Interim guidance on the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) will only be issued by the Panel where it has reached an agreed interim position on likely changes to the plan as notified.
Some key things in the interim guidance are listed below. It is important to read the guidance in full to understand the panel's interim position.
Topic 081 - Re-zoning and Precincts (Geographical Areas)
Approach to Re-zoning and precincts in greenfield areas proposed to come inside the Rural Urban Boundary
Read the full interim guidance here: Topic 081 - Re-zoning and Precincts (Geographical Areas) (PDF 166KB)
Further Interim Guidance for Chapter G - Regional and District Rules - released 9 October 2015
G2.1 – Determining activity status
- Overall activity status of a proposal should be determined based on all rules which apply to a proposal.
- The most restrictive rule which applies to a proposal should take precedence.
- The relationship between Auckland-wide, zones and precinct rules remains inconsistent and at issue for the Panel. The problem arises with those precinct rules which are intended to take precedence over the Auckland-wide or zone rules. At the upcoming hearings on Rezoning and Precincts the Panel will be further assessing precinct rules against the following:
- why a precinct rule that is more enabling than an Auckland-wide or zone rule is necessary; and
- whether or not such a precinct rule is the most appropriate way of addressing the matter; and
- how such a precinct rule could fit into the Panel’s preferred proposition of the most restrictive rule taking precedence.
- The Panel is unable to resolve the most appropriate form of rule G2.1 - Determining Activity Status before hearing and considering submitters’ evidence on precincts in Topic 081.
G2.3 – Rule infringements for permitted, controlled and restricted discretionary activities
- Restricted discretionary activity status is appropriate. Only matters of relevance to the standard or standards being infringed should be considered.
- To avoid confusion, and to better distinguish the components of an activity that are required to be met to ensure a particular activity status, the Panel prefers the term “standard” (e.g. permitted activity standard, controlled activity standard, restricted discretionary activity standard, land use standard or development standard. This confines the word “control” to a controlled activity and its associated matters of control only.
G2.4 – Notification
- All controlled activities should be considered without public or limited notification, or the need to obtain written approval from affected parties, unless special circumstances exist under s95A(4) RMA.
- All restricted discretionary, discretionary or non-complying activities should be subject to the normal tests for notification under the relevant section of the RMA, unless otherwise specified by a specific rule in the Plan.
Read the full interim guidance here: Further Interim Guidance for Chapter G - Regional and District Rules (PDF 242KB)
Topic 035 Air Quality - released 6 October 2015
This guidance provides direction to the rezoning as sites to Heavy and/or Light Industry zones which will be addressed in hearing topics 080 and 081.
- Air quality in the region should be kept at the same levels or improved, i.e. not allowed to get worse.
- Most adverse effects on air quality come from motor vehicles and domestic fires which can’t be dealt with under the RMA.
- Controls to reduce emissions should be commensurate with the extent of the effects and recognise the benefits that industry provides to the region.
- The overlays proposed in the Plan are not supported.
- More land should be zoned for heavy industry.
- Industries discharging contaminants to air should be located within the heavy industry zone.
Read the full interim guidance here: 035 Air Quality (PDF 172KB)
Major Recreation Zone and Precincts - released 7 September 2015
- The Panel endorses the structure of a single zone and precincts.
- Clarification is provided with respect to activity tables.
- A three-tiered noise assessment framework is supported.
- Specific comment is provided with respect to Pukekohe Park and Eden Park.
- The lighting controls and transport management approach proposed by Council is supported.
- Clarification with respect to helicopter usage is provided.
- Increased timeframes with respect to operating temporary buildings and structures.
- Support of the Interface Control Area (ICA) concept and height-to-boundary development controls.
- Suggested removal of footprint controls (GFA) and other urban design controls (excluding the ICA).
- Subdivision of sites should promote the Primary Activity of the precinct.
- The Panel is still considering issues relating to design statements, notification rules, Historic Heritage Overlays, SEA Overlays, and rezoning requests.
- Directions and next steps are provided.
Read the full interim guidance here: 076 Major Recreation Zone and Precincts (PDF 255KB)
Best practice approaches to rezoning, precincts and changes to the Rural Urban Boundary - released 31 July 2015
- The Panel has set out its interim position on best practice for changes to the zones, precincts and the Rural Urban Boundary (RUB).
- This is to help parties to prepare for the hearing on these topics.
- Evidence for on these topics should address the matters set out in the guidance.
Read the full interim guidance here: Interim guidance released on best practice approaches to rezoning, precincts and changes to the RUB (PDF 190KB)
Interim guidance text for Topic 020 Viewshafts - released 17 July 2015
- The Panel is concerned about the insufficient information before it regarding the methodology of view identification, protection and management.
- The Panel has asked the Council, Housing NZ and any other submitters on this topic who wish to, either jointly or separately, to develop a methodology of view identification, protection and management based on regional, district and local viewshafts.
- For further information, refer to the full Interim Guidance Text for Topic 020 Viewshafts.
Read the full interim guidance here: 020 Viewshafts (PDF 59KB)
Special Character and Pre-1944 - released 15 July 2015
- The Panel is not convinced that special character is “historic heritage” requiring protection as a matter of national importance.
- If Council wishes to change the provisions from special character to historic character (i.e. a change from s7 to s6 of the RMA) then it should proceed by a plan change.
- Howick should remain a special character area.
- Additional special character areas should be addressed by a future plan change.
- The Pre-1944 Demolition Control Overlay is placing unnecessary constraints and burdens on landowners seeking to develop their properties.
- It is also an unnecessary burden on submitters preparing for hearings on topic 079 Special Character and Pre-1944 Mapping.
- No evidence to suggest that the pre-1944 buildings are at any significant risk of demolition or relocation.
- No evidence that the areas where there are pre-1944 buildings are at risk of losing their character.
- If the Council wishes to pursue the Pre-1944 Demolition Control Overlay this should be done through a plan change process.
Read the full interim guidance here: 029 and 030 Special Character and Pre-1944 (PDF 75KB)
Natural Hazards and Flooding - released 6 May 2015
- The Panel supports the merging of the natural hazard and flooding provisions into one section.
- The Panel considers that the merged provisions should seek to not increase risks in areas of existing activities and avoid the creation of new risks in areas of proposed development while acknowledging the functional needs of particular activities to be located in areas which are subject to natural hazards such as on the coast.
- The Panel is concerned about the inconsistent reference to natural hazards (including all types listed in s106 of the RMA) in the subdivision provisions and the apparent lack of regulatory control. Controls on subdivision are a direct way in which to avoid new risks in areas of proposed development.
- The Panel considers that there are other more appropriate methods to address certain aspects of natural hazards.
- The Panel is not convinced about the degree of restriction on use and development in existing built up areas under the natural hazard and flooding provisions. More consideration should be given to enabling design-led solutions using controlled or restricted discretionary activity status, with appropriately limited matters of control or discretion, and clear and succinct assessment criteria that assist with giving effect to the objectives and policies for natural hazards and flooding.
- The Panel considers that the Plan provisions should deal with coastal inundation / sea level rise on the basis of a projected 1m sea level rise within 100 years (i.e. to 2115).
- The Panel considers that the Plan provisions should deal with the 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) coastal storm tide event plus the 1m projected sea level rise.
- The Panel is not convinced of the need for a 2m sea level rise to be identified as a statutory requirement in the Plan or maps. Maps showing a 2m sea level rise could be located outside of the PAUP GIS Viewer (i.e. in Auckland Council’s GIS Viewer).
- The Panel is not satisfied that there is jurisdiction to include rules in the Plan which control the way in which building work is undertaken on existing sites except where the Plan provisions regulate buildings for the purpose of the protection of other property (as defined in s7 Building Act 2004) from the effects of surface water, given the provisions in s18 Building Act 2004 and ss 68(2A) and 76(2A) RMA.
- The Panel accepts that there is jurisdiction to include rules in the Plan to control the development of areas of land (rather than existing sites) through the processes of subdivision and structure planning.
- The Panel is not convinced of the necessity for the text provisions and maps for a Flood Prone layer.
- The Panel considers that churches and schools should be less vulnerable activities for the purposes of these provisions.
- The Panel is not convinced of the need for provisions regarding bushfire.
- The Panel agrees that the definitions in relation to land which may be subject to instability can be improved. The Panel considers the evidence of Mr Hillier from Tonkin & Taylor to be persuasive. For the reasons he gives, the Panel considers that liquefaction is a relevant consideration at the stage of subdivision or structure planning, and may be assessed having regard to the references to subsidence, slippage and erosion in section 106 RMA.
Read the full interim guidance here: 022 Natural Hazards and Flooding - Updated 10 June 2015 (PDF 276KB)
Chapter G (default status, information requirements, bundling, control modification) - by 9 March
- More thought needed around consents for controlled and restricted discretionary activities being considered without public or limited notification.
- Plan should not include lists of information required for resource consents.
- Default activity status should be discretionary rather than non-complying.
Read the full interim guidance here: Regional and District Rules - PAUP Chapter G - General Provisions (PDF 231KB)
Waitakere Ranges precinct - the panel will no longer be releasing interim guidance on the Waitakere Ranges precinct. Please refer to the hearings page, under topic 075 'documents' to find the relevant information post pre-hearing meeting.
General structure of the RPS - by 9 March 2015
- There should be a separate RPS section in the plan.
- The overview of resource management issues is appropriate – no further issues need to be added.
- Things that are not RPS matters need to be moved to other sections.
- Things that are not about resource management need to be taken out.
- Suggestions to make this section easier to understand, including reorganising the content.
Read the full interim guidance here: RPS General - PAUP Chapter B - Regional Policy Statement (PDF 378KB)
Infrastructure and energy - by 27 February 2015
- Infrastructure is crucial to any development and needs its own section in the RPS.
- No distinction between infrastructure and significant infrastructure.
- Social infrastructure not included - should be dealt with elsewhere.
Read the full interim guidance here: 012 RPS - PAUP Section B3.2 - Significant infrastructure and Energy (PDF 106KB)
Urban growth - other matters - released 20 March 2015
- Diversity, innovation and choice in building design are not given effect in the district plan provisions.
- The PAUP should help improve affordability of homes by dealing with limited land supply and overly restrictive development controls, but not by trying to control prices of favour certain kinds of home ownership.
- Some growth and development in rural and coastal towns and villages should be provided for and structure planning should apply to this development.
- Social facilities should be able to use their sites efficiently by providing for ancillary activities and complementary business activities.
- Support for commercial growth on transport corridors as well as in centres.
- Resource management policies should not be used to protect the viability of centres.
Read the full interim guidance here: 013 Urban Growth - PAUP Sections B2.2, B2.4, B2.5, B2.6, B2.7 and B3.1 (PDF 1.71MB)
Urban growth/rural urban boundary - released 24 February 2015
- Support for a quality compact city and the use of a rural urban boundary (RUB) to achieve this.
- The RUB should be more flexible, but there should be no urbanisation outside the RUB.
- Identifies where higher residential density should be enabled.
Read the full interim guidance here: 013 Urban Growth - PAUP Sections B2.1 and B2.3 (PDF 183KB)
Rural subdivision - updated 10 June 2015
- Subdivision in rural zones should be provided for to a greater extent.
- Clarifies the constraints that should apply to rural subdivision.
- Productive potential of elite soils should not be undermined.
Read the full updated interim guidance here: 011 Rural - PAUP Section B8.3 - Rural Subdivision (PDF 34KB)
Other Rural - The panel will no longer be providing interim guidance on topic 011 Rural - PAUP Section 8.1 - Rural activities and PAUP Section 8.2 - Land with high productive potential