Auckland Transport · This resource consent application seeks consent to modify 12 existing verandas that overhang the required clearance envelope of the double decker bus. These

Auckland Transport

Alterations to Verandahs - Eden Valley Special Character Area

Resource Consent Application

October 2018

GHD | Report for Auckland Transport – Alterations to Verandahs - Eden Valley Special Character Area - 51/34340/00| i

Table of contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Summary of Project consent requirements....................................................................... 1

1.3 Summary of works subject to this consent application ...................................................... 1

2. Applicant and property details ................................................................................................... 3

3. Description of the proposal ........................................................................................................ 5

3.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 5

3.2 Clearance requirements .................................................................................................. 6

3.3 Scope of proposed route clearance works ....................................................................... 6

3.4 Description of the works subject to this application........................................................... 7

3.5 Permitted verandah works ............................................................................................. 18

3.6 Assessment of alternatives ............................................................................................ 19

4. Site description ....................................................................................................................... 22

4.1 Location ........................................................................................................................ 22

4.2 Zoning ........................................................................................................................... 23

4.3 Surrounding environment .............................................................................................. 23

5. Matters requiring consent ........................................................................................................ 24

5.1 Consents sought ........................................................................................................... 24

5.2 Permitted activities ........................................................................................................ 24

5.3 Other resource consents required .................................................................................. 24

5.4 National Environmental Standards ................................................................................. 25

6. Consultation ............................................................................................................................ 26

6.1 Engagement with Council .............................................................................................. 26

6.2 Mana Whenua consultation ........................................................................................... 26

6.3 Consultation with building owners/ occupiers ................................................................. 26

6.4 Community engagement................................................................................................ 26

7. Assessment of effects on the environment............................................................................... 27

7.1 Necessity of the works ................................................................................................... 28

7.2 Public benefit and positive effects .................................................................................. 28

7.3 Potential Adverse Effects ............................................................................................... 29

7.4 Summary of effects assessment .................................................................................... 33

8. Statutory assessment .............................................................................................................. 34

8.1 Part 2 assessment of the RMA – Purpose and principles ............................................... 34

8.2 Assessment of objectives and policies ........................................................................... 34

9. Notification .............................................................................................................................. 38

9.1 Section 95A - Public Notification .................................................................................... 38

9.2 Section 95E - Affected Persons ..................................................................................... 38

9.3 Section 95B - Limited Notification .................................................................................. 39

GHD | Report for Auckland Transport – Alterations to Verandahs - Eden Valley Special Character Area - 51/34340/00| ii

10. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 40

11. Scope and limitations .............................................................................................................. 41

Figure index

Figure 1 – Dominion Road Double Decker Bus Route ......................................................................... 5

Figure 2 - Required road clearances ................................................................................................... 6

Figure 3 – Character-defining Building – 211-215 Dominion Road ....................................................... 7



Figure 6 – Character-defining Building – 274 Dominion Road ............................................................ 10

Figure 7 – Character-defining Building – 276-278 Dominion Road ..................................................... 11

Figure 8 – Character-defining Building – 280 Dominion Road ............................................................ 12

Figure 9 – Character-defining Building – 293-305 Dominion Road ..................................................... 13

Figure 10 – Character Area Building (neither character defining nor character supporting) –

335 Dominion Road ....................................................................................................... 14

Figure 11– Character-defining Building – 349 Dominion Road ........................................................... 15

Figure 12 – Character-defining Building – 353 Dominion Road .......................................................... 16



Figure 15 – Building verandah locations along Dominion Road .......................................................... 22

Table index

Table 1 - Applicant and property details ............................................................................................... 3

Table 2 Proposed Cutback Dimensions ............................................................................................... 8



Table 5 Proposed Cutback Dimensions ............................................................................................. 10





Table 10 Proposed Cutback Dimensions ........................................................................................... 15




Table 14 – AUP (OP) Planning Assessment ...................................................................................... 24

GHD | Report for Auckland Transport – Alterations to Verandahs - Eden Valley Special Character Area - 51/34340/00| iii

Appendices

Appendix A – Verandah plans

Appendix B – Options Analysis Summary

Appendix C – AUP(OP) Special Character Area Overlay – Business: Eden Valley | Special

Character Statement

Appendix D – Heritage Assessment

Appendix E – Landowner Written Approvals

GHD | Report for Auckland Transport – Alterations to Verandahs - Eden Valley Special Character Area - 51/34340/00 | 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

This resource consent application is one of a suite of consents sought from Auckland Council (the

Council) for works necessary to safely establish Auckland Transport’s1 (AT) Double Decker Bus

Routes.

To increase the capacity of the existing passenger transport network, AT is in the process of

establishing double decker bus routes on key corridors throughout the Auckland region.

AT is responsible for all Auckland regional transport services2, including:

Provision of roads, footpaths, cycleways, carparking and public transport services;

Construction, maintenance and repair of Auckland’s roads and transport network; and

Provision and maintenance of passenger transport services and associated infrastructure

throughout the Auckland region.

The consents lodged and approved to date, for works to provide a clearance envelope along the AT

double decker bus routes, include all tree trimming/ removals and verandah cut-back works along

routes including the Botany Road, Onewa Road, Mt Eden Road and Great North Road routes. All of

the consents lodged to date have been assessed and granted without the need for limited or public

notification.

To integrate these new double decker buses quickly, safely and with as little disruption as possible to

the road network and passenger transport service, AT has begun to undertake the necessary

clearance works along the Dominion Road Double Decker Bus Route (known as the Dominion Road

Route) from September 2018.

1.2 Summary of Project consent requirements

The Dominion Road Route will follow the existing (255, 258, 258X, 267 and 267X) routes as shown

in Figure 1 below. The Dominion Road Route travels from both Lynfield and Blockhouse Bay, joining

in Mount Roskill and travelling the length of Dominion Road before entering the CBD.

Resource consent is not required to establish the double decker bus route. Consent is required for

some of the clearance works within the road corridor. These works typically include tree trimming,

tree removals, works within the root zone and cut backs to the verandahs of buildings. Other works

required are permitted activities.

1.3 Summary of works subject to this consent application

This resource consent application seeks consent to modify 12 existing verandas that overhang the

required clearance envelope of the double decker bus. These verandahs are located on buildings

identified within the Special Character Area Overlay – Business: Eden Valley. Eleven of the buildings

are identified as character defining buildings within the character overlay and one is a character

building (neither character defining nor character supporting). The reduced verandah widths will

allow the double decker buses to run safely along the route.

1 An Auckland Council Controlled Organisation and Requiring Authority, in accordance with section 167 of the Resource Management

Act 1991 (RMA), 2 Excluding State Highways.


Although the verandahs are not owned by AT (owned by the private owners of the buildings they are

attached to), the verandahs encroach over road reserve which is administered by AT. Consultation

with all landowners has been undertaken and their approval obtained (refer Appendix E).

This application does not seek consent for the other activities associated with clearance of the route

for the double decker buses. Those consents will be lodged separately and will include:

Consent to undertake tree works along the Ian McKinnon Drive portion of the route;

Consent to undertake tree works within the CBD portion of the route;

Consent to undertake tree works along the Dominion Road portion of the route (lodged prior to

this consent – TRE60325776);

Consent to undertake tree works along the View Road portion of the route (lodged prior to this

consent – LUC60325920);

Consent to undertake tree works along the Lynfield and Blockhouse Bay legs of the route

(Consent approved 13/08/18, council reference: TRE60322330).

This application has been prepared in accordance with Section 88 and the Fourth Schedule of the

Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), and the Auckland Unitary Plan – Operative in Part

(AUP(OP)).


2. Applicant and property details

Table 1 - Applicant and property details

Applicant: Auckland Transport

Landowner: Auckland Transport – Owner of the Road Corridor

(the subject verandahs extend into the road

corridor which is administered by Auckland

Transport as a Council Controlled Organisation)

Property Owners –

The North Trust (211-215 Dominion Road)

Xiaoyue Niu (226-228 Dominion Road)

Yu Li (244-248 Dominion Road)

David Vujanic (274 Dominion Road)

Thomas McCann (276-278 Dominion Road)

Kuang-I Feng (280 Dominion Road)

Andrew Langridge (293-305 Dominion Road)

Andrew Langridge (335 Dominion Road)

Chris Burke (349 Dominion Road)

Natu Chhiba (353 Dominion Road)

Natu Chhiba (355 Dominion Road)

Trevor Doreen (357-361 Dominion Road)

Address for Service:

All correspondence should be

directed to the Address for Service

unless otherwise specifically

requested.

Auckland Transport

Private Bag 92250

Auckland 1142

Attention: Manini Hallikeri

cc Matt Keyse

GHD Limited

PO Box 6543 Wellesley Street

Auckland 1141

Legal Description of Site Road Reserve

Physical address and legal description of buildings immediately adjacent the road corridor

and to which the verandahs are attached

Physical Address: Legal Description/ CT:

211-215 Dominion Road, Auckland

Unit A and Accessory Unit 1-3 Deposited Plan

187952/ NA118A/282


226-228 Dominion Road, Auckland Lot 2 Deposited Plan 31896/ NA985/261

244-248 Dominion Road, Auckland Part Lot 4 of Allotments 7 and 8 Section 10

Suburbs of Auckland and Part Lot 4 Allotment 7

and 8 Section 10 Suburbs of Auckland and Part

Lot 4 Allotment 7 and 8 of Section 10 Suburbs of

Auckland/ 235566

274 Dominion Road, Auckland Lot 2-4 and Part Lot 1 Deposited Plan 17436/

NA40C/908

276-278 Dominion Road, Auckland Lot 5-6 Deposited Plan 17436/ NA423/107

280 Dominion Road, Auckland Lot 7-8 Deposited Plan 17436/ NA415/215

293-305 Dominion Road, Auckland Lot 8-9 Block 1 Deposited Plan 174/ NA197/31

335 Dominion Road, Auckland Part Lot 4-5 Deposited Plan 16887/ NA1098/231

349 Dominion Road, Auckland Part Lot 56 Deposited Plan 397/ NA67C/963

353-355 Dominion Road, Auckland Part Lot 57 Deposited Plan 397/ NA177/111

357-361 Dominion Road, Auckland Part Lot 58 Deposited Plan 397/ NA323/190

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in

Part) - Zoning and Limitations

Zoning: Business - Local Centre Zone

Overlays: Built Heritage and Character: Special

Character Areas Overlay Residential and

Business - Business Eden Valley

Natural Resources: Quality-Sensitive Aquifer

Management Areas Overlay - Western Springs

Volcanic Aquifer

Natural Heritage: Regionally Significant Volcanic

Viewshafts And Height Sensitive Areas Overlay -

E6, Mount Eden, Viewshafts

Controls: Arterial Roads

Height Variation Control - Eden Valley, 13m

Macroinvertebrate Community Index – Urban

Designation: Auckland Transport - Passenger

Transport Route Designation (1614)


3. Description of the proposal

3.1 Background

AT is in the process of establishing double decker bus routes on key corridors across the Auckland

region. The planned service commencement date for the Dominion Road Route is December 2018.

The Dominion Road Route travels from both Lynfield and Blockhouse Bay, joining in Mount Roskill

and travelling the length of Dominion Road before entering the CBD as shown in Figure 1.

The clearance works, including tree clearance and verandah cut backs, associated with the route

from Auckland CBD through Panmure to Botany (known as the Botany Route), the route through Mt

Eden to Hillsborough (known as the Mt Eden Route) and the route through Western Springs to New

Lynn (known as the Great North Road Route) have already been consented.

AT has undertaken route surveys to ensure the required clearances (discussed further in Section 3.2

of this report) can be achieved along the Dominion Road Route. Clearance works have been

identified to eliminate conflicts with the double decker buses where existing trees and verandahs

extend into and across the road corridor.

Figure 1 – Dominion Road Double Decker Bus Route

Source: Auckland Transport


3.2 Clearance requirements

In order for double decker buses to safely operate on the existing road network there is a need to

provide a clearance envelope that is free from hazards. Providing a clearance envelope beyond the

kerb-line, contributes to creating a safer road environment, which is part of AT’s ‘safe system’

approach.

AT has adopted a horizontal clearance of 500mm setback from the kerb face on double decker bus

routes to account for the camber of the road and lean of higher buses. Where the buses are entering

and exiting bus stops, this horizontal clearance is increased to 1000mm to account for the wide tail

swing of the buses.

Figure 2 - Required road clearances

Source: GHD

3.3 Scope of proposed route clearance works

GHD has been engaged by AT to ascertain the works required within the road reserve along the

Dominion Road Route in order to provide adequate clearance for double decker buses. Conflicts with;

verandahs, street furniture, traffic signs, power and telephone poles and trees along the route have

been noted and are being addressed in several ways. Various options have been explored for

dealing with these conflicts including:

Tree trimming within arboriculture best practice guidelines.

Tree removal.

Cutting-back verandahs that protrude towards the road corridor.

Alterations to the road layout to provide bus lanes in the middle of the road.

Repainting of road markings.

Moving street furniture such as signage, light poles, bus stops and telephone poles.

Moving kerb lines.

Alternative routes.

The solutions now proposed for the Dominion Road Route comprise an overall balanced package of

work in order to ensure the safety of bus passengers, effective traffic operations and maintenance of

heritage and character values.


3.4 Description of the works subject to this application

The proposed works involve the cut back of 12 existing verandahs on character defining buildings

within the Special Character Area Overlay – Business: Eden Valley. One building which is located in

the special character area that is neither identified as character defining nor character supporting will

also require works. The verandahs are currently projecting into the clearance envelope required by the

double decker buses as outlined in section 3.2 above. These verandahs are shown in the figures

below with design drawings contained in Appendix A.

3.4.1 211-215 Dominion Road

The building located at 211-215 Dominion Road is a two storey, rendered brick building located near

the intersection of Dominion Road and Valley Road.

Figure 3 – Character-defining Building – 211-215 Dominion Road

The building is located adjacent to an existing bus stop and therefore the verandah requires a

setback of 1000mm from the kerb. The verandah is currently set back 600mm from the kerb. It needs

to be cutback by 400mm to meet the clearance requirements.

The proposed alterations will involve removing and disposing of the existing edge beam (which does

not meet the current structural code) and tie rods, which are not suitable to be reused due to their

poor condition.

The existing timber rafters will be cut shorter to suit; and a new edge beam installed.

New tie rods will be fabricated to match the originals. The tie rods will be connected to the existing

fixing points on the parapet wall and to new fixing plates bolted to the edge beam.

The existing roofing will be cut shorter and reused, new flashings installed and the existing signage,

lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as appropriate.


Table 2 Proposed Cutback Dimensions

Existing verandah width

Proposed cutback Resultant width Reduction in Verandah

Resultant setback

2400mm 400mm 2000mm 16% 1000mm


226-228 Dominion Road is a two-storey timber building with weatherboard construction. At the time

of the pre-application meeting it was considered the neighbouring verandah at 224 would need to be

cut back as well, however through further investigation this is no longer necessary.


The existing verandah is a freestanding canopy structure comprising of stretched fabric over curved

steel frames.

The canopy is 200mm back from the kerb line therefore, will need to be reduced in width by around

300mm to meet the 500mm clearance requirements. This work will involve cutting the existing

curved steel roof frame off the support posts; cutting down the curved rafters to suit the reduced

width before re-welding the modified frame to the retained support posts on-site.




Resultant setback

2050mm 300mm 1750mm 14% 500mm



The building located at 224-228 Dominion Road is a two-storey building containing four independent

shops on the lower floor.


The building veranda is currently 250mm back from the kerb line, therefore it is proposed to be

reduced in width by approximately 250mm to meet the 500mm clearance requirements.

The proposed alterations comprise removing and disposing of the existing edge beam (which does

not meet the current structural code) and tie rods, which are not suitable to be reused due to their

poor condition.

The existing timber rafters will be retained, after being cut shorter to suit, and will be refixed to the

new timber edge beam. New tie rods will be fabricated to match the originals and will be connected

to the edge beam.

The existing roofing (which is relatively new) will be cut shorter and reused with new flashings and

soffits installed. The existing signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced as

appropriate.




Resultant setback

2600mm 250mm 2350mm 9% 500mm


3.4.4 274 Dominion Road

The building located at 274 Dominion Road known as Geoff’s Emporium is a two-storey building with

a zig zag style verandah cantilevered off the building.

Figure 6 – Character-defining Building – 274 Dominion Road

The building verandah is currently 100mm back from the kerb line, therefore it is proposed to be

reduced in width by approximately 400mm to meet the 500mm clearance requirement.

However, at this amount of setback, the front edge of the verandah clashes with the existing light

pole. AT have deemed that this pole is not able to be relocated; and so there are two options to

address this clash:

1. Reduce the verandah front edge to be at least 80mm clear of the pole all around; or

2. Reduce the width of the verandah overall by a further 300mm (approximately, resulting in a

total cutback of 600mm) so that the front edge passes behind the pole.

The design development team assessed both options and considered the second option to be the

most appropriate, as maintaining the overall integrity of the verandah’s appearance was considered

a higher priority than maximising the width of cover that the verandah provides.

The proposed alteration works will involve the removal of the front fascia elements (flashing and

fascia board) before cutting back the internal structure and reinstating the fascia. This will be done by

using the original material if it is in suitable condition or replacing this with new material to match.

The existing light pole will remain in its current position but will no longer be embedded within the

verandah. The edge beam of the proposed verandah will fall behind the pole with the proposed

cutback.




Resultant setback

2900mm 600mm (to clear the pole)

2300mm 20% 500mm



The building located at 276-278 Dominion Road is the two storey building located directly next to the

Geoff’s Emporium building. The verandah has recently been refurbished along with the rest of the

building.


The building’s verandah is currently 200mm back from the kerb line, therefore it is proposed to be


The work will involve the removal of the existing edge beam, cutting back the rafters and soffit

framing, and installing a new edge beam.

Due to the recent refurbishment of the building the verandah’s tie rods and fixing points can be used.

The roofing is also in good condition and will be cut shorter and reused with new flashings and soffits

installed. The existing signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as

appropriate.




Resultant setback

2900mm 300mm 2600mm 10% 500mm



The building located at 280 Dominion Road is the two storey building located directly next to 276-

278.


The building verandah is currently 200mm back from the kerb line, therefore it is proposed to be


The proposed alterations comprise removing and disposing of both the existing edge beam (which

has deteriorated and does not meet the current structural code) and the tie rods, which are not

suitable to be reused.

The existing timber rafters will be cut shorter to suit and a new edge beam to be installed.

New tie rods will be fabricated to match the originals and will be connected to new fixing plates

attached to the edge beam and the existing fixing points on the parapet wall.

The existing roofing will be cut shorter and reused with new guttering, flashings and soffit linings

installed. The existing signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as

appropriate.




Resultant setback

2900mm 600mm (to clear the pole)

2600mm 10% 500mm



The building located at 293-305 Dominion Road is a two-storey building containing four independent

shops.


The building is located outside an existing bus stop and therefore the verandah requires a setback of

1000mm from the kerb. The verandah is currently set back 500mm. A cutback of 500mm is required

to meet the clearance requirements.

The proposed alterations include the removal and replacement of the existing edge beam (which

does not meet the current building code) and the tie rods which due to their poor condition are not

suitable for reuse.

The existing timber rafters will be retained after being cut shorter to suit and will be refixed to the new

timber edge beam. New tie rods will be fabricated to match the originals and will be connected to the

existing fixing points on the parapet wall.

The steeper angle of the tie rods results in them clashing with the masonry ledge or cornice located

above the second storey windows. To ensure safe clearance to the tie rods the cornice is proposed

to be cut back by 165mm. The cutback will reduce the cornice by 165mm. This building is the only

building amongst the group where works to the facade is required.

The existing roofing will be cut shorter and reused with new flashings and soffits installed. The

existing signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as appropriate.

The existing light pole will remain in its current position but will no longer be embedded within the

verandah. The edge beam of the proposed verandah will fall behind the pole with the proposed

cutback.




Resultant setback

2700mm 500mm 2200mm 18% 1000mm



335 Dominion Road is a single storey, single unit shop with a fully enclosed verandah supported by

tie rods. While the building is located within the Eden Valley Special Character Area it is not

considered to be character defining nor character supporting.

Figure 10 – Character Area Building (neither character defining nor character

supporting) – 335 Dominion Road

The existing verandah is set back about 200mm from the kerb line, therefore it is proposed to be

reduced in width by around 300mm to meet the 500mm clearance requirement.

The proposed alterations to the verandah involves removing the edge channel, shortening the end

beams before reinstating the edge channel to suit the new verandah alignment. Both tie rods are

badly corroded and will be replaced with new tie rods to match.

The fixing points of the existing tie rods are at approximately ¾ width (~2100mm) of the existing

verandah. One of the existing fixing points is badly corroded so the set out of the new tie rods fixing

points will be repositioned closer to the building (~1875mm). This will actually serve to retain the

fixing at approximately ¾ width of the modified verandah, thus retaining the existing tie road

arrangements and visual proportions.




Resultant setback

2800mm 300mm 2500mm 10% 500mm



349 Dominion Road is a two-storey corner building which fronts both Dominion Road and Burnley

Terrace.

Figure 11– Character-defining Building – 349 Dominion Road

The verandah is currently aligned with the kerb and therefore the structure is proposed to be cut

back by 500mm. The existing verandah wraps around the building, fronting both Dominion Road and

Burnley Terrace as seen in Figure 10. To ensure the consistency is kept with the existing verandah,

the 500mm cut back is proposed to be undertaken to the entire verandah including the portion

fronting Burnley Terrace.


not meet the current building code) and the replacing the tie rods which are not suitable to be reused

due to their poor condition.

The existing “T” rafters will be retained while being cut shorter to suit. They will be refixed to the new

timber edge beam. New tie rods will be fabricated to match the originals and will be connected to the

edge beam.

The existing roofing and purlins will be cut shorter and reused where possible, or new matching

material installed as necessary. New flashings and soffits will need to be installed. The existing

signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as appropriate.




Resultant setback

2550mm 500mm 2050mm 19% 500mm



353 Dominion Road is a small single storey shop which has had significant alteration to its exterior

and verandah over its life time (see Appendix D). It is proposed that the verandah is rebuilt rather

than cut back as the original materials contained within the verandah are in a poor condition and are

unable to be safely modified.


The front edge of the verandah is currently position about 200mm away from the kerb line. The

verandah is proposed to be rebuilt with a width reduced by 300mm to meet the 500mm clearance

requirements.

The previous alterations and the age of the original material which remains means that the existing

structure is unable to be safely modified. Therefore the verandah is proposed to be replaced.

The design for the new structure is based on the construction methods for the existing verandah.

This includes reconstructing the barrel vault roof along with installing a new edge beam, tie rods and

curved steel rafters to form a curved roof as close to the original structure as possible. The existing

signage and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as appropriate.




Resultant setback

2515mm N/A (verandah to be rebuilt with reduced width of 300mm)

2215mm 11% 500mm



355 Dominion Road is adjacent to 353 Dominion Road with the two buildings separated by a small

vehicle access way. 355 Dominion Road is a small single storey building containing a single shop.


The front edge of the verandah is aligned to the kerb line and is proposed to be cut back by

500mm to meet the clearance requirement.

The proposed alterations involve removing and disposing of the existing edge beam (which does not

meet the current structural code) and the tie rods, which are not suitable to be reused.



bolted to the edge beam. The existing fixing points on the parapet wall will be retained.

The existing roofing will be cut shorter and reused, new barge flashings and soffit linings installed.

The existing signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new as

appropriate.




Resultant setback

2400mm 500mm 1900mm 20% 500mm



357 Dominion Road is located directly next to 353 Dominion Road and includes three units.


The front edge of the verandah is aligned to the kerb line and is proposed to be cut back by 500mm.


not meet the current building code) and the tie rods, which are not suitable to be reused.



bolted to the edge beam. The existing fixing points on the parapet wall will be retained.

The existing roofing will be cut shorter and reused, new barge flashings and soffit linings installed.

The existing signage, lighting and other services will be reinstated or replaced with new, as

appropriate.




Resultant setback

2400mm 500mm 1900mm 20% 500mm

3.5 Permitted verandah works

In total, 28 verandahs are proposed to be cutback along Dominion Road as part of the proposed

works. Sixteen of those verandahs are able to be cutback as a permitted activity because they are

located outside of the Special Character Area Overlay. The remaining 12 verandahs are identified in

Section 3.4 and are the subject of this application.


It is noted that while resource consent is not required for all verandah alterations, building consent

will be sought for all 28 verandahs.

3.6 Assessment of alternatives

A range of alternative solutions have been explored by the project design team to avoid the need to

modify the verandahs along Dominion Road for the purpose of establishing the Double Decker Bus

Route.

Specifically, a detailed optioneering process was undertaken to identify and assess a range of

feasible solutions, including:

Relocation of inline bus stops.

Re-alignment of kerb lines.

Modification of verandah structures.

Modification of verandahs was considered a ‘last resort option’ for the team due to the greater

number of variables associated with such works. Such variables included the need to gain approvals

from building owners, applying for building and/or resource consents, and finding appropriate

contractors to undertake the works. All of these things were considered as risks to the project’s

timeframes.

A number of proposed modifications to the road corridor were considered throughout the design

phase to alleviate the need to alter verandahs along the route. These solutions included the buildout

of kerbs, carriage width alterations, movement of bus stops (where greater clearances are required)

and the alteration of road markings. Of the 77 verandahs originally identified as being located within

the clearance envelope of the buses, 50 of those conflicts have been resolved using these methods.

Of the 28verandahs requiring cutbacks, 12 require resource consent. The alternatives to cutbacks for

these 12 identified verandahs have been unachievable largely due the buildings being located in

areas where:

Existing lane widths do not allow for lane marking alterations or kerb buildouts while

meeting minimum lane width requirements;

Removal of lanes is not appropriate due to the high vehicle numbers which use the corridor

and potential for significant congestion;

Kerb buildouts have been proposed on the other side of the street (reducing the lane widths

to minimum limits) to reduce more significant cutbacks to other verandahs;

Bus stop repositioning is not feasible due to a lack of appropriate alternative locations;

Bus stop size reductions are not feasible as the road corridor hosts a high number of buses

which must be accommodated for to ensure they are not queuing within the road corridor,

across intersections or blocking vehicle access

A summary of the alternative options considered for each of the 12 verandahs is provided in Table

14 below, with a detailed assessment included in the Option Analysis Summary in Appendix B.

Overall, due to these reasons, the proposed verandah cutbacks have been considered the best

practicable option to safely clear the corridor for the operation of the double decker buses.


Table 14 Alternatives summary

Property Alternatives considered Reasons these alternatives

are not achievable

211-215 Dominion Road Kerb build out i.e. extending

the footpath into the road

reserve.

Relocation of the bus stop:

uphill towards View Road, or to

the south.

Adjusting the length of the bus

stop (making it shorter).

The existing road carriageway

in this location is not wide

enough to enable the kerb

build out and provide for traffic

lanes of an appropriate width.

Shifting the bus stop would

impact commuters, particularly

those who are physically

impaired.

A shorter bus stop would be

inadequate due to high

boarding numbers and

frequency of buses at this bus

stop.

226-228 Dominion Road Kerb build out i.e. extending


reserve.

The existing road carriageway

in this location is not wide

enough to enable the kerb

build out and provide for traffic

lanes of an appropriate width.

244-248 Dominion Road Adjustment of lane

arrangements including

removal of tapered right turn

lane.

Lane rearrangement would

reduce the right hand lane

below the required lane width.

Removal of the lane would

impact traffic flow as there are

often vehicles queuing in the

lane to turn right.

274 Dominion Road

276-278 Dominion Road

280 Dominion Road

293-305 Dominion Road Relocation of the bus stop

Kerb build out i.e. extending


reserve.

Adjustment of lane

arrangements

Moving the bus stop would

impact the safety of the nearby

crossing facilities which AT

has identified as essential to

the road corridor for pedestrian

safety in a highly

pedestrianised area.

The narrow lane widths in the

area also do not allow for kerb

buildouts or lane modification

to avoid the conflict with the

verandah.

335 Dominion Road Kerb build out i.e. extending


reserve.

The narrow lane widths in the

area also do not allow for kerb

buildouts or lane modification


Adjustment of lane

arrangements

to avoid the conflict with the

verandah.

349 Dominion Road Kerb build out i.e. extending


reserve.

Adjustment of lane

arrangements

The lane widths have been

reduced to minimum widths

due to kerb buildouts on the

other side of the road to

prevent cutbacks to the

building at 360 Dominion Road

(Special Character Area

Building).

360 Dominion Road was

determined more appropriate

to be protected by the kerb

buildout as the verandah

would require a 1000mm

cutback due to the bus stop in

front of it. In comparison the

buildings 349, 353, 355 and

357 Dominion Road require a

smaller cut back of 500mm.

353 Dominion Road

355 Dominion Road

357 Dominion Road

GHD | Report for Auckland Transport – Alterations to Verandahs - Eden Valley Special Character Area - 51/34340/00 |

22

4. Site description

4.1 Location

The 12 verandahs subject to this application are all located on Dominion Road at the general

locations identified in Figure 15 below.

Figure 15 – Building verandah locations along Dominion Road


23

4.2 Zoning

The 12 verandahs are all attached to buildings located within the Business – Local Centre Zone

and are identified within the Built Heritage and Character: Special Character Area Overlay -

Business Eden Valley. Eleven of the buildings are identified as ‘character defining’ buildings in

accordance with Chapter D18 of the AUP(OP). One building is identified as neither ‘character

defining’ nor ‘character supporting’, but is still located inside the special character area (See

Appendix C). The verandahs able to be altered as a permitted activity are located in the

Business - Mixed Use Zone and are all located outside of the Special Character Area Overlay.

The verandahs subject to this application are also located within the Natural Resources: Quality-

Sensitive Aquifer Management Areas Overlay - Western Springs Volcanic Aquifer with three

buildings at the southern end of the character area also located in the Natural Heritage:

Regionally Significant Volcanic Viewshafts and Height Sensitive Areas Overlay. All of the

buildings are also located within the Height Variation Control - Eden Valley, 13m.

The proposed works will be undertaken within the road reserve, which is subject to an Arterial

Route Control area.

A number of the buildings subject to this application are also located within the A T designation

(1614) which runs along Dominion Road.

4.3 Surrounding environment

The business area is a community focal point for Eden Valley with the buildings defining the

character of the area. The buildings are part of a significant grouping of early 20th century

commercial buildings stretching down Dominion Road. While redevelopment and infill has

occurred throughout the last century, a diverse mix of commercial buildings has been retained.

The diversity of the area is a result of a range of architectural styles used across the original

commercial buildings and the non-uniform infill, which has occurred along Dominion Road over

time. As described in the heritage assessment (Appendix D), the buildings as they exist today,

are ‘rag tag’ in nature and this is consistent across the character area. This is due to the

variations in building design but also a result of the aging buildings and individual alterations/

additions that have occurred to them over the years.

The majority of buildings in the area that front Dominion Road have verandahs which provide

shelter over the footpaths running beneath them. Like the buildings, the verandahs range

considerably in design, height, width, coverage and condition adding to the visual and design

complexity of the area. For many of the verandahs, their appearance is greatly determined by

the signage present which is generally attached to the front edge beam facing the road. The

‘rag tag’ nature of the area described in the heritage assessment (Appendix D) comes through

from the verandahs themselves as while the facades of the older buildings often retain original

design features the verandahs in many cases are significantly modified, are later additions to

the buildings, or dominated by the modern signage.


24

5. Matters requiring consent

5.1 Consents sought

5.1.1 Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in Part (AUP (OP))

Table 2 outlines the relevant rules and activity status of the proposed works to cut back the

existing verandahs under the AUP (OP).

Table 14 – AUP (OP) Planning Assessment

Activity Rule Activity status

Alterations to verandahs in the Eden Valley Character Area

Chapter D, Section D18 Special Character Areas Overlay – Residential and Business

Rule D18.4.2 (A11)

Alterations to a character defining building not otherwise provided for (refer to Appendix C)

Restricted discretionary activity

Alterations to verandahs in the Eden Valley Character Area – not identified as character defining buildings


Rule D18.4.2 (A13)

Alterations to a building in the Special Character Areas Overlay – Business not identified as character defining (refer to Appendix C)


Alterations to verandahs in the Eden Valley Character Area – not identified as character supporting buildings


Rule D18.4.2 (A21)

Alterations to a building in the Special Character Areas Overlay – Business not identified as character supporting (refer to Appendix C)


5.1.2 Consent summary

Land use consent is required under section 9(3) of the RMA for the cut back of 12 existing

verandahs in the Special Character Area Overlay: Business – Eden Valley as a restricted

discretionary activity.

5.2 Permitted activities

Additional verandah works that can be undertaken as a permitted activity include cut backs on

buildings not subject to verandah controls within Special Character Area Overlays. These

works are permitted and no resource consent is required.

5.3 Other resource consents required

This application is one of several consents sought for the Dominion Road Route.

Other consents required for the clearance works along this route, which are being lodged

separately, include:

Consent to undertake tree works along the Ian McKinnon Drive portion of the route;

Consent to undertake tree works within the CBD portion of the route;


25

Consent to undertake tree works along the Dominion Road portion of the route (lodged prior

to this consent – TRE60325776);

Consent to undertake tree works along the View Road portion of the route (lodged prior to

this consent– LUC60325920);

Consent to undertake tree works along the Lynfield and Blockhouse Bay legs of the route

(Consent approved 13/08/18, council reference: TRE60322330).

5.4 National Environmental Standards

The works will not trigger the National Environmental Standards for Assessing and Managing

Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health Regulations (NES Soil) as the verandah works

do not involve soil disturbance.


26

6. Consultation

6.1 Engagement with Council

A pre-lodgement meeting was held (4th July 2018) with members of the Council’s consenting

team (Ciaran Power, Rebecca Fogel, George Farrant and Paul Hansen) to discuss the extent of

the route clearance works, proposed timeframes and future assessment work still to be

undertaken. The Council Officers confirmed that the required applications could be lodged on a

staged basis. Preliminary drawings identify the buildings and proposed verandah alterations

were provided to Council at this tme.

A further pre-lodgement meeting was held on 2nd August 2018 with Rebecca Fogel (heritage)

and Andrew Boyd (building consents) to discuss in more detail the proposed works to the

buildings along Dominion Road. Rebecca Fogel identified concerns around the cut back of the

verandahs. It was made clear an alternative options assessment would be required as part of

the consent application to outline why road alterations could not reduce the need to modify the

subject verandahs. It was also identified that specific features and decorative elements of the

buildings would need to be discussed as part of the application and be presented in the design

drawings. As a result of these discussions an Alternative Options Assessment (Appendix B)

and Heritage Assessment (Appendix D) has been completed and forms part of this application.

6.2 Mana Whenua consultation

AT has undertaken consultation with mana whenua in relation to the wider programme of works

including the Double Decker Buses.

Our assessment of the AUP(OP) rules relative to the proposed works is that a cultural impact

assessment is not required in this instance because no relevant rules are triggered by the

proposed works. Thus, no consultation specific to the verandah cutbacks has been undertaken

with mana whenua and none is considered necessary for the purpose of this resource consent

application.

6.3 Consultation with building owners/ occupiers

Consultation has been undertaken between AT and the property owners for the sites on which

the verandahs will be subject to works. As part of this consultation it has been established that

AT will fund the works, perform all works in accordance with the Building Act requirements

(building consent will be required for these works), and in a manner which manages temporary

construction effects on the occupiers. No concerns have been raised by the landowners in

relation to these works (See Appendix E for owner approvals).

AT is continuing to work collaboratively with the property owners to undertake the necessary

works to provide the required cutbacks. In addition, the construction contractors will be required

to inform the occupiers of the buildings of the proposed works prior to works commencing on

site to ensure that they are provided adequate notification.

6.4 Community engagement

A public engagement campaign is proposed to take place prior to the launch of the double

decker buses along this route. In addition, AT has advised the Puketepapa and Albert-Eden

Local Boards of the proposal and have explained the necessity of the works required.


27

7. Assessment of effects on the

environment

Section 88(2)(b) of the RMA requires that any application for a resource consent should include,

in accordance with the Fourth Schedule, an assessment of effects on the environment in such

detail as corresponds with the scale and significance of the effect that the activity may have on

the environment. This section fulfils that requirement.

Under Section 104(1)(a) of the RMA, when considering an application for resource consent the

consent authority must, subject to Part 2, have regard to any actual and potential effects on the

environment.

This section assesses the potential effects of the proposed verandah works including:

Necessity of the works;

Public benefit and positive effects;

Potential adverse effects;

Consideration of alternatives.

Resource consent is required as a restricted discretionary activity. The relevant restricted discretionary assessment criteria are as follows:

D18.8.2.2. Special Character Areas Overlay - Business

(2) For additions to a character defining building:

(a) policies D18.3(8) to (14) as relevant, and in addition, all of the following:

(i) whether the additions are appropriate when considered against the relevant assessment criteria for additions in the zone;

(ii) whether at the street elevation(s) maintain an appearance similar to the original façade of the character defining building;

(iii) where relevant, whether the addition to the building is positioned and designed to retain the continuity of the front façade alignment of the building or adjoining buildings and the established horizontal or vertical modulation;

(iv) whether the design and materials respect and respond positively to those originally used and contribute strongly to the architectural character and detailing of the building;

(v) whether the additions to the building are compatible with the architectural form, mass, proportions and style of the existing building(s) on the site;

(vi) whether the additions to the building retain as much of the existing building fabric as practicable;

(vii) whether the additions to the building use a colour scheme which is compatible with the age and detailing of the building;

(viii) for retail premises, whether the additions to the building have main frontage(s) incorporating significant areas of unobscured display glazing and building entries reflecting traditional forms in order to maintain good visual connections with the street; and

(ix) whether the additions to the building locate and design attachments, such as signs, aerials and design attachments, such as signs, aerials and air conditioning units, sympathetically to the existing building.


28

(4) For new buildings; or alterations and additions to buildings not identified as character defining or character supporting:

(a) policies D18.3(8) to (14);

(b) whether the new building or alterations and additions to buildings not identified as character defining or character supporting:

(i) are appropriate when considered against the relevant assessment criteria for new buildings or alterations or additions in the zone;

(ii) reflect and have regard to the special character statement for the area;

(iii) are designed to respond positively to the architectural form, bulk, proportions, materials and colour of any existing buildings on the site and/or any surrounding scheduled historic heritage place, character-defining or character-supporting buildings;

(iv) are designed to respond positively to the built form characteristics and urban structure of the special character area;

(v) are designed and located in a manner that respects original physical features of the special character area as identified in the built form section of the special character statement;

(vi) where possible, are positioned to reflect and/or enhance the continuity of the historic front façade alignments of the adjoining character defining or character supporting buildings;

(vii) are constructed with materials that are of a high standard of quality and durability that respond positively to the architectural character and detailing of any scheduled historic heritage place, character-defining or character-supporting buildings;

(viii) are designed to respond positively to the established horizontal or vertical modulation evident on the front façade of any existing scheduled historic heritage place, character-defining or character-supporting buildings;

(ix) for retail premises, have main frontage(s) incorporating significant areas of unobscured display glazing and building entries reflecting traditional forms in order to maintain good visual connections with the street;

(x) proposes to combine buildings and/or sites, so that the finished appearance/facade maintains visual evidence of the previous pattern of development by vertical modulation; and

(xi) provides for on-site parking or loading where this would enable better outcomes in terms of maintaining/enhancing special character and supporting commercial land use viability.

7.1 Necessity of the works

The proposed verandah works are essential to facilitate the safe functioning of the road

network, following the proposed roll out of AT’s double decker buses. A comprehensive survey

of the Dominion Road section of the Dominion Road Route has been undertaken and the

verandah works have been identified as the minimum works necessary to ensure the potential

conflict between the new buses and buildings along the route is avoided. Without the works

identified, a significant safety issue will be present along the route with the potential of buses

striking verandahs within the corridor.

7.2 Public benefit and positive effects

The overall public benefit of the proposed works is that:

A safe double decker bus route can be established from the CBD to Lynfield and Blockhouse Bay via Dominion Road; and


29

The new double decker buses provide opportunity for increased bus patronage at peak travel periods when they are operating along the route.

The Double Decker Bus Project is a tangible example of delivery of the AT and Council goal of a

more efficient roading network as set out in the ‘Auckland Plan’ and the AUP(OP). The route

facilitates additional public transport capacity on the existing network, without the need for

additional roading infrastructure.

The resulting works, while altering the verandahs, will have a positive effect in maintaining and

enhancing the verandah structures. Many of the buildings/ vernadahs are in a deteriorating

condition. It has been identified during early investigations that some key structural elements,

such as the tie rods supporting many of the verandahs, are in a state of disrepair. AT has a

responsibility to reinstate all verandahs to a safe condition in keeping with the building code. As

a result, many of the verandahs will be re-established in a better structural condition than they

are currently in, prolonging their life and ensuring public safety.

7.3 Potential Adverse Effects

The verandah alterations have been assessed against the relevant assessment criteria for a

restricted discretionary activity set out in D18.8.2.2 of the AUP (OP).

7.3.1 Effects on the elements of the character-defining buildings

The proposed works will alter 11 existing verandahs attached to character-defining buildings

located within the Special Character Area Overlay – Business: Eden Valley. As outlined above,

and in the character statements provided in Appendix C and D, these buildings hold special

character value within the Eden Valley area.

Effect on Building Character

The buildings within the special character area demonstrate a range of Edwardian and early 20th

century architectural styles typically found in traditional commercial areas. The mixture of

architectural styles is evident across the 12 buildings that are the subject of this proposal. With

regard to the verandahs, the heritage assessment (Appendix D) has highlighted that many of

the verandahs attached to the buildings have either been previously modified or added some

time after the construction of the buildings. The verandahs are characteristically different from

one another, and ‘rag tag’ in their design, height, width, coverage and condition.

The works proposed on the majority of the buildings are limited to the existing verandahs, with

most buildings not requiring alterations to other features (i.e. building facades). As far as

practicable, the verandahs will be altered/ replaced using the same design and materials they

were originally constructed with in order to help retain their existing architectural character and

remain compatible with the existing environment.

While modification of the verandahs is occurring, the buildings’ original and key character

defining elements, such as the facades and decorative features will remain untouched. An

example of this is the works being proposed at 211-215 Dominion Road. While the previously

modified verandah will be impacted, none of the features identified in (Appendix D), such as

the rendered brick finish, stepped parapet or cornice feature, will be altered by the works. All

fixing points to the buildings, including the tie-rod fixing points consistent with many of the

buildings, will be reused and remain unaltered. By retaining these features across the 12

buildings, it is considered that the effects of the verandah cutback will have a less than minor

effect on the overall character of the buildings.

293-305 Dominion Road is the only building where some modification will need to be made to

the building’s facade to allow for the alteration of the verandah. While the existing tie rod fixing

points on the parapet wall will be used, the steeper angle of the tie rods will result in them


30

clashing with the masonry ledge known as the cornice of the building. A 165mm cut back of the

cornice is proposed to ensure safe clearance is achieved. As identified in the alternative

assessment (Appendix B) there is no safe alternative location for the bus stop located outside

this building. Movement of the bus stop would impact the safety of the nearby crossing facilities

which AT has identified essential to the road corridor for pedestrian safety in a highly

pedestrianised area. The narrow lane widths in the area also do not allow for lane modification

to avoid the conflict with the verandah. As a result the alteration to the verandah and facade is

deemed necessary and is the most practicable option to maintain the clearance envelop

required by the buses traveling the route..

It is considered there will be less than minor effects on the buildings character as a result of

reducing the cornice. The cornice will be retained and will only be reduced by 165mm (from

approximately 650mm to 485mm). The cornice is a simple masonry ledge with no other

decorative features impacted by the cutback. The reduced cornice will remain compatible with

the architectural form, mass, proportions and style of the existing building. Further, from the

street, the building will maintain an appearance similar to the original façade, Therefore, the

result to the character of 293-305 Dominion Road is considered to be less than minor.

Design and Use of Materials

The existing early commercial buildings within the special character area are generally

constructed of brick or plastered brick with some constructed using timber. As identified in the

heritage assessment (Appendix D) while the facades of many of the buildings have been

retained in their original design and construction materials, the verandahs have generally been

added later and/or have been modified over time e.g. to accommodate new building uses,

changes in the streetscape, and to meet legacy District Plan set back requirements.

All of the verandahs identified as requiring alterations will retain their current design. While the

widths of the verandahs will be reduced, the appearance of the verandahs and underlying

construction methods will remain unchanged. Unique details on individual verandahs such as

the exposed zig zag design of the verandah at 274 Dominion Road will be preserved.

To maintain the design and continuous frontage of 274 Dominion Road it is proposed that the

verandah is cut back more than the 500mm requirement to fall behind the lamp post which

currently protrudes through the verandah (see Figure 5). Cutting the vernadah back by a further

~300mm will maintain the current design and prevent a gap in the zig zag fascia board which

would ultimately alter the verandahs look and design. While the extended cutback will mean the

verandah edge will no longer be in line with 274-276 and 280 Dominion Road this is consistent

with many of the buildings within the character area. The effect of this change is also reduced or

diminished by the fact that the verandah at 280 Dominion Road, while in line with the other

verandahs, is considerably higher (which creates visual variability).

To retain the integrity of the special character and materiality of the buildings, when reinstating

the verandahs, effort will be made to reuse existing materials where possible. As identified in

Appendix A and D this is largely achievable where the materials are in an acceptable condition

and meet the requirements of the current structural code. In ten of the buildings the verandas

edge beams and tie rods need to be replaced due to poor condition or inability to meet the

code. However, in most cases material such as the existing rafters, roofing iron, edge channel,

signage and lighting can be retained (see Appendix A and D for details).

The use of existing materials and underlying construction methods will maintain the appearance

of the existing verandahs and thus minimise the visual impacts of the verandah modifications.

As identified in the character statement contained in Appendix C key design features and

materials including plaster detailing, timber window joinery, cornice lines, parapets and the

underlying brick or plastered brick construction will not be impacted by the proposed works.


31

Therefore it is considered that the effects on the character defining features of the buildings as a

result of the proposed verandah modifications is less than minor.

Verandah Modification

For all 11 of the character defining buildings, the proposed works will not permanently remove

any verandahs in their entirety. Works will only reduce their width to create a greater clearance

back from the kerb. In 10 of the 11 buildings, the existing verandah can be modified by simply

cutting back the structure. The verandahs are generally about 2.5 – 3.0m wide at present. The

largest cut back proposed is 600mm with the largest percentage of verandah removed equalling

~20% with most ranging between ~10-15%. As identified in Appendix D, modification of this

scale to the verandahs will be difficult to distinguish due to the lack of uniformity in terms of the

verandah heights, widths and designs which are characteristically inconsistent across the

character area.

353 Dominion Road is the only building which requires a full replacement of the verandah

structure This is due to the verandah’s poor condition. This verandah will reconstructed at the

same height and length as the existing verandah with its curved profile to be retained (See

Appendix A and D for design details). As part of the reconstruction, the original materials will

be reused as possible. As identified in Appendix D some of the original cladding can remain in

situ and is potentially salvageable. The use and reinstatement of some of these materials will

provide a better outcome for the character of the building as it is currently highly modified with

many of its original features removed or hidden.

Summary

It is assessed that the works will not detract from the character of the buildings located within

the character overlay with the alterations not causing noticeable change. The architectural

values of the existing buildings in terms of built form, building fabric, building scale, height,

density and building frontage setbacks will not change as a result of the proposal This is

supported by the heritage assessment (Appendix D) which concludes that from a heritage

perspective the works will have a less than minor effect on the special character values of the

respective buildings. Therefore, it is considered the impacts on the character of the buildings as

a result of the verandah works is less than minor.

7.3.2 Effects on the elements of the building within the Special Character

Overlay that is neither character defining nor supporting

The proposed works will alter one existing verandah at 335 Dominion Road that is considered

neither character defining nor character supporting, within the Special Character Area Overlay –

Business: Eden Valley.

As with the buildings outlined above, the proposed works are limited to the existing verandah,

with no alteration works required to other features of the building (i.e. the building’s facade).

The verandah is not being removed, with a requirement only to increase its setback from the

kerb. The verandah will retain its existing height and design. The width will be reduced from

2800mm mm to 2500 mm. The existing materials will be retained where possible which

according to Appendix D can largely be achieved. It has been found that the tie rods and fixing

points on the verandah are too badly corroded to be reused. Therefore, matching tie rods and

new fixings on the verandah will be fabricated.

In the heritage assessment (Appendix D) it is concluded the works will not impact the character

of the 335 Dominion Road building or its value within the Special Character Area Overlay. The

reduction in width of the verandah is minimal. The verandah will continue to contribute positively

to the architectural form of the building, and the relative proportions of the building and

verandah will be maintained. As a result, the special character of the surrounding environment


32

will be maintained because the appearance of the 335 Dominion Road building façade and

verandah will be indistinguishable from the current situation.

Overall, it is considered the impacts on the character of the building at 335 Dominion Road, as a

result of the verandah works, is less than minor.

7.3.3 Effects on character and streetscape of the surrounding Special

Character Area

Eden Valley has been identified as a special character area as it is a significant example of a

suburban commercial zone that developed in the early decades of the 20th century. This

development occurred in conjunction with the expansion of the surrounding residential area and

development of the tram line along Dominion Road.

The character of the area is derived from the early 20th century commercial buildings that line

the street, including a range of building types, in a mix of architectural styles, consistent with the

evolving architectural tastes of the period. Notably however, these buildings are aging, and

various additions and alterations have occurred (including the verandahs). This has created a

variegated streetscape, now characterised by irregularity.

The existing verandahs are generally about 2.5 – 3.0m wide, and the largest cut back proposed

is 600mm. This amounts to a 20% change to the bulk and scale of each verandah

(approximately) which, when considered in terms of proportionality and the context of the rest of

the street, will be indistinguishable.

Upon completion of the works, the appearance of the buildings at street elevation will be the

same as the existing situation. The changes will be sympathetic to the surrounding environment

because the materials and construction methods, such as the tie rod fixing points, will remain

the same. The changes will be indistinguishable such that a coherent streetscape will be

retained with other character-defining buildings on Dominion Road. Some initial concerns which

arose from the Council pre-application meetings were that the reduction in size of the verandahs

may impact the character of the individual buildings due to them being left disproportionate.

However, the architectural heritage assessment (Appendix D) highlights that the cutbacks are

unlikely to be noticeable. It is worth noting, for context, that the verandahs at 211-215 and 293-

305 Dominion Road (for example) have been aligned to the edge of the footpath (adjoining the

road), where as the verandahs on neighbouring buildings have been set back to comply with the

legacy District Plan requirements. As a result there are no visual reference points provided by

neighbouring buildings against which to compare the change in width of the verandahs as there

may be with a linear row of building frontages. These two buildings are offered as examples, but

the same situation will apply along the length of the proposed works area.

Overall, it is our assessment that the proposed modifications will be difficult to determine due to

the current lack of uniformity of buildings and verandahs along Dominion Road. Clear examples

of this is are at 274, 276-278 and 280 Dominion Road where the three neighbouring verandahs

all range considerably in height, width and design. The modified verandahs will continue to be

supported as per their current features (tie rod suspension or beams). The reduction of the

verandahs widths will mean that the angle of the tie rods will change. However, there is no

consistency in regard to this along Dominion Road at present and through the use of original (or

similar) materials, this change will not be noticeable.

It is the variegated streetscape and general lack of uniformity, which is consistent across the

entire character area, that will minimise the impacts of the proposed works on the surrounding

Special Character Area. The impact may be different the changes were occurring to a line of

buildings with a neat linear frontage. However, irregularity is the nature of the streetscape and

this will be maintained.


33

The proposed works will not detract from the values associated with the special character area.

The buildings will still be representative of typical early 20th century commercial development,

and any change to the physical and visual qualities of the area as a result of the increased

verandah setbacks will be barely noticeable on a day-to-day basis. As indicated above, the

architectural values of the existing buildings as influenced by the built form, the building fabric,

building scale, height, density and building frontage setbacks will not be diminished as a result

of the proposal.

It is therefore considered that the effects on the surrounding Special Character Area as a result

of the works will be less than minor.

7.3.4 Effect on pedestrians

The verandahs along Dominion Road currently provide shelter over the footpaths that run on

both sides of the street. Verandah coverage is currently not continuous along Dominion Road,

within the Special Character Area. Sections, mainly between Valley Road and Bellwood Ave,

provide continuous coverage while other sections are only covered by the odd building

verandahs here and there, for example 293 Dominion Road.

Importantly, no verandahs are proposed to be permanently removed by the works. Therefore,

pedestrian shelter will still be provided and will be retained to a reasonable standard. While

reduced, the verandahs will continue to provide between 2000mm and 2500mm of coverage

over the footpath. The new setbacks will also be no more than one metre from the kerb line

which is sufficient to allow pedestrians to walk along the middle of the footpath (or closer to the

shopfronts) and remain sheltered. Overall, despite the cutbacks, the verandahs will still provide

coverage that is equal or greater than many of the other existing buildings within the area (see

Appendix D). Therefore, the effects of the increased verandah setbacks at the subject sites are

considered to be less than minor.

7.4 Summary of effects assessment

In summary, given the design of the verandah cut backs and the assessment of the effects of

the proposed works undertaken above, it is considered that the alterations to the 11 character-

defining buildings and one character building (neither defining nor supporting) will be largely

unnoticeable with the adverse effects on the environment will be less than minor.


34

8. Statutory assessment

8.1 Part 2 assessment of the RMA – Purpose and principles

The proposed works meet the section 5 sustainable management purpose of the RMA. The

proposal will provide for the improved function of Auckland’s public transport network in manner

that avoids significant adverse environmental effects. The proposed works enable a more

efficient use of the road network and facilitate increased capacity and use of AT’s public

transport services, while maintaining public safety. It will allow for a greater number of

commuters to travel on buses along the Dominion Road route without the need for further

roading infrastructure. Therefore, the proposal will support the economic and social wellbeing of

the local community while protecting both natural and cultural values.

Section 6 of the RMA contains matters of national importance (which includes the protection of

historic heritage) and Section 7 outlines other matters that must be taken into consideration.

The proposal will not affect any scheduled or heritage buildings and there will be insignificant

adverse amenity effects on the character–defining values of the buildings, and wider special

character area given the verandahs will be retained with a similar appearance. The proposal is

considered to be consistent with the provisions of Section 6 and 7 of the RMA.

Section 8 of the RMA requires the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi to be taken into account

in resource management decisions. There are no cultural concerns anticipated from the

proposed verandah cut back works.

8.2 Assessment of objectives and policies

8.2.1 Regional Policy Statement (RPS)

The AUP(OP) Regional Policy Statement is operative in part. Subject to their being no

outstanding appeals to sections relevant to a particular activity the legacy RPS falls away. A

review of the chapter B5 – Built Heritage and Character section B5.3 (Special Character) has

revealed appeals remain in place and therefore the legacy Auckland Council Regional Policy

Statement is considered.

Auckland Council Regional Policy Statement

There is no policy direction in relation to special character area buildings within the RPS. In

relation to Transport the relevant objectives and policies are contained in Chapter 4.

The objectives relevant to the proposal are as follows:

4.3. Objectives

(1) promote the development of a transport network which is as safe as is practicable and which promotes better physical health for the community”.

This is to be implemented through the following policy:

4.4.1 Policy

(1) land use and transport planning will be integrated in a way which:

(i) seeks to reduce trip lengths and numbers and the need for private vehicle travel

and encourages a significant increase in the amount of travel made by public

transport, walking and cycling;

The verandah cut back works are required to maintain safe clearances to facilitate improved

public transport. The double decker buses will increase public transport capacity, and reduce

the need for private vehicle travel, thereby supporting the intensification of Auckland and


35

improving the efficiency of Auckland’s roading network. As such, the proposal is consistent with

the Transport objectives and policies of the RPS.

AUP(OP) Regional Policy Statement

The objectives and policies relating to works on buildings within Special Character Area

overlays are found within chapter B5 – Built Heritage and Character. The objectives seek that

heritage values within special character areas are protected from inappropriate subdivision, use

and development. It is also promoted that the character and amenity of these areas are

maintained and enhanced.


D5.3.1. Objectives

(2) Historic heritage values of identified special character areas are protected from inappropriate subdivision, use and development.

(3) The character and amenity values of identified special character areas are maintained and enhanced.

These objectives are to be achieved through the relevant policies which require special

character areas to be defined and evaluated by their physical and visual qualities along with

their historical value and significance. Special character areas should be managed so

modifications to buildings maintain and enhance the character of the area, demolition is

restricted, the relationship between built form and the wider environment is maintained or

enhanced and the cumulative effects which impact special character values are avoided,

remedied or mitigated.

B5.3.2. Policies

(1) Identify special character areas to maintain and enhance places that reflect patterns of settlement, development, building style and/or streetscape quality over time.

(2) Identify and evaluate special character areas considering the following factors:

a. physical and visual qualities: groups of buildings, or the area, collectively reflect important or representative aspects of architecture or design (historical building types or styles), and/or landscape or streetscape and urban patterns, or are distinctive for their aesthetic quality; and

b. historical: the area collectively reflects an important aspect, or is representative, of a significant period and pattern of community development within the region or locality.

(3) Include an area with special character in Schedule 15 Special Character Schedule, Statements and Maps.

(4) Manage identified special character areas by all of the following:

a. requiring new buildings and additions and modifications to existing buildings to maintain and enhance the special character of the area;

b. restricting the demolition of buildings and destruction of features that define, add to or support the special character of the area;

c. maintaining and enhancing the relationship between the built form, streetscape, vegetation, landscape and open space that define, add to or support the character of the area; and

d. avoiding, remedying or mitigating the cumulative effect of the loss or degradation of identified special character values.

The relevant Transport objectives and policies in the AUP(OP) RPS and the legacy RPS closely align. Therefore, to reduce repetition, the transport objectives and policies contained in


36

the AUP(OP) RPS have not been included here. The same conclusion is reached i.e. the proposal is consistent with the Transport objectives and policies of the AUP(OP) RPS.

8.2.2 AUP(OP)

The objectives and policies relating to works on buildings within Special Character Area

overlays are found in chapter D (D18). The objectives seek that the character values of these

areas (as identified in the special character area statements) are maintained and enhanced, in

particular focusing on attributes that define, contribute and support these values. Any adverse

effects of land use on these values should be avoided, remedied or mitigated.


D18.2 Objectives

(1) The special character values of the area, as identified in the special character area statement are maintained and enhanced.

(2) The physical attributes that define, contribute to, or support the special character of the area are retained, including:

c. built form, design and architectural values of buildings and their contexts;

d. streetscape qualities and cohesiveness, including historical form of subdivision and patterns of streets and roads; and

e. the relationship of built form to landscape qualities and/or natural features including topography, vegetation, trees, and open spaces.

(3) The adverse effects of subdivision, use and development on the identified special character values of the area are avoided, remedied or mitigated.

These objectives are to be achieved through the relevant policies which require development

and redevelopment to respond positively to the character values identified in the special

character area statements. The policies discourages the removal or demolition of character

buildings and require alterations to these buildings to be respectful of the character values of

the area. The use and maintenance of these buildings is also encouraged.

D18.3 Policies

Special Character Areas Overlay – Business

(4) Require all development and redevelopment to have regard and respond positively to

the identified special character values and context of the area as identified in the special character area statement.

(5) Identify individual buildings that contribute to the identified special character according to the following descriptions:

e. character defining – makes a considerable contribution to the character of the area because of historical, physical and visual qualities; and

f. character supporting – makes a moderate contribution to the character of the area. The building should contribute to the appearance, quality, and identity of the area and should be consistent with the values of character-defining places.

(6) Discourage the removal or substantial demolition of buildings that contribute to the

continuity or coherence of the special character area as identified in the special character area statement.

(7) Require new buildings, alterations or additions to existing buildings, or infrastructure, which are within the overlay but are not character defining or character supporting buildings, to maintain the integrity of the context of the area by providing quality


37

design, materials, colour and decoration which respects and enhances the built form and streetscape of the area.

(8) Require additions and alterations to existing character defining and character-supporting buildings, to be compatible with and respect the special character and existing scale of development.

(9) Encourage the ongoing use and maintenance of buildings in special character areas.

The alterations to the verandahs (which are located on character-defining buildings) have been

designed such that upon completion of the works, the verandahs will have an almost identical

appearance to their original form. The proposed alterations to the verandahs will only impact the

width of the structures with all original characteristics and building materials retained where

possible.

Overall, the alterations proposed to the verandahs will not impact the integrity and context of the

special character area. The alterations will be compatible and respectful to the existing

environment, with the relationships between neighbouring buildings, and proportions between

individual buildings and their verandahs, being maintained along the streetscape.

The need for the verandah cut back works is so that the double decker buses are able to

operate safely and efficiently. As such, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with

objectives and policies of the AUP (OP).


38

9. Notification

The following assessment gives consideration to the adverse effects of the activities on the

environment under section 95 of the RMA for the purpose of determining notification

requirements.

9.1 Section 95A - Public Notification

Section 95A directs the Council in deciding whether to publicly notify an application or not.

In respect of this application:

Auckland Transport does not request public notification.

The application is not made jointly with an application to exchange recreation reserve land

under section 15AA of the Reserves Act 1977.

The application is not for a resource consent for one or more activities, subject to a rule or

national environmental standard that precludes public notification.

The application is not for a resource consent for one or more of the activities listed in

Section 95A(5)(b) of the RMA.

No rules in the AUP(OP) or in any NES require public notification of this application.

The adverse effects of the proposal are not more than minor and there are no special

circumstances that warrant public notification of this application.

9.2 Section 95E - Affected Persons

Section 95E only deems a person an affected person, if the effects are minor or more than

minor (but not less than minor).

It has been assessed that the effects on the environment associated with the proposed

verandah works will be less than minor and no persons are identified as affected. An

assessment of the potentially affected parties is outlined below:

There will be positive effects for the road owner (AT), through maintaining legal road

clearance width distances. Temporary traffic management measures will be required to be

in place in accordance with CoPTTM to ensure the works do not affect road users or

pedestrians, however this is not a matter for which the rule has restricted discretion and

therefore these effects must be disregarded.

The owners and occupiers of the buildings subject to this application have been consulted

in relation to the proposed works and written approval has been obtained (Appendix E).

The works will be undertaken in a manner which meets the requirements of the Building

Act. The works will be undertaken in a manner which ensures the safety of customers, and

the business operating hours will be maintained throughout the duration of the works. Any

effects on the landowners and occupiers will be temporary and less than minor. Note, that

the temporary construction effects are not matters for which the rule has restricted

discretion and therefore they must be disregarded.

There will be no effects on adjacent property owners as a result of the verandah cut back

works. No effects on the structural integrity of neighbouring verandah are anticipated as all

buildings (including verandahs) are required to be designed to support their own weight

under the Building Act. Construction and traffic effects will be adequately managed to

mitigate effects on adjacent sites and will be temporary in nature. Although it is noted that

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/link.aspx?search=ts_regulation_contaminants_resel&p=1&id=DLM7234104#DLM7234104


39

these are not matters for which the rule has restricted discretion and therefore these effects

must be disregarded.

Any effects on the wider public/neighbourhood will be less than minor. The works are

designed to reinstate the verandahs as they currently exist, simply with a reduced width to

allow for the bus route. Despite their reduced widths the veradahs will still provide adequate

shelter to pedestrians in the area. This will allow for the streetscape and character values

presented by the buildings to be maintained.

9.3 Section 95B - Limited Notification

Section 95B directs the Council in deciding whether to limited notify an application or not.

In respect of this application:

There are no customary rights or title groups to whom council should provide limited

notification.

The proposed activity is not on or adjacent to, nor will it affect, land that is the subject of a

statutory acknowledgement made in accordance with an Act specified in Schedule 11 of

the RMA.

There are no rules that preclude limited notification.

In deciding if a person is affected, a person is affected if the adverse effects of the activity

on that person are minor or more than minor (but not less than minor) pursuant to Section

95E of the RMA. Having regard to the assessment of effects on the environment in

Section 7 it is considered that the environmental effects associated with the proposed

activities are less than minor and therefore no persons are affected by the proposed

works.

There are no special circumstances that warrant limited notification of this application.

On this basis, it is considered that the application does not require notification and it is

requested the application is considered on a non-notified basis.


40

10. Conclusion

This application seeks a land use consent to cut back 11 verandahs overhanging the road

corridor located on character defining buildings within the Special Character Area – Business:

Eden Valley. Resource consent is also required for the cut back of a verandah located on a

building within the same special character area but which is not identified as character defining

nor character supporting. These works result from the need to maintain required road safety

clearances to facilitate the proposed double decker bus route along Dominion Road. The

verandah cut back work is not provided for by the permitted activity rules under the AUP (OP)

and as such the proposed works are a Restricted Discretionary Activity.

This application has provided an assessment of the environmental effects of the proposed

verandah cut back works. The assessment within this application has shown that the potential

effects arising from the activity will be less than minor (Section 104(1)(a)).

The assessment contained in this application has also demonstrated the proposal is consistent

with the purpose and principles of the RMA and with the objectives and policies of the relevant

Regional Policy Statements and the AUP(OP) (Section 104(1)(b)).

No affected parties have been identified and the effects of the proposal on the environment are

considered to be less than minor, given the design of the cut back verandahs and construction

methodology to be adopted. Overall, it is considered that this application can be processed on

a non-notified basis, and consent can be granted.


41

11. Scope and limitations

This report has been prepared for the benefit of AT. No liability is accepted by this company or

any employee or sub-consultant of this company with respect to its use by any other person.

This disclaimer shall apply notwithstanding that the report may be made available to other

persons for an application for permission or approval or to fulfil a legal requirement.

Appendices

Appendix A – Verandah plans

Appendix B – Options Analysis Summary

Appendix C – AUP(OP) Special Character Area Overlay – Business: Eden Valley | Special Character Statement

Appendix D – Heritage Assessment

Appendix E – Landowner Written Approvals

GHD

Level 3, GHD Centre 27 Napier Street T: 64 9 370 8000 F: 64 9 370 8001 E: [email protected]

© GHD Limited 2018

This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

Document Status

Rev No.

Author Reviewer Approved for Issue

Name Signature Name Signature Date

1 Matt Keyse

Alex Jepsen

Sean Dowdall

12/10/2018

www.ghd.com

Documents

Auckland Transport · This resource consent application seeks consent to modify 12 existing verandas that overhang the required clearance envelope of the double decker bus. These