BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT …

BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL

IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management

Act 1991 and the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010

AND IN THE MATTER of TOPIC 081f Rezoning and

Precincts (Geographical Areas) AND IN THE MATTER of the submissions and further

submissions set out in the Parties and Issues Report

STATEMENT OF REBUTTAL EVIDENCE OF TODD WILLIAM WEBB

ON BEHALF OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL

BOMBAY 1 PRECINCT

24 FEBRUARY 2016

1. SUMMARY

1.1 The purpose of my rebuttal evidence is to address matters arising from the

evidence filed by Takanini Properties Limited (the Submitter) in relation to the

proposed Bombay 1 precinct.

1.2 Overall, I consider that the Submitter's planning evidence supports the

establishment of the new Bombay 1 precinct. Having reviewed that evidence, I

consider some changes are required to the precinct, including the deletion of sub-

precinct C and the removal of the associated rural activities provided for within the

sub-precinct. I oppose changes to broaden the scope of commercial activities

provided for on the site. In my opinion the changes are not supported by sufficient

evidence and seek to re-litigate matters addressed through the recent plan change

process.

1.3 I support the revised precinct provisions set out in Attachment 1 to this evidence.

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 My name is Todd William Webb. I have the qualifications and experience set out in

my evidence in chief dated 29 January 2016. I have been engaged by the Council

to respond to submissions received on the notified PAUP and to provide planning

evidence in relation to the Bombay 1 precinct. The new precinct was requested by

the Auckland Council to give effect to recent decisions in respect of Private Plan

Change 36 (PC36) to the Auckland Council District Plan (Franklin Section) (the

Operative Plan). PC 36 established a ‘Motorway and Rural Service Special’ zone

(Part 44) on the land located at 2038 Great South Road, Bombay.

2.2 I confirm that this rebuttal statement of evidence has been prepared in accordance

with the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court

Practice Note.

2.3 In preparing this rebuttal statement I have read the evidence prepared on behalf of

the Submitter, on the proposed Bombay 1 precinct. This rebuttal statement

addresses the issues in that evidence.

3. SCOPE

3.1 In preparing this rebuttal statement I have read the evidence prepared on behalf of

the Submitter on Topic 081 Rezoning and Precincts (Geographical Areas) in

relation to the proposed Bombay 1 precinct. This rebuttal statement responds to

various issues raised in the Submitter's planning evidence from David Haines.

3.2 The Submitter is the landowner of 2038 Great South Road, Bombay which is the

land subject to PC36. The undeveloped land is located between State Highway 1,

Mill Road and Great South Road, at the Bombay motorway interchange. As

proposed in my evidence in chief, the northern area of the site at 2038 Great South

Road comprised sub-precinct B of the proposed Bombay precinct, while the

southern portion comprised sub-precinct C.

3.3 In my evidence in chief on the Bombay 1 precinct I grouped related submissions

into sub-groups or "themes". This rebuttal statement will adopt a similar approach

in relation to the evidence in chief from the Submitter.

3.4 The sub-groups or "themes" that will be addressed in this evidence are as follows:

(a) Recognition of the recent resource consent; and

(b) Provisions to provide for new activities.

4. RECOGNITION OF THE RECENT RESOURCE CONSENT

4.1 The Operative Plan rezoned the whole of the site ‘Motorway and Rural Service

Area’ and provided for a small number of Rural Industry type activities within sub-

precinct C (Area B under the Operative Plan). It is my understanding these

activities formed part of the landowner's original development concept, which has

now been superseded by the recent resource consent, which is described in

paragraph 7.10 of my EIC. Paragraph 26 of Mr Haines’ evidence states:

‘rather than developing Areas A and B as two distinct planning units, the

landowner, via its recent resource consent, has rationalised the development

of the Site in a manner that better reflects its current features and

characteristics.’

4.2 As identified in paragraph 51 of Mr Haines’ evidence sub-precinct C is to be used

solely for wastewater and stormwater treatment and disposal purposes following the

approval of resource consent to establish a service station and drive-through

restaurant on the site.

4.3 Having reviewed the recent decisions of Council on PC36, and the recent resource

consent granted for the site, I concur with Mr Haines that there is no longer a

justification for maintaining the delineation between sub-precincts B and C. I also

agree that as the rural industry-related activities, which PC36 sought to provide, are

no longer wanted by the landowner and do not accord with the consented use of the

land, these should be removed from the precinct.

4.4 Acknowledging that Council’s rebuttal evidence on rezoning supports a change

from Rural Production to Neighbourhood Centre, I support the deletion of sub-

precinct C and the associated rural production activities provided for therein. An

amended precinct plan and precinct provisions are provided in Attachment 1 to my

evidence.

5. PROVISIONS TO PROVIDE FOR NEW ACTIVITIES

5.1 As outlined in paragraphs 64 and 65 of Mr Haines’ evidence, the Submitter seeks

changes to the provisions of the Bombay 1 precinct to allow for the establishment of

supermarkets up to 450m2 GFA per tenancy as a permitted activity, and up to

2000m2 GFA as a restricted discretionary activity. Mr Haines also seek to provide

for retail up to 450m2 per tenancy a permitted activity within the precinct.

5.2 Under the operative provisions applying to the site owned by the Submitter at 2038

Great South Road and the BP Service Centre at 216 Mill Road (sub-precinct A) -

supermarkets and retail up to 450m2 are non-complying activities.

5.3 As acknowledged in the evidence of Mr Haines, the submission of Auckland Council

sought the establishment of the precinct to give effect to recent Council decisions in

respect of PC36 to the Operative Plan. In this regard, I note that the purpose of the

precinct identifies that it seeks to restrict activities to those that will not generate

adverse effects, including cumulative effects, on the function, role and amenity of

neighbouring centres, beyond those effects ordinarily associated with trade effects

or trade competition.

5.4 The issue of retail distributional effects was a main issue within the recent plan

change, with submissions from parties including the Waikato District Council (WDC)

seeking reassurance that the new motorway service area would not affect the

Pokeno township. The submission from WDC resulted in the Hearings Panel

amending the reasons and explanation for the Objective, Policies and Methods to

read:

‘The desirability of establishing motorway and rural service activities at this

strategic location must be managed to ensure that activities do not give rise to

adverse effects on the environment, particularly in regards to distribution

effects on the existing centres of Pukekohe, Tuakau, Pokeno and Waiuku.’

5.5 The section 32 report prepared by Mr Haines (dated March 2012) and lodged with

PC36 addressed the issue of effects on centres. With respect to the policy

restricting activities in the zone to those that will not have adverse distributional

effects on established centres, page 14 of Mr Haines’ section 32 report identifies

the benefits of the proposed policy as:

• Will ensure that there are no adverse distributional effects on retail activities

in the existing zoned centres such as Pukekohe, Waiuku and Tuakau.

• Will reduce traffic generation.

5.6 The section 32 report prepared by Mr Haines goes onto state that he considers the

policy will be efficient and effective as it restricts activities within the zone to those

that will not have adverse distributional effects on Franklin District’s existing

centres.

5.7 Noting that the Submitter is proposing to allow supermarkets and retail to 450m2 per

tenancy as a permitted activity and that no control is proposed on the number of

tenancies permitted on each site, no expert evidence has been submitted to

address whether the provision for these activities could give rise to cumulative

effects. This includes effects on the function, role and amenity of neighbouring

centres, beyond those effects ordinarily associated with trade effects or trade

competition. Additionally, the Submitter has not presented evidence regarding the

potential traffic effects arising from multiple retail and supermarket tenancies that

would be permitted under the revised precinct provisions.

6. CONCLUSIONS

6.1 In summary, having considered the evidence received from the Submitter in relation

to the Bombay 1 precinct, I agree with the evidence of David Haines that changes

to the precinct plan and provisions to remove provision for the rural service activities

are appropriate given the resource consent granted for the site. These changes are

reflected in Attachment 1 to this evidence. However, I do not support the other

changes proposed by Mr Haines, in particular having reviewed the decision and

associated documents provided with PC36, I consider changes making provision for

retail and supermarkets on the site would be contrary to the intent of the precinct

and are not the most appropriate way of achieving the purpose of the RMA.

Todd Webb

24 February 2016

ATTACHMENT 1

Revised Precinct Provisions and Plan

Proposed track changes to Bombay 1 New precinct for evidence dated 28/12/2015.

1

Editorial notes: (retain below as appropriate)

Council's proposed changes to the submitter’s proposed precinct wording are shown in strikethrough and underline

Red text changes record amendments proposed in rebuttal evidence

1 x.x. Bombay 1 precinct Precinct description The underlying zoning of land within this precinct is the Neighbourhood Centre and Rural Production zone. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct. The precinct applies to two sites located at 2038 Great South Road and 216 Mill Road, which are located in proximity to the Bombay on / off ramps of State Highway 1. The purpose of the precinct is to provide for establishment and operation of motorway service areas in proximity to the Bombay motorway junction. The precinct seeks to restrict activities to those needed to meet the demands of motorists for convenient services, while ensuring safe and efficient movement of traffic in proximity to the State Highway 1, adequate on-site infrastructure and the amenity effects on adjacent properties are minimised. The precinct also make provision for suitable rural activities, acknowledging its semi-rural location.

2 Objectives The underlying Neighbourhood Centre and Rural Production zones and Auckland-wide objectives apply in this precinct, in addition to those specified below, with the exception of D3.6. Objective 1.

1. Motorway and rural service activities are established within adjacent to the State Highway 1 Bombay on/off ramps.

2. The site layout and design provides safe and convenient access for pedestrians and vehicles.

3. The amenity values of land adjoining the precinct are maintained/ protected. 4. Buildings and activities with the site do not interfere with the safety or efficiency of the

surrounding road network.

3 Policies The underlying Neighbourhood Centre and Rural Production zones and Auckland-wide policies apply in this precinct addition to those specified below, with the exception of D3.6. Policy 1 and Policy4a and D6.2, Policy 2, 3, 4 and 5.

1. Restrict activities in the precinct to those that will not generate adverse effects,

including cumulative effects, on the function, role and amenity of neighbouring town centres, beyond those effects ordinarily associated with trade effects or trade competition.

2. Enable activities in the precinct that serve motorway users and those reliant on high


2

levels of access to district arterial roads. 3. Manage activities and development within the precinct to maintain amenity values of

adjacent areas. 4. Design the site layout access to ensure safe and convenient access for vehicles and

pedestrians 5. Locate buildings and activities so that they do not interfere with the safety or

efficiency of the surrounding road network.

Precinct Rules

x.x Bombay precinct

The underlying zoning of land within the motorway precinct is the Neighbourhood Centre and Rural Production zone. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct. The provisions in Chapter I for the underlying zone do not apply in this precinct, unless otherwise specified below. The Auckland-wide provisions in Chapter H apply in this precinct unless otherwise specified below. The rules in this section implement the objectives and policies in Chapter F, section XX

1. Activity table

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

Activity table 1- Sub-precinct A & B

Activity Activity status

Residential

Visitor Accommodation P

Commerce

Service stations P

Retail not exceeding 70m2 GFA within

Sub-precinct A P

Retail NC

Produce sales in sub-precinct A P

Food & Beverage P

Drive-through Restaurants P

Michele Perwick� 27/1/2016 9:19 AMComment [1]: Consequential amendment from Topic 004 Primary evidence of Linley Wilkinson

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 3:39 PMComment [2]: Inclusion of sub-precinct A in the precinct is outside the scope of submissions see para 7.6 of evidence .

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 11:17 AMComment [3]: Operative plan provides for grocery, stationery and requisites not exceeding 70m2 and vegetable sales in


3

Offices accessory to the primary activity on the site and: a. the office GFA does not exceed 30 per cent of all buildings on the site or b. the office GFA does not exceed 100m2

P

Offices NC

Community

Emergency Services P

Industry

Industrial Activities NC

Development

New Buildings RD

Additions and alterations to buildings that are less than:

- 25 percent of the existing GFA or the building, or

- -250m2whichever is lesser

P

Internal alterations to buildings P

Additions and Alterations not otherwise provided for

RD

Rural

Farming in Sub-precinct A P

Activities not otherwise provided for NC

Activity table 2- Sub- precinct C

Activity Activity status

Residential

Visitor Accommodation P

Commerce

Cafe & Restaurants RD

Retail NC

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 11:03 AMComment [4]: Provided as a controlled in the operative plan – change for consistency with PAUP

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 11:03 AMComment [5]: Provided as a controlled it the operative plan – change for consistency with PAUP

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 11:05 AMComment [6]: Provided for as discretionary in the operative versions – change for consistency with PAUP approach.


4

Offices accessory to the primary activity on the site and: a. the office GFA does not exceed 30 per cent of all buildings on the site or b. the office GFA does not exceed 100m2

P

Offices NC

Community

Emergency Services P

Industry

Industrial Activities NC

Rural

On-site primary produce manufacturing

P

Post-harvest facilities P

Rural Services D

Rural Industry D

Development

New Buildings RD

Additions and alterations to buildings that are less than:

- 25 percent of the existing GFA or the building, or

- 250m2whichever is lesser

P

Internal alterations to buildings P

Additions and Alterations not otherwise provided for

RD

2. Land use controls The land use controls applying in the Bombay precinct replace the land use controls in the underlying zones. 2.1 Stormwater 1. All new activities within sub-precincts B & C must have an on-site stormwater

management system, able to contain a 5% AEP event 10- minute storm event from the site without overflowing. The system must empty within a 24 hour time period.

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 3:39 PMComment [7]: See para 11.6 of evidence

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 11:40 AMComment [8]: As above




5

2. On-site stormwater management measures must be designed and located such that any overtopping or failure of the measures does not result in the discharge of contaminants into natural waterways.

3. Any development that does not comply with clause 1 and 2 above is a discretionary

activity.

2.2 Vehicle Access 1. Vehicle access within sub-precincts B & C, must be in the locations identified on precinct

plan 1.

2. Any development that does not comply with clause 1 above is a discretionary activity.

2.3 Cafe and Restaurant 1. Any cafe and restaurant in sub-precinct C must be ancillary to the on-site primary

produce manufacturing,

2. Any development that does not comply with clause 1 above is a non-complying activity activity.

2.4 Produce Sales

1. Produce sales in sub-precinct A must not exceed two permanent premises and one

market area.

2. Only produce grown or produced on the site, or on a site owned by the same landholder, may be sold or offered for sale.

3. Development controls The land use controls applying in the Bombay 1 precinct replace the land use controls in the underlying zone development control rules. The Auckland-wide controls apply in this precinct unless otherwise specified below. 3.1 Building height 1. Buildings must not exceed 7.5 m in height.

3.2 Yards

1. 5m from all boundaries

3.3 Landscaping

2. A landscape buffer of 5m in depth must be provided on all boundaries excluding access

points.

3. Yards must be planted with a mixture of trees, shrubs or ground cover plants (including grass) within and along the full extent of the yard for a depth of five metres.

3.4 Location of Fuel Dispensars 1. To prevent vehicles queuing onto surrounding roads, fuel dispensing units or points must

be at least 12 metres from the midpoint of the vehicle crossing measured from the boundary. For fuel dispensers catering for trucks this distance must be at least 18 metres.

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 2:06 PMComment [11]: Consistency with Rural zone approach for produce sales – operative provisions cannot be enforced


6

1. Assessment – Restricted discretionary activities For development that is a restricted discretionary activity in the Bombay precinct, the council will restrict its discretion to the following matters:

1. New buildings and alterations and additions to buildings not otherwise provided for

a. building design and external appearance b. design of parking, access and servicing c. on-site infrastructure

2. Cafes & Restaurants in sub-precinct C

a. rural character and amenity values b. noise c. traffic volume and safety d. stormwater

Assessment criteria For development that is a restricted discretionary activity in the Bombay 1 precinct, the following assessment criteria apply:

1. New buildings and alterations and additions to buildings not otherwise provided for a. Building design and external appearance

i. Buildings should be designed to relate to each other and the features and characteristics of the site, its immediate and wider rural environment including the site’s location at the entry into Bombay and its role in responding to the ‘gateway concept’, along with achieving high design standards for the built elements.

b. Design of parking, access and servicing i. At grade parking should be softened with landscaping, including tree planting. ii. Vehicle crossings and access ways should be designed to reduce vehicle speed,

be visually attractive and clearly signal to both vehicles and pedestrians the presence of a crossing or access way.

iii. A safe and convenient pedestrian environment with a good standard of amenity should be created within the site which: • Provides direct and well defined routes • Links car parking areas to building access points • Incorporates pedestrian linkages to adjacent sites, streets and public open

spaces, (where appropriate) c. On-site infrastructure

i. Adequate on-site infrastructure should be provided to service the activities;

2. Cafes & Restaurants in sub-precinct C i. Refer to Clause 4.2.2 a – e of the Rural zone rules.

2. Assessment –Restricted discretionary controls infringements

a. Matters of discretion In addition to the general matters set out in clause G2.3 of the General Provisions the council will restrict its discretion to the matters below for the relevant land use control infringement.

Todd Webb � 28/1/2016 11:42 AMComment [12]: Assessment criteria are generally consistent


7

1. Building Height a. Effects on the planned built character of the precinct b. Effects on amenity

2. Yards

a. Effects on the transport network b. Effects on amenity

3. Landscaping

a. Effects on amenity

4. Location of Fuel Dispensers

a. Effects on transport network

Assessment Criteria

In addition to the general assessment criteria in clause G2.3 of the General Provisions the council will consider the relevant assessment criteria below for the development control infringement. 1. Building Height

(a) The proposed height of the buildings should be compatible with the planned built character of the precinct.

(b) Additional building height should not detract from the character and amenity values of the area, in particular the amenity of neighboring rural sites!

2. Yards (a) Yards should not be used for activities or buildings likely to affect the safe and

efficient operation of the surrounding road network.

(b) Any buildings or activities within the 5m yard not detract from the character and amenity values of the area, in particular the amenity of neighboring rural sites

3. Landscaping

(a) Landscaping should soften the visual impact of buildings and activities so they do not visually detract from the locality including views from the motorway.

4. Location of Fuel Dispensars

(a) Fuel dispensars should be positioned so that they do not result in vehicles queuing onto surrounding roads or generate conflict at the access points to the precinct.


8

3. Precinct plan

MILL ROAD

BOMBAY O

FF RAMP

BOMBAY ON RAMP

SH 1

GR

EAT SOU

TH R

OA

D

Bombay sub-precinct A

Bombay sub-precinct B

COPYRIGHT© Auckland Council

Legend

PrecinctsLandscapingVehicle access

´

0 75 150 M

Bombay 1 : Precinct plan 1

Documents

BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT …