R/JSL/2016/788 and R/REG/2016/922. Housing New Zealand. 161 West Tamaki Road (Lot 1 DP 90134) 2A Overlea Road (Lot 1 DP )

Transcription

1 Notification and Resource Consent Report for a Discretionary Application for a Qualifying Development under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHAA) Application Description Application Number: R/JSL/2016/788 and R/REG/2016/922 Applicant's Name: Housing New Zealand Site Address: 149, 161 and 163 West Tamaki Road, Glen Innes, 2A, 2B, 4, 6, 8 8A and 12 Overlea Road, Glen Innes 4, 6, 6A, 8, 10 Leybourne Circle, Glen Innes Legal Description: 149 West Tamaki Road (Lot 3 DP 43138) 161 West Tamaki Road (Lot 1 DP 90134) 163 West Tamaki Road (Lot 10 DP 43138) 2A Overlea Road (Lot 1 DP ) 2B Overlea Road (Lot 2 DP ) 4 Overlea Road (Lot 3 DP ) 6 Overlea Road (Flat 1 DP on Lot 69 DP and Lot 70 DP 43138) 8 Overlea Road (Flat 3 DP on Lot 69 DP and Lot 70 DP 43138) 8A Overlea Road (Flat 2 DP on Lot 69 DP and Lot 70 DP 43138) R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 1

2 12 Overlea Road (Flat 3 DP on Lot 69 DP and Lot 70 DP 43138) 4 Leybourne Circle (Lot 2 DP ) 6 Leybourne Circle (Flat 1 DP , Carport 1 DP , Shed 1 DP on Lot 1 DP ) 6A Leybourne Circle (Flat 2 DP , Carport 2 DP , Shed 2 DP on Lot 1 DP ) 8 Leybourne Circle (Lot 63 DP 43138) 10 Leybourne Circle (Lot 62 DP 43138) Name of Special Housing Area in which QD is located: Northern Tāmaki SHA (Tranche 2) Site Area: 9,469m 2 Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) Zoning: Mixed Housing Suburban Precinct: Tāmaki Precinct PAUP Special Areas and Overlays etc: Natural Resources: Stormwater Management Area Omaru Stream, Flow 2 Operative Plan Zoning: Residential 5 Proposal Demolition the existing 15 dwellings on the subject site; and construct 36 new dwellings and one studio (Lot 127); and undertake a 36 lot residential subdivision incorporating the proposed dwellings, two jointly-owned access lots (JOAL), and associated infrastructure and associated works. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 2

3 General Location of Subject Site Figure 1- Aerial Photograph Identifying Application Site and Showing Surrounding Area Figure 2- Aerial Photograph Identifying Application Site (Acquired from Applicant's AEE) R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 3

4 Application Documents (Plans and Reference Documents) The following information has been provided: Application Form and Assessment of Effects prepared by Tattico Limited, titled Overlea Neighbourhood Qualifying Development for Overlea North Housing New Zealand Corporation, Application for Resource Consent and Assessment of Environmental Effects, dated 26 February Specialist Reports Specialist Report Title Prepared by Rev Date Infrastructure Report Overlea Redevelopment Overlea North Design Report aurecon 22 February 2016 Traffic Impact Assessment Overlea Neighbourhood Glenn Innes (North) Traffic Impact Assessment Traffic Planning Consultants (TPC) 22 February 2016 Preliminary Investigation Site Overlea Redevelopment - Preliminary Site Investigation aurecon - 23 March 2015 Draft Contaminated Site Management Plan Overlea Redevelopment - Draft Contaminated Site Management Plan aurecon 0 23 March 2015 Design Statement Overlea South Design Statement Studio pacific architecture 23 February 2016 R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 4

5 Architecture Drawings prepared by Studio Pacific Architecture R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 5

6 R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 6

7 Engineering Drawings prepared by aurecon R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 7

8 Additional Information S92 Response Letter prepared by Ross Cooper dated 29 March 2016, with attachments (as referenced above) The information has been reviewed and assessed by the following specialists: Jian Chen- Senior Subdivision Specialist, DPO Shane Maelzer - Development Engineer, DPO Maree Gleeson- Principal Engineer, Stormwater Unit Matt Riley- Urban Design Consultant- Barkers & Associates Kate Brill- Principal Engineer, Auckland Transport Aru Chelliah- Principal Engineer, Watercare Service David O Reilly - Contaminated Land Consultant, Focus Environmental Services Ltd. Proposal, Site and Locality Description Proposal The proposal is for joint land use and subdivision consent for the demolition of all existing dwellings on the subject site; and to establish 36 new dwellings and one studio unit; and for a 36 lot residential subdivision incorporating 36 dwellings and studio unit, two jointly-owned access lots (Lot 100 and Lot 200) and associated infrastructure and associated works which has been set out in full in section 8 of the AEE submitted by prepared by Tattico Ltd dated 26 February The subject site encompasses 13 existing lots containing 15 existing dwellings. Associated infrastructure and earthworks are included in the proposal to enable the development. The proposed development is an average density of 1 dwelling per 256m 2 over the entire development site. The proposed layout is shown on the extract from the scheme plan below: R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 8

9 Figure 3- Proposed Scheme Plan Site and Surrounding Environment Tattico, on behalf of the applicant, Housing New Zealand, have provided a description of the Overlea Neighbourhood, surrounding locality and application site in Sections 3, 4 and 5 respectively of the AEE dated 26 February Having visited the site on 15 March 2016, I concur with this description and it is accepted and adopted by Council. Background The applicant has undertaken extensive pre-application meetings with the Development Project Office (DPO) throughout 2015 / 2016 to arrive at the application (revised) as lodged. Following lodgement, the application documents have been modified in response to feedback from the DPO. The proposed development is the third stage (north) within the Overlea neighbourhood, which has been targeted in the PAUP for redevelopment. Overlea Framework Plan (Council reference: R/LUC/2014/5367), was approved on 29 th June Resource consent (R/JSL/2014/5371) was approved in December 2015 for 54 new dwellings R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 9

10 and residential lots at Overlea Central which is located immediately to the south of the application site. Resource consent (R/JSL/2015/4815; R/REG/2015/4816) was approved in March 2016 for 45 new dwellings (47 total) and residential lots at Overlea South which is located to the south of the application site. Qualifying Development Criteria The site is located within a Special Housing Area (SHA) Northern Tāmaki, as named by the Order in Council of 29 th October 2013 which requires a Qualifying Development (QD) to be a maximum of 6 storeys (27m height); requires a minimum of 4 dwellings to be constructed; requires a percentage of affordable houses to be provided for developments of 15 dwellings or more as referenced in the Order in Council, and in accordance with the principles of Housing Accords And Special Housing Areas Act (HASHAA). This application provides for a total of 36 new dwellings and a studio unit with a mix of typologies over an area of 9,469m 2. None of the dwellings will exceed 6 storeys or 27m in height; and the required percentage of affordable houses will be provided for this development by way of retained affordable dwellings (minimum 10%). It is therefore noted that the proposed QD is in accordance with the above criteria. This QD application was lodged concurrently with the preceding Overlea Framework Plan application (Council reference: R/LUC/2014/5367), which was approved on 29 th June In respect to the affordable housing component, page 18 of the AEE prepared by Tattico notes: As part of HNZC s redevelopment programme for the Tāmaki area it is anticipated that while enhanced levels of social housing are sought, a blind mixed-tenure model is to be followed. Certain proportions of the new dwelling may be sold to the public as either affordable housing or at market rates. As such, it is noted that only a portion of the 47 [sic] dwellings will be social housing through HNZC / TRC, with a number of dwelling to be sold off at market rates. While the exact split between and location of HNZC houses / affordable / market rate has not been decided at this time, HNZC confirms that the Unitary Plan requirements for the 10% affordable housing will be more than met. The social housing function provided by HNZC is considered to address the affordable housing requirements of the Unitary Plan, and at this stage it is anticipated there will be approximately a 30 / 70 split between social housing and other, including affordable and market rate sales to the public. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 10

11 Reasons for the Application Resource consent is needed for the following reasons: Relevant Operative Plans Auckland Council District Plan (Auckland City Isthmus Section 1999) Auckland Council and government entered into the Auckland Housing Accord on the 3 rd October Under section 10 and 11 of HASHAA, the Accord established Auckland Council as an authorised agency under the HASHAA, and outlines how Auckland Council will achieve the purpose of the HASHAA, and increase housing supply and affordability over the next three years. In exercising functions as an authorised agency, the Accord directs that any SHA is not subject to the operative RPS or any other operative district plan, and that applications for qualifying developments will be determined under the relevant provisions of the notified Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. The provisions of an operative plan are a matter that regard must be had to, under section 34(1)(d)(i) of HASHAA. However, relatively little weight has been given to those provisions in light of the hierarchy of relevant matters described in section 34(1) and the Accord which is considered to be a relevant matter for consideration under s 104 of the RMA. Particularly relevant aspects of the operative plan have been identified and commented on where appropriate. Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) 2013 Chapter H Auckland-wide Rules, Rule 3.1 Street trees The removal of any street tree by a party other than Council or its agent triggers assessment as a discretionary activity. The applicant proposes the removal of two street tree located on the Overlea Road road berm and two street trees on the Leybourne Circle road berm immediately adjacent to the application site to facilitate the construction of vehicle crossings, and accordingly, resource consent for a discretionary activity is required. Chapter H Auckland wide Rules, Rule Flow Impervious area greater than 25m 2 in a SMAF 2 area that meets the hydrology mitigation requires controlled activity consent. Chapter H Auckland-wide Rules, Rule Subdivision Activity Table 2 Subdivision in accordance with an approved land use resource consent is a restricted discretionary activity. The proposed subdivision forms part of a combined land use consent for the construction of 36 new dwellings and two JOAL s. Note 1: For the purpose of the above reason for consent, the applicant has requested that the Council determine the land use components of this application in the first instance, and follow that with a determination of the subdivision component. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 11

12 Note 2: In accordance with the requirements of Rule (Development Controls for Restricted Discretionary Activities), the application site is subject to the provisions of two zones. However, the Framework Plan has approved an approach to apply the Mixed Housing Suburban zone across the application site, and as such the application has been assessed against the applicable controls for that zone overall. Chapter H- Auckland Wide Infrastructure, Earthworks Rule Residential Zones Earthworks greater than 2,500m 2 and 2,500m 3 undertaken in a residential zone requires restricted discretionary activity consent. It is proposed to undertake 3,200m 3 of bulk cut and 2,700m 3 of bulk fill over an area of 1.05 hectares. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Chapter H: Auckland-wide Rules, Rule 4.5 Contaminated land A detailed site investigation of the application site is currently being undertaken. The applicant seeks resource consent for a discretionary activity for the discharge of contaminants not meeting the restricted discretionary controls of the Unitary Plan. Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan - Land Use and Development Controls Modifications Applications to modify land use and development controls are to be assessed as a restricted discretionary activity under Part 3: Chapter G, Rule Resource consent is required to modify the following Land Use and Development Controls, to the extent detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico and summarised below: Chapter H Auckland-wide Infrastructure, Transportation Rule Traffic generation Any proposed for 30 or more dwellings triggers an assessment of the likely traffic generated by the development. The proposal seeks resource consent for 36 residential dwellings and one studio unit over 36 lots (21 additional dwellings and one additional studio unit and 24 additional lots), and as such, requires restricted discretionary activity consent. Infrastructure, Transportation Rule Design of parking and loading spaces All parking spaces within the proposed development that are located on a driveway in front of a garage or dwelling that are within a required yard trigger assessment as a restricted discretionary activity. A total of 20 parking spaces sit within a required yard, and triggers consent as a restricted discretionary activity. Infrastructure, Transportation Rule , Reverse Manoeuvring On site manoeuvring is required for all sites which obtained access form a district arterial route. Reverse manoeuvring will occur from Lot 136 onto West Tamaki Road which is a R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 12

13 district arterial route. This triggers consent as a restricted discretionary activity. Infrastructure, Transportation Rule Formation & gradients All parking areas will be formed, drained, provided with all-weather surface, and with a gradient of not more than 1 in 20 along its length. However two parking spaces (Lot 103 and Lot 108) fail to meet the gradient requirement, and accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Infrastructure, Transportation Rule Width and number of vehicle crossings The maximum width of vehicle crossings is 3.5m. The vehicle crossing serving Lot 115 is 6.0m in width. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. The proposed vehicle crossing for Lot 122 is not 2m clear from the adjacent crossing serving Lot 124. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Infrastructure, Transportation Rule Width of Vehicle access and Queuing The proposed JOAL servicing Lots does not comply with the minimum 5.5m width. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Chapter I Zone Rules, Residential Mixed Housing Suburban Part 3: Chapter I, Rule Outlook Space Ten dwellings infringe the Outlook Space control relating to the Principle Living Area, as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Part 3: Chapter I, Rule Outlook Living Space The dwelling on Lot 102 does not meet the minimum 4m x 4m dimension for outdoor living space as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. The dwelling at level 1 on Lot 127 does not meet the minimum balcony area that is required to be accessed from a principal habitable room. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Part 3: Chapter I Rule Dwellings fronting the street A number dwellings do not meet the minimum glazing percentage requirements of the zone) as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. As such, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Residential Zones, Development Controls, Rule Fences A number dwellings do not meet this control as the proposed fences exceed the maximum 1.2 metre height limit for front yards, as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 13

14 prepared by Tattico. As such, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Residential Zones, Development Controls, Rule Garage The A2 building typology (8 total) do not meet this control as the garages exceed a portion of the front façade of the dwelling in excess of 40%, as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. As such, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Residential Zones, Development Controls, Rule minimum dimension of principal living rooms and principal bedrooms A number dwellings do not meet this control as it applies to bedrooms, as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. As such, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Residential Zones, Development Controls, Rule Storage Two dwellings (lot 65 and 69) do not meet the minimum storage requirements, as detailed in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Part 3: Chapter I, Rule Universal Access The development control requires that 20% of dwellings meet the Universal Access requirements of the Mixed Housing Suburban zone. A total of 6 out of 36 (17%) of the proposed dwellings fully meet Universal Access requirements for developments of this nature. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Chapter K Precinct Rules Tāmaki Precinct Land Use Control, Density, Rule Any application for four or more dwellings requires resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity. A total of 36 dwellings are proposed across the Overlea North development, and as such, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Part 3: Chapter K: Rule 5.3 Maximum Impervious Area A number of dwellings infringe the maximum impervious area control. The specific infringements are set out in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. A number of dwellings infringe the minimum landscaping area control. The specific infringements are set out in Attachment G of the AEE prepared by Tattico. Accordingly, resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity is required. Tāmaki, 1 Activity Table 1 R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 14

15 Any land use and / or development complying with an approved Framework Plan requires resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity. The proposal is in accordance with the approved Overlea Framework Plan, and accordingly, assessment as a restricted discretionary activity is required. National Environmental Standard ("NES") The National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health 2011 (NES) applies to certain activities proposed on a piece of land, which has been or potentially has been impacted by previous or current activity or industry that was included in the Ministry for the Environment s Hazardous Activities and Industries List (HAIL). The site has been identified in the geotechnical report as having unrecorded fill on the site, which may or may not contain contaminants. Since the applicant has not provided a Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) due to the presence of the existing dwellings on the site, the proposal is a discretionary activity under the NES (regulation 11). Overall the application is assessed as a discretionary activity. Notification Assessment Under Section 29 of HASHAA, the council may only notify an application to adjacent owners, relevant infrastructure providers and requiring authorities. However, the council must not notify an application if it would not have been notified under the RMA or PAUP or if written approvals have been obtained from all adjacent owners, relevant infrastructure providers and requiring authorities. Adjacent land is not defined in HASHAA (or the RMA) however the term adjacent has been defined in case law as meaning lying near or close; adjoining; continuous; bordering; not necessarily touching though this is by no means precluded. The land adjacent to the land subject to this application comprises of the following properties: Table 1: Address Legal description Written approval provided by owner? 137 West Tamaki Road Lot 1 DP No 139 West Tamaki Road Lot 2 DP No 141 West Tamaki Road Lot 3 DP No R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 15

16 143 West Tamaki Road Lot 4 DP No 145 West Tamaki Road Lot 5 DP No 145A West Tamaki Road Lot 6 DP No 147 West Tamaki Road Lot 1 DP No 151 West Tamaki Road Lot 4 DP No 153 West Tamaki Road Lot 5 DP No 155A West Tamaki Road Lot 1 DP No 155B West Tamaki Road Lot 2 DP No 155C West Tamaki Road Lot 3 DP No 157 West Tamaki Road Lot 1 DP No 159 West Tamaki Road Lot 2 DP No 159A West Tamaki Road Lot 3 DP No 165 West Tamaki Road Lot 11 DP No 1 Leybourne Circle Lot 107 DP No 3 Leybourne Circle Lot 108 DP No 5 Leybourne Circle Lot 109 DP No 7 Leybourne Circle Lot 110 DP No 9and 9a Leybourne Circle Lot 111 DP No 12 Leybourne Circle Lot 61 DP No 1 Overlea Road Lot 75 DP No 3 Overlea Road Lot 101 DP No 5 Overlea Road Lot 100 DP No 7 and 7A Overlea Road Lot 1 DP No R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 16

17 9 Overlea Road Lot 98 DP No 14 Overlea Road Lot 66 DP No 10 and 10A Overlea Road Lot 68 DP No 3 Elstree Ave Lot 435 DP No 5 Elstree Ave Lot 485 DP No 7 Elstree Ave Lot 436 DP No 9 Elstree Ave Lot 437 DP No Infrastructure providers with assets on, under or over the subject site or adjacent land; and requiring authorities with designations within the subject site or adjacent land includes the following: Table 2: Infrastructure provider / Requiring authority Watercare Auckland Transport Relevant asset and location Written approval provided? Services water and wastewater West Tamaki Road, Overlea Road, Leybourne Circle and Elstree Ave No* No* Stormwater Unit Stormwater service within road reserve No* Vector Power lines No Telecom/Chorus Phone lines No *These infrastructure providers / requiring authorities have provided their comments to this (?) application and have not raised any issues. Notification Assessment and Recommendation Not all written approvals have been provided. Council must decide if the application should be notified to those persons/infrastructure providers who have not provided their written approvals (refer Table 1 and 2). The following matters may be used to guide this decision. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 17

18 Purpose of HASHAA and the Auckland Housing Accord Relevant rules, policies and objectives of the PAUP Effects on the environment Notification tests of s95e, RMA - Consent authority decides if person is affected person Infrastructure provision and readiness Having regard to the above and after an analysis of the application, including any proposed mitigation measures and specialist reports, the adverse and positive effects of the activity including an assessment against the relevant objectives and policies of the PAUP are identified and discussed below. It is noted that the submitted AEE for the proposal prepared by Tattico Ltd dated 26 February 2016 provides a thorough assessment of the actual and potential effects of the proposal and will be referenced and referred to as appropriate below. Land use The intention to use the site for residential re-development has been identified under both the Operative Auckland Council Plan and the PAUP, with the site zoned for residential purposes under both plans. This part of Tāmaki forms part of the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company area which seeks to regenerate and transform the area with additional housing specifically identified in this location. To respond to this regeneration and level of change, this area is located within the Tāmaki Precinct in the PAUP. The Precinct provisions seek to ensure that the planned regeneration provides residential growth and intensification required to transform the area, with this growth focussed on achieving high quality and integrated development. The application site has been identified under the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan as one of the first sites for new housing, and as such falls within the area of the approved Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan (R/LUC/2014/5367). The Framework Plan assessed the additional density allowed for under the PAUP precinct provisions, the overall transport and stormwater strategy for the area, and some development control modifications. The proposal is broadly consistent with the approved Framework Plan. The proposed development and related subdivision scheme seeks to accord with the PAUP provisions through the efficient use of the site through the building layout, landscape and dwelling typologies seeking to respond positively to each to achieve a coherent and integrated development of the site. Furthermore, the Neighbourhood Plan has identified the integrated approach to the re-development of the area for residential intensification, and the proposal is in broad accordance with the approved Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 18

19 It is considered that the principle of developing the site for residential purposes in the manner proposed forms part of the aspirations of Council Plans, which seek to provide for the transformation of the Tāmaki area through the integrated and efficient use of land in a quality compact city model. Furthermore the proposed development will provide a compatible land use and density to resource consent (R/JSL/2014/5371) was approved in December 2015 for 54 new dwellings and residential lots at Overlea Central which is located immediately to the south of the application site; and resource consent (R/JSL/2015/4815; R/REG/2015/4816) was approved in March 2016 for 45 new dwellings (47 total) and residential lots at Overlea South which is located to the south of the application site. Affordable Housing The Auckland Plan (AP) identifies that affordable housing is a core priority for Auckland in terms of housing supply, choice, affordability and quality. The PAUP seeks to continue this priority by ensuring efficient use of land; providing a range of housing choice and requiring quality homes that meet the needs of low to moderate-income households. This directly aligns with the purpose of the HASHAA, which seeks to enhance housing affordability by facilitating an increase in land and housing supply. The scheme is a Housing New Zealand Corporation (HNZC) re-development and a core component of the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan for regeneration is to increase the supply of housing; improve housing quality; and increase the diversity of housing types to enable choice and affordability in the market by providing housing along the full housing continuum. The applicant commits to provide a minimum of 10% affordable dwellings, and although the exact number has not been stated, it is likely that a 30/70 split between HNZC retained dwellings for community social housing purposes, and dwellings to be sold to the private market. The final locations of the affordable units are yet to be confirmed. Notwithstanding, the applicant has designed the scheme to ensure the affordable dwellings are tenure blind so that the affordable units are not discernible within the overall development or within the wider neighbourhood. It is considered that the proposal would not result in any adverse effects in terms of the provision of affordable housing across the site. Rather, it is considered that the scheme provides an efficient use of the finite HNZ land resource and is an important part of the regeneration of the Overlea neighbourhood area. It is considered that the proposal would also result in a number of positive effects given the number of dwellings to be provided within the Overlea neighbourhood, which will enable an overall increase in supply and choice of affordable housing in an area where there is a known housing need. Furthermore Tattico (on behalf of the applicant) have confirmed that the proposed housing has been designed to achieve a Homestar 6 rating. This will ensure the R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 19

20 housing is designed in a sustainable manner that reduces energy use and provides warm/dry housing for future residents. Infrastructure A clear underlying principle of the HASHAA is that the SHA s and associated QD s are required to be adequately serviced by infrastructure. An infrastructure report has been submitted in support of the proposed development which identifies that there is suitable infrastructure to support the intensification sought and has suggested an approach to stormwater devices across the site to ensure suitable detention and retention of water in respect of the PAUP Stormwater Management Area Flow (SMAF) requirements. The application has been submitted with an Infrastructure Report, titled Overlea Redevelopment Overlea South Design Report, prepared by aurecon and dated 17 November This report sets out the proposed approach to earthworks, wastewater, water supply, stormwater, flooding and overland flowpaths, services, public roading and private shared access. The proposals have been reviewed by Watercare, Auckland Transport, the Council s Stormwater Unit and Central and DPO Development Engineering teams and no concerns have been raised. It is noted that both Vector and Telecom have existing assets within the adjacent road reserve in respect of power and phone services. It is not considered that these infrastructure providers are affected by the proposed development and easy connections can be made to these services via the existing infrastructure. The site is located with a PAUP Stormwater Management Area and as a result will require the installation of new stormwater infrastructure on the site in the form of retention and stormwater management to comply with the PAUP hydrological requirements for the retention and detention of stormwater flows on site. The application has adopted a Toolbox Approach for the storrmwater management for the site. In addition to these devices the local stormwater pipe network within the road reserve needs to be upgraded to service the increased density anticipated in the Tāmaki Precinct by the PAUP. The applicant and the stormwater unit have come to an agreed approach on these necessary upgrades which are identified within the aforementioned aurecon report. A condition has been included (and endorsed by the applicant) which requires the pipe upgrades occur prior to the connection and occupation of the new dwellings. It is noted the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan included a condition of consent which limits the additional impervious area within the Tāmaki North Stormwater Catchment to be limited to 4ha until such time as the mitigation works are complete within Elstree Reserve and Tāmaki College to ensure no further downstream flooding. It is noted that the proposal R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 20

21 development takes the additional impervious area over the 1.5ha threshold by 0.01 ha or 100m². Councils Stormwater Unit have reviewed the proposed impermeable area and have stated: Therefore the building consent for Block C can only be issued after the downstream daylighting project is complete or alternatively the design the on-site retention be modified to incorporate detention to pre-development flows for the block. The proposal will also connect to existing wastewater and water lines that either run through the site or are located within the road reserve. There is capacity on these lines to service the proposed dwellings and Watercare have reviewed the proposal and provided their approval in principle. Council s specialists have suggested a number of conditions regarding the Engineering Plan Approvals for the infrastructure on site, which have been endorsed by the applicant and form part of the application. Consequently, there is considered to be suitable stormwater, wastewater and water supply and other infrastructure to service the development. It is not considered that any infrastructure providers or adjacent sites would be affected in terms of infrastructure capacity or provision. Landform and Earthworks The PAUP anticipates that earthworks are essential to the development of urban land, but that the works need to be suitably managed to ensure that adverse effects associated with sediment runoff to receiving environments (streams and the coast) are avoided. The proposal will require earthworks across 9,469m 2 of the site. The site does not directly adjoin any water body, however the stormwater infrastructure within the road reserve connects to the local stream and therefore sediment control management is necessary to mitigate adverse water quality effects. The Infrastructure Report, titled Overlea Redevelopment Overlea North Design Report, prepared by aurecon and dated 22 February 2016 has included a detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) to address the construction activities associated with the proposal. The ESCP provides details and measures to minimise surface erosion and the discharge of sediment laden water from the site during and immediately following earthworks for the development. The applicant has proposed the installation of silt fences, runoff diversion channels and sediment decants in accordance with Auckland Council s Technical Publication 90 Erosion and Sediment Control, to ensure that sediment is appropriately managed. Subject to the installation of the sediment and erosion control measures, the effects on the receiving environment will be appropriately managed. The sensitivity of the receiving environment to the adverse effects of the discharge will not be compromised given the level of the discharge and appropriate on site management techniques. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 21

22 It is considered that these measures will ensure that any effects on adjacent sites are suitably mitigated and that the aspirations of the PAUP are achieved for the site during construction works. Contamination A Draft Contaminated Site Management Plan (DCSMP) has been lodged with the application and this has identified potential contamination on the site due to: Fill material of unknown origin at depths between 0.5 and 0.9 metres below ground level across the development site that was inferred to be part of the original subdivision earthworks ;and Council s Consultant Contaminated Land specialist, Mr David O Reilly, has assessed the proposal against the relevant discretionary activity provisions of the National Environmental Standards for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health Regulation 2011 and has confirmed that: The effects of the potential contamination can be mitigated and the site is made safe for the proposed subdivision provided the following suggested conditions are implemented. These conditions have been reviewed and agreed by the applicant. Following this technical assessment any adverse contamination effects are assessed to be less than minor and can be appropriately mitigated. In addition Council s Contaminated Land Specialist (Regional-Discharge), Marguerite Nakielski has also reviewed the proposal in respect to discharge of contaminants and has stated It is considered that any effects of the proposed activity on the environment as identified above will be appropriately managed and mitigated, based on undertaking the proposed measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate effects in accordance with the application documents. These conditions have been reviewed and agreed by the applicant. Following this technical assessment any adverse discharge of contaminant effects are assessed to be less than minor and can be appropriately mitigated. Traffic and Roading The PAUP adopts an integrated approach to transport and land use to ensure that adverse effects of traffic generation on the transport network are managed and to ensure that an integrated transport network, which aligns with intensification and efficient use of land, is encouraged. Furthermore, the PAUP objectives also require that the parking spaces and access locations be suitably designed and located to contribute to a quality built environment, and to ensure that the safety and efficiency of both pedestrians and vehicles are considered when assessing place making, movement and access function across a site. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 22

23 The submitted AEE assesses in sections , and within 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 of the appended Traffic Impact Assessment Report, prepared by Mr Todd Langwell of Traffic Planning Consultants Ltd, that any effects on traffic will be less than minor. I agree with the comments raised in these assessments, in particular I consider that the proposed development has sought to integrate successfully into the existing street network to create a connected roading pattern with the proposal minimising the number of proposed vehicle crossings onto Elstree Ave where practically possible. It is noted Auckland Transport have sought the vehicle crossings from Lots 71 and 72 be paired or an alternative vehicle cess from Elstree Ave be provided for Lot 102 to accommodate a bus stop. I do not consider this to be practical in this instance as this will involve the internal configuration of the units needing to be designed resulting in a poorer level of amenity for each dwelling / lot. Furthermore, I consider the proposed vehicle crossings will result in less than minor adverse effects given there remains sufficient space between the two crossings for pedestrians. It is acknowledged that on-site manoeuvring is not possible given the site layout and available front yard areas, and that reverse manoeuvring will occur directly onto West Tamaki Road, Elstree Ave, Leybourne Circle and Overlea Road. Mr Langwell has assessed this, and concluded there would be a negligible effect on the safe functioning of existing and proposed road network. Mr Langwell has confirmed that appropriate sight distances will be maintained to ensure pedestrian and traffic safety effects are minimised. Mr Langwell has confirmed that vehicles reversing onto Overlea Road and, Leybourne Circle are roads with low traffic volumes with low speed environments and that the sightlines will enable reverse manoeuvring to be undertaken in a safe manner. I concur with this assessment. In respect to Elstree Ave and West Tamaki Road these are existing situations and the proposal will be reducing the number of crossings from these roads. The number of crossings have been minimised by increasing the number of access points off the proposed JOAL. This is considered acceptable. It is acknowledged that 2 car parking spaces have proposed gradients of 1 in 10, which is greater than the 1:20 permitted car parking space gradient. A full assessment of these infringements has been undertaken by Tattico and Traffic Planning Consultants, and I concur with the conclusions that the proposed car parking and vehicle access design and layout will not result in adverse effects on the safe functioning of the roading network, or cause safety concerns for pedestrians, cyclists and other road users. In terms of visitor parking the PAUP mixed housing suburban zone does not identify a specific requirement in this regard; however it is considered that that there is sufficient on street parking within both the proposed roads and surrounding road network to cater for any visitor demand that may occur. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 23

24 Mr Langwell has made an assessment of the sight distances across the intersections of the proposed roads, and determined there is sufficient sight distances available to exceed the Austroads guidelines, which identifies that there is suitable visibility and sightlines for both vehicles and pedestrians to ensure that vehicles entering and exiting the roads can occur in a safe manner. Auckland Transport s Consents Specialist, Kate Brill supports the proposal with regards to the location of the crossings and JOAL s, subject to recommended conditions of consent requiring details to be provided with the engineering plan approval. These have been endorsed by the applicant and form part of the application. The design of the proposed jointly-owned access lots and parking within the development site has incorporated measures to ensure slow speeds and good visibility to drivers with low fencing and landscaping, narrow width where possible, vehicle crossing entries to the accessways from the roads, pedestrian demarcated surfacing and integrated surface treatment. This design approach will ensure that pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles have safe movement around the site within the private residential lots, private accessways and within the proposed public roads. Consent is sought for a development exceeding 30 dwellings (36 and one studio proposed in total), and the traffic assessment provided with the application concludes that the existing roading network can adequately accommodate the additional traffic movements from the development with adversely affecting the safe and efficient operation of the road network. The additional density within the Overlea neighbourhood was fully assessed under the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan, and it was concluded that with some roading and intersection upgrades (required by enhancement measures as part of the wider redevelopment of the area), the existing wider roading network can accommodate the additional density and the proposal is in accordance with the framework plan. Based on the assessment undertaken by Mr Langwell, I consider that the surrounding road network can accommodate the additional traffic movements per day. The application requires consent for the removal of four trees located on the Council owned road berm (Overlea Road and Leybourne Circle). Conditions of consent are recommended (and endorsed by the applicant) for the safe removal of these trees and for details of replacement planting to be provided. I consider these trees, once removed, will be a temporary loss to the street scene amenity and wider neighbourhood character, and once replaced, will provide for an attractive streetscape and the replacement trees can be well considered with specific regard to the development of the site and integrated within the wider neighbourhood. Furthermore, AT has reviewed the proposal and is generally satisfied with the layout, design and approach to the parking and access design. Detailed design of the accessways and roads will be provided for approval at the engineering plan approval stage, as well as the details of the relocated bus stop - this has been recommended as condition of consent and endorsed by the applicant. Overall, it is considered that the design, layout and accessways (JOAL), parking and intersection arrangements for both pedestrians and vehicles is appropriate and safe for the site. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 24

25 It is considered that any adverse effects on adjacent sites would be less than minor from a traffic perspective. Character and Urban Design The mixed housing suburban zone is the predominant residential zone within the PAUP. This zone anticipates a moderate level of intensity to allow for the provision of a range of housing typologies. It seeks high quality amenity onsite and dwellings that positively respond to the street, the site context and the planned character of the area. The Precinct provisions for Tāmaki identifies the need for further intensification to allow for the regeneration of the area to cater for the increased population growth, but more importantly to transform the place making within the Tāmaki area. The appropriateness of this character has been demonstrated and assessed at a high level within the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan (R/LUC/2014/5367). The existing character of the Overlea Neighbourhood area is dominated by a consistent built form pattern comprised of single storey weatherboard state homes that have a typical setback of 10 metres from the street edge. This existing pattern of development is an inefficient use of an existing land resource and results in poorly defined street edges and limited contribution to the visual amenity of the existing streetscene and neighbourhood character. Furthermore, given the age of the housing stock, the existing dwellings are typically in poor form and do not respond positively to the site characteristics in terms of orientation, outlook and topography. The Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan approved an overall density of 1/247m² over the entire framework plan area. The subject application, being the Overlea North area is the third stage of the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan with stage 1 previously approved under resource consent (R/JSL/2014/5371) in December 2015; and stage 2 previously approved under resource consent (R/JSL/2015/4815) in March Because of the large site area (9500m²) and integrated housing design approach any adverse effects on the character of the surrounding neighbourhood character and amenity have been appropriately mitigated through the comprehensive design approach and layout of the proposal which will be compatible with the existing built form and pattern of development in this suburban context. The proposed houses are 2-3 storeys in height and of an overall bulk, scale and massing that is compatible with what is anticipated in this context. This will ensure the buildings do not adversely affect the neighbourhood character in which they are located. Overall it is considered that the bulk, height and scale of the proposal is what could reasonably be anticipated on the site in this suburban location of Auckland. R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 25

26 The overall design, including the pitch roof forms and well-articulated building mass and bulk ensures that the buildings sit comfortably within the wider environment. It is considered that the overall built form will result in less than minor adverse effects on the character and visual amenity of the wider suburban context in which the site is located. The design and external appearance of the buildings are in general keeping with the residential character. The building forms will be compatible with the visual amenity of the residential neighbourhood and in this regard any adverse visual effects when viewed from Overlea Road, West Tamaki Road, Elstree Ave and Leybourne Circle or the wider environment, will be negligible. The proposed buildings provide sufficient differentiation in their built form through the differing styles, palette of external finishing materials and roof forms. This will mean that the proposed development when viewed from the wider environment will read as a series of separate and distinct buildings rather than one continuous unmodulated building mass. Furthermore the spacing of the buildings taken together with the modulation of each building and varying forms will ensure that that the overall massing of the buildings both individually and collectively do not appear to be overly dominant. Having regard to the above it is assessed that proposal will be compatible with the local context and any adverse effects on the neighbourhood character will be less than minor. The proposal will provide sufficient landscaped areas within the front yard areas of the site adjacent to existing and proposed road boundaries. The proposed landscaped areas will provide sufficient space for meaningful planting. This planting will provide both a softening and screening of the proposed development and will ensure this is integrated with the surrounding established residential neighbourhood. The proposed development features two-three storey dwellings with an average density of 1/263m², which is a change in the built and visual character from the existing established residential area. In particular, the local area has typically not been redeveloped since it was originally subdivided and developed approximately 60 years ago and where it has been developed it generally adopts the density anticipated by the Operative Plan of one dwelling per 500m². Consequently, the local area is dominated by modest sized dwellings on large sites and this proposal would signal a change in the visual amenity and neighbourhood character for the local area, particularly for those properties opposite the development site on the western side of Elstree Ave; the eastern side of Leybourne Circle; and northern side of West Tamaki Road. The layout and design of the proposal will be consistent with the design principles approved under the Overlea Neighbourhood Framework Plan. This approach will ensure an integrated approach to proposal so that the proposal fits comfortably with the existing and future planned development in this location. The overall design of the proposal will result in an attractive new built form, which demonstrates strong street edges that positively related to an engage with the adjacent street scenes of West R/JSL/2016/788 and REG/2016/922 Overlea North Page 26