on the site for 6 dwellings above what currently exists, which is 58 dwellings.

1.4 It is considered appropriate for a precinct to be developed as Martins Bay is (as noted in existing Objective 2) unique in character, being an example of a small coastal bach settlement. The precinct meaningfully departs from the provisions of the underlying proposed Rural and Coastal Settlement (RCS) zone (the underlying zone in the PAUP as notified is Rural Coastal (RC), but as discussed below is now proposed to be rezoned RCS). The RCS zone does not contain development controls appropriate to manage the existing development. Additional reasons are set out at paragraph 13.1.

1.5 The main differences between the precinct and the relevant zone, which is taken to be RCS, as proposed in the joint statement of evidence for Topic 081b of David Hookway and Austin Fox on rezoning for Warkworth and Snells Beach, are set out in Table 1 below:

Table 1

Main precinct provision or group of Difference from PAUP provisions changes

Replacement dwellings, or alterations Chapter I 1.3.1 - Table 1 to a dwelling, to the same height and One dwelling per 4000m2 net site area. building footprint of the existing More enabling. dwelling being replaced or altered.

More restrictive. Density Limit of one per 4000m2. More Density Limit of 64. More enabling. restrictive.

1.6 The key changes to the precinct covered in this evidence relate to expanding the precinct to cover an area to the south zoned Future Urban in the Operative Plan and to two create two sub-precincts to deal with the existing bach community and the area of current Future Urban zoned land in the most appropriate manner.

PART A: OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 The purpose of this Report is to consider a submission received by the Council in relation to Martins Bay precinct.

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

2.3 This Report has been prepared by Austin Daniel Fox. A summary of the qualifications and experience of the Report writer is 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 Martins Bay precinct.

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 Rezoning and Precincts Geographic (Topic 081), which sets out the statutory framework, methodology, principles and section 32 evaluations used to guide the development and application of zones and precincts.

4.3 The following expert statements of evidence have been relied upon in preparing my Report:

(a) Hearing Topic 056 (Rural Objectives and Policies & Rural Activities and Controls), Ruth Andrews, Planning Evidence, dated 17 May 2015.

(b) Hearing Topic 057 (Rural Objectives and Policies & Rural Activities and Controls), Bain Cross, Planning Evidence, dated 15 May 2015.

5. INTERIM GUIDANCE FROM THE PANEL

5.1 I have read the Panel’s Interim Guidance direction 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; and

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 focussed 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. While the Evaluation Report applies to the entire plan, the report targets the 50 topics where the provisions represent a significant policy shift.

6.3 The precinct provisions do not reflect a major policy shift from the operative plans and are evaluated in this Report in accordance with s32 and s32AA.

PART B: OVERVIEW OF MARTINS BAY PRECINCT

7. CONTEXT

7.1 This proposed precinct is located towards the northern end of Martins Bay and adjacent to the Scandrett Regional Park, which is to the south east of Snells Beach, and comprises a small batch community and associated open space. The precinct location is contained in Attachment B.

7.2 The purpose of the precinct is to ensure the scale and intensity of the existing development is maintained. The precinct seeks to enable small scale new development on the site for 6 dwellings above what currently exists, which is 58 dwellings.

7.3 The underlying zoning of land in the Martins Bay precinct in the PAUP as notified is RC (which is proposed in the joint statement of evidence for Topic 081b of David Hookway and Austin Fox on rezoning for Warkworth and Snells Beach to be changed to RCS zone).

7.4 The following overlays apply to the Martins Bay precinct:

a) Coastal Natural Character Areas; b) Outstanding Natural Landscape; and c) Natural Hazards – Coastal Inundation.

7.5 The surrounding area is characterised by farmland, rural lifestyle properties and the neighbouring Martins Bay Holiday Park. To the north east of the site is Scandrett Regional Park. The closest settlement is Algies Bay to the north west.

7.6 From Scandrett Road the site slopes down to the south east, where the land flattens out around Martins Bay. Dwellings occupy the base of the more steeply sloping land

and along the southern boundary of the site. The site can be seen from certain points of Scandrett Road, with Martins Bay adjoining the Hauraki Gulf.

8. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement

8.1 The Martins Bay area has a coastal location. The precinct generally aligns with the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS). The precinct recognises the natural character of the coastal environment, and the landscape values of Martins Bay by avoiding inappropriate development.

Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000

8.2 It is considered that the precinct is not contrary to the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000. The precinct codifies an existing built form, while steering away significant further development. The existing Martins Bay bach community is relatively small. The built form and associated activities are not considered to impede the life- supporting capacity of the soil, air, water, and ecosystems of the Hauraki Gulf. Coastal structures are proposed to be dealt with at an Auckland-wide level, so that any potential or actual effects resulting from such structures can be managed appropriately.

9. PAUP FRAMEWORK

Regional Policy Statement

9.1 The precinct generally aligns with the strategic direction of the PAUP Regional Policy Statement (RPS). Particular regard is had to the following sections of the RPS:

(a) Issue 7 - Sustainably managing our coastal environment The PAUP specifies that ‘use and development within the coastal environment needs to be in an appropriate location and of an appropriate form’. The terms of the Martins Bay precinct seek to constrain significant further development of the site so as to maintain the existing overall scale of development.

(b) Issue 8 – Sustainably managing our rural environment Natural hazards potentially affecting the precinct are appropriately managed through the Auckland-wide provisions. Natural hazards are an issue for part

of the site in relation to coastal inundation. It is recognised in the PAUP that ‘some existing development, including infrastructure, is already located on land that may be subject to natural hazards. This needs managing to ensure that the risk is not increased’. Recognising the existing dwellings in the precinct, the precinct seeks to minimise further significant development in Martins Bay in order to minimise the risk to people from natural hazards. Furthermore, coastal structures will be addressed through the Auckland-wide provisions to ensure such structures can be managed as appropriately as possible.

PART C: OVERVIEW OF SUBMISSIONS

10. SUBMISSION THEMES

10.1 Two submissions have been received in relation to the Martins Bay precinct.

10.2 The first (submission number 1798-3) requests that the Martins Bay precinct as notified in the PAUP is extended to cover part of a site adjoining the precinct to the south, and for this amended precinct to provide for development of this land. I support this submission in part and have suggested that the precinct map is amended to cover the part of this submitters site that is zoned Future Urban in the operative Plan, and have included a new sub-precinct for this area. I consider a dwelling cap of six units is appropriate for this land as this takes account of the minimum net site area of 3000m2 in the RCS zone as stated in the Council evidence of Elizabeth Stewart for Topic 064.

10.3 The other submission (submission number 4236-101) seeks a change to Policy 4 on page F140 of the PAUP. Page F140 contains the description, objective and policies of the Martins Bay precinct; however there is not a policy 4 for the Martins Bay precinct. As a result I do not consider it possible to grant the relief sought in this submission.

11. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF SUBMISSIONS

11.1 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 to the amended PAUP position as proposed in the Council’s closing statements to the Panel;

12. INCORRECTLY CODED SUBMISSION POINTS

12.1 There are no incorrectly coded submission points in relation to this proposed precinct.

PART D: ANALYSIS OF SUBMISSIONS

13. MERIT ASSESSMENT OF NEW PRECINCT REQUESTS

13.1 I support the Martins Bay precinct for the following reasons:

(a) The precinct is, as noted in existing precinct Objective 2, unique in character, being an example of a small coastal bach settlement.

(b) The precinct meaningfully departs from the provisions of the proposed underlying RCS zone. The RCS zone does not contain appropriate development controls to manage modifications to the existing development.

(c) The precinct generally aligns with the strategic direction of the PAUP RPS. Particular regard is had to Issue 7 - Sustainably managing our coastal environment, and Issue 8 – Sustainably managing our rural environment.

(d) Natural hazards potentially affecting the precinct are appropriately managed through the Auckland-wide provisions. Natural hazards are an issue for the site. Potential hazards at Martins Bay include coastal inundation. Existing dwellings are located adjacent to the coast, with dwellings either sited on slight hills or at sea level. A hillside forms the backdrop to the precinct. It is recognised in the PAUP (Issue 8 – sustainably managing our rural environment) that ‘some existing development, including infrastructure, is already located on land that may be subject to natural hazards. This needs managing to ensure that the risk is not increased’. Recognising the existing dwellings in the precinct, the precinct seeks to minimise inappropriate future development in Martins Bay in order to minimise risk to people from natural hazards.

(e) The precinct generally aligns with the NZCPS. The precinct recognises the natural character of the coastal environment, and the landscape values of Martins Bay by avoiding inappropriate development.

(f) The precinct generally aligns with the objectives and policies of the proposed Rural and Coastal Settlement zone, whereby activities and development are managed in a way which maintains the coastal character of Martins Bay, and development at Martins Bay does not detract from the wider areas amenity values.

(g) The precinct recognises Scheduled Activity 113 of the Auckland Council District Plan (Operative Rodney) Section 2011. In the 1980's the Rodney District Council acknowledged the existence of the settlement and gave it legal status, through this Scheduled Activity. Provision for up to 10 additional dwellings within the bach area enables the settlement to redevelop without compromising the upper slopes and coastal landscape character of the area. Retaining the informality of the settlement through unformed driveways and parking areas throughout the bach areas ensures the historical bach character is retained.

(h) As the provisions of the proposed underlying RCS zone depart from what is sought in the precinct, existing use rights cannot be solely relied upon to provide for reasonable modifications to the existing built form.

14. ANALYSIS OF PRECINCT PROVISIONS 14.1 The main differences between the precinct and the relevant zone, which is taken to be RCS, as proposed in the joint statement of evidence for Topic 081b of David Hookway and Austin Fox on rezoning for Warkworth and Snells Beach, are set out in Table 1, which is reproduced below for convenience:

Main precinct provision or group of Difference from PAUP provisions changes

More restrictive. Density Limit of one per 4000m2. More

Density Limit of 64. More enabling. restrictive.

14.2 The underlying proposed RCS zone does not provide for such existing situations as Martins Bay, where there are multiple dwellings on a single site. The precinct seeks to codify existing use rights.

14.3 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 the submitter, I consider that the proposed set of provisions as marked up in Attachment C are appropriate for the aforementioned reasons in paragraph 13.1.

15. CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO OTHER PARTS OF THE PAUP

15.1 There are no consequential amendments required.

16. CONCLUSIONS

16.1 I have considered the submissions received on the proposed Martins Bay precinct. I consider that the map included within Attachment B (which includes the additional land referred to in submission point 1798-3 and depicts two sub-precincts), and the amendments to the precinct text as set out in the proposed set of provisions, as marked up in Attachment C, most appropriately meet the purpose of the Act.

Austin Fox

26 January 2016

ATTACHMENT A: CV of Report Writer

Austin Fox

Career Summary

Period Role Organisation

2013 – Present Planner Auckland Council

2004 – 2011 Planning Officer Newcastle City Council

2003 – 2004 Area Planning Officer Castle Morpeth Borough Council

2001 – 2003 Planning Officer South Norfolk Council

Qualifications

Year University Qualification

2003 University of Newcastle upon Tyne Diploma, Town Planning

2001 University of Newcastle upon Tyne BA(Hons), Town & Country Planning

ATTACHMENT B: Planning map

ATTACHMENT C: Track changes for Martins Bay 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.

Green text changes record amendments proposed and agreed to in mediation (those amendments not agreed to stay black)

Red text changes record amendments proposed in rebuttal evidence

Blue text changes record amendments proposed post hearing (e.g. right of reply)

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

5.24. Martins Bay precinct

The objectives and policies of the underlying Rural and Coastal Settlement zone apply in the following precinct unless otherwise specified. Refer to planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct.

1 Precinct description

The Martins Bay precinct is located on Scandrett Road, adjacent to Martins Bay beach and the entrance to the Scandrett Regional Park. The precinct has been split into two Sub- Comment [1]: Reflects new precinct precincts (refer to Precinct Plan 1). The underlying zone for the precinct is Rural and Coastal structure, with addition of land referred to Settlement. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct and sub- in submission point 1798-3. precincts.

The purpose of the precinct is to maintain and enhance existing development and character of this unique coastal bach settlement. The key feature of the area is the informality of development with unformed driveways and car parking areas. A maximum of 58 dwellings is provided for within Sub-precinct A and a maximum of six dwellings is provided for in Sub- precinct B. and nNew dwellings will require resource consent and will be subject to controls to maintain the scale of the coastal landscape character and the integrity of the upper slopes. The precinct also provides for the establishment of an esplanade reserve that includes the trees running along the foreshore of the site and for a significant area of communal open space to be maintained.

2 Objectives The underlying zone and Auckland-wide objectives apply in this precinct, in addition to those Comment [2]: Consistency with other specified below: precincts.

The objectives are as listed in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone in addition to those specified below: 1. Landscape and natural character values of Martins Bay are protected.

2. The unique character of the coastal bach settlement is maintained and enhanced.

3 Policies The underlying zone and Auckland-wide policies apply in this precinct, in addition to those Comment [3]: Consistency with other specified below: precincts.

The policies are as listed in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone in addition to those specified below: 1. Locate and limit the visual impact of buildings, roads and earthworks to retain the Comment [4]: Policies 1 and 2 merged landscape values, and unique character in Martins Bay, and its coastal bach to remove unnecessary duplication. settlement.

2. Locate and limit the visual impact of buildings, roads and earthworks to maintain and enhance the unique character of the coastal bach settlement.

Precinct Rules 5.24 Martins Bay precinct

The activities, controls and assessment criteria in the underlying Rural and Coastal Comment [5]: Consistency. Settlement 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.

The underlying zoning of land within this precinct is Rural and Coastal Settlement zone. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct and sub-precincts.

The provisions in Chapter I for the underlying zone and Auckland-wide provisions of Chapter H apply in this precinct unless otherwise specified below

1. Activity table

The activities in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone apply in the Martins Bay precinct Comment [6]: Consistency. unless otherwise specified in the activity table below.

The underlying zone and Auckland-wide activity tables apply in this precinct unless otherwise specified below.

Activity table – Martins Bay precinct Activity Activity status Sub- Sub- Comment [7]: Additions reflect new precinct structure. precinct A precinct B Development Replacement of existing dwellings and accessory buildings to P NA the same footprint and height as at 1 September 2006 Existing vehicle access arrangements for up to 58 dwellings as at P NA 1 September 2006 Vehicle access arrangements for up to 6 Sub-precinct B dwellings NA P via existing Sub-precinct A vehicle access Dwellings RD RD Conversion of a dwelling into a maximum of two dwellings NC NC Accessory buildings RD RD Comment [8]: Accessory buildings included here to ensure the special Additions to an existing dwelling RD RD character of the bach community is maintained. Subdivision Comment [9]: Additions to existing dwellings included here to ensure the Subdivision of the Martins Bay precinct from remainder of the site RD RD special character of the bach community is maintained.

2. Land use controls 1. The land use controls in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone apply in the Martins Comment [10]: Consistency. Bay precinct unless otherwise specified below.

The underlying zone and Auckland-wide land use controls apply in this precinct, unless otherwise specified below.

2.1 Density

1. The number of dwellings in the Sub-precincts must not exceed: 58 Comment [11]: Reflects new proposed a) Sub-precinct A – 58; precinct structure. b) Sub-precinct B – 6. Comment [12]: 6 equates to a maximum number of dwellings that are provided for 2. Development that does not comply with clause 1 above is a non-complying activity. in an underlying RCS zone.

3. Development controls

1. The development controls in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone apply in the Comment [13]: Consistency. Martins Bay precinct unless otherwise specified below.

The underlying zone development controls and Auckland-wide controls apply in this precinct, unless otherwise specified below.

3.1 Building coverage

1. A dwelling (including any associated accessory building) footprint must not exceed: Comment [14]: Accessory buildings a. 168m2 for single storey included here to ensure the special character of the bach community is maintained. b. 140m2 for two storeys.

2. Decks must not exceed 25m2 plus an area equivalent to the difference in the maximum dwelling footprint in clause 1 above and the footprint of the relevant dwelling.

3. Buildings or decks must not located within the communal open space or future esplanade reserve shown in Precinct Plan 1.

3.2 Open space

1. A minimum of 5,000m2 of communal open space must be maintained adjoining the future esplanade reserve as shown on Precinct Plan 1.

3.3 Yards

1. Buildings and decks must not locate within 6m of the future esplanade reserve shown Comment [15]: Decks included here to on Precinct Plan 1. ensure the special character of the bach community is maintained. 3.4 Reticulated connection

1. Dwellings in Sub-precinct A must be connected to Martins Bay 1999 Ltd private Comment [16]: Reflects new precinct sewerage reticulation and water supply. structure.

4. Subdivision controls The subdivision controls in the Auckland wide rules – Subdivision applies in the Martins Bay precinct, unless otherwise specified below. 1. An esplanade reserve as indicated by the future esplanade reserve area in Precinct Plan 1 must be provided when subdivision of the Martins Bay precinct from the remainder of the site occurs.

5. Assessment – Restricted discretionary activities

5.1 Matters of discretion For activities/development that is a restricted discretionary activity in the Martins Bay precinct, the council will restrict its discretion to the following matters, in addition to the matters specified for the relevant restricted discretionary activities in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone and the Auckland-wide rules – Subdivision. 1. Location, design, scale and appearance of buildings.

2. Landscaping and screening.

3. Earthworks and land modification.

4. Land suitability for building.

5. That the existing access is maintained to the bach settlement.

6. Methods and design of water supply, sewage disposal and drainage.

7. Provision of an esplanade reserve.

5.2 Assessment criteria For activities/development that is a restricted discretionary activity in the Martins Bay precinct, the following assessment criteria apply in addition to the criteria specified for the relevant restricted discretionary activities in the Rural and Coastal Settlement zone and the Auckland-wide rules – Subdivision. 1. The proposed overall development, location and design of buildings and provision of open space should be in general accordance with maintaining the future esplanade reserve and communal open space on Precinct Plan 1.

2. Buildings and structures should be sited so they do not require extensive landform modification to minimise adverse effects on natural landform and discharges of silt.

3. Appropriate methods should be proposed to avoid adverse effects on land stability, water quality, and the habitats of flora and fauna.

4. Development should be in scale with development on site existing at 1 September 2006.

5. Development should retain the informal character of the existing coastal village by: a. not requiring individual sealed driveways or car parking areas

b. avoiding kerb and channelling.

6. Precinct plan

Precinct Plan 1: Martins Bay precinct