Archive | Whitford

Hamlet that doesn’t fit the rules heads to appeal

Auckland Council’s hearings committee has an unusually difficult consent appeal to consider on Tuesday, the application for a rural hamlet 3km down the coast from Beachlands, the Pine Harbour marina & Formosa golfcourse in the east of the region.

Difficult, because the hearing panel that declined the application in October actually liked the concept, but said it didn’t fit the planning rules.

As is customary, the council committee will consider the position the council should take on the appeal in the confidential section of its agenda.

The development application for Ahuareka Village, at 650-680 Whitford-Maraetai Rd, Whitford, was made by Ahuareka Trustee (No 2) Ltd (Rob Bassett & Brett Russell). The proposal was for a 160-lot village of 186 household units & apartments, a country pub with 10 guest rooms, a 300m² community building, 2 retail lots & 3 commercial service or office lots to be built in a cluster occupying about 5% of what is a 92.8ha cattle farm. The farm would be transformed, with public walkways created, forest regenerated and waterways upgraded.

The hearing ran for 2 days in August and was closed on 7 October, with the decision issued on 29 October. The commissioners were Rebecca Macky (chair), David Hill, Mark Farnsworth & Stephen Udy.

One essential question at the hearing was whether it should be considered as rural or urban in a rural setting. And if it’s urban-rural, how does that fit into the rules of development?

During the hearing, council planning consultant Peter Reaburn, a director of Cato Bolam Ltd, suggested a better course than the resource consent application might be for the proposal to go through a private plan change.

The commissioners raised that prospect again in their conclusion to decline the application for land use consent for concept subdivision plan approval, which would be followed by staged subdivision consents. The commissioners decided this failed to promote the sustainable management framework required by the Whitford rural zone.

Manukau City Council created the rural zone’s rules through plan change 8, notified in 2005, made partly operative in 2010 and fully operative in 2012. The plan change area was divided into 3 zones based on landscape type & the ability for the landscape to visually accommodate development. Each zone had a maximum carrying capacity and the plan change also introduced 4 policy overlays – road corridor, scenic amenity, catchment management & coastal – that would further constrain development density.

Ms Macky wrote in the hearing panel’s decision that the plan change, which became chapter 12A of the new Auckland Council’s district plan, had been carried forward into the notified proposed unitary plan virtually unchanged: “While decisions on submissions on that plan are not due for release until 2016, the objectives & policies have legal effect (albeit with little weight). Furthermore, the fact that public policy regarding this zone/precinct has undergone minimal shift is a relevant matter about which we must take note, as it increases the weight to be given to those provisions.

“While the applicant suggested that the provisions are redundant in the current Auckland growth context, we do not agree. Over the past 10 years the provisions have actually been extensively reviewed, and sealed by the court as recently as 2012. We cannot so lightly set those provisions aside for a non-complying activity of the scale proposed.”

In the panel’s 29 October decision on the Ahuareka proposal, Ms Macky said: “The actual & potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity are minor or less than minor, and the applicant has proposed relevant & effective conditions of consent. In most respects, the proposal will have better environmental outcomes than a complying subdivision.”

However, when it came to assessing the development against the zone requirements, she said: “In respect of the zone, we accept that the application satisfies many of the plan’s objectives & policies when those are read in a site-specific manner but, while the application may have clear merit on a number of attributes, not all the enhancement mitigation required by the policy structure is offered. Nor was any alternative to that mitigation suggested.

“To consent to this application would be to undermine the bonus enhancement policy settled through the Environment Court and would likely result in a precedent effect for later applications also to provide for development without the enhancement planting. We conclude that the proposal is not consistent with a sustainable management framework required by the Whitford rural zone.”

Ms Macky went into some detail about what the plan change was intended to achieve, the carrying capacity, and what that capacity meant for Ahuareka: “As plan change 8 emerged in Its final form, subzones A & C were combined, totalling 2777ha; subzone B remained the same at 957ha; the capacity cap increased to 925; and the subdivided lot:parent lot ratio for the new combined Whitford rural A altered from the plan change 8 range of 1:4-1:6ha (between A & C) to 1:3.5ha (with B remaining constant throughout at 1:5ha).

“The total area of the Whitford rural zone also seems to have remained constant throughout, with Whitford B retaining a land area ratio relative to the remainder of the zone of approximately 1:3.

“If the lot sizes across the whole Whitford rural zone as currently limited are averaged, 3734ha subdivided by 925 = 4.04ha. In other words, for every countryside living lot created, the plan expects there will be in the order of 4ha of unbuilt-on land – whether that is native bush, riparian margin, pastoral farm, planted or replanted vegetation.

“That means that with the 186 lots proposed, minus the 18 lots permitted ‘as of right’ under the 1:5ha rule for the (approximately) 92ha property, 168 lots of compensatory ‘undeveloped’ land is required.

“At its average, this represents 168 x 4ha = 672ha, which is both the average across the zone and also in terms of the bonus lot requirement. Even with the crediting of the 32ha of protected remnant forest & new planting and 41.4ha of open rural landscape that is proposed, a shortfall of about 600ha enhancement potential in the Whitford rural zone remains.

“If approved, the development would leave a shortfall expectation of 3734/600ha = 16% that cannot be recovered underneath the cap. This is even more significant under the Whitford B subzone, representing 957/600ha = 63%.

“The question in front of us is: Does this matter and, if so, can it be cured?”

The panel’s answer was that, in its submitted form, the application couldn’t be cured.

Earlier stories:
12 February 2014: Vote split on Beachlands rural village direct referral
18 September 2005: Regional policy decision could stop Whitford development plans
9 July 2005: Manukau notifies Whitford rural catchment

Attribution: Plan change, hearing decision.

Continue Reading

Allen proposes new subdivision stage at Whitford

Published 20 June 2012

Jurisdiction: Auckland Council

Neighbourhood: Whitford

Applicant: Wayne Allen Ltd (Amanda & Wayne Allen, Whitford)

Application detail: 133 Whitford Park Rd, non-complying application to subdivide a recently created lot into 4 new rural-residential lots & one balance lot, with associated native revegetation planting, stormwater, roading & sediment control works

Notification date: 18 June

Submission closure date: Friday 13 July

Other details: The proposed subdivision is a continuation of Mr Allen’s subdivision at this address, and one of a number of subdivision schemes he’s been involved in on Whitford Park & Brownhill Rds, Whitford.

Others have been through several Regis companies, but some of those have collapsed after sales & sale prices dropped in the global financial crisis.

The most recent collapse was of Regis Park Stage 2 Ltd, which went into voluntary liquidation last November after sale of the company’s remaining sections fell $5.3 million short of realising enough to satisfy a secured creditor. All up, its deficit was estimated at $6.64 million. Regis Residential Ltd (Mr Allen & John Mason) went into liquidation in April 2011, but Regis Holdings Ltd settled Auckland Council’s liquidation application in September.

The Regis group took the Regis Park Estate development at Whitford to consent & subdivision stages, but in a declining property market which resulted in lot sales at a loss. Regis Farm Ltd has a 29.2ha subdivision at 65 Whitford Park Rd, across the road from the Whitford Golf Club, to be divided into 12 lots – 11 rural-residential lots of 4350-8900m² and one balance lot of 22.1ha. Regis Park has 66 sections within an 18.2ha private park, and stage 2 had another 20 sections.

Mr Allen is a director of Allen Investment Trustees Ltd, Nelson Street Management Ltd, Ormiston Investment Trustee Ltd, Sealz Ltd, Soulo Ltd, Stanford Construction Ltd, Stanford Group Ltd, Turanga Creek Ltd, Whitford Properties Ltd & Whitford Property Trustees Ltd.

Earlier story:

25 May 2008: Allen proposes 6-lot cluster at Brownhill Rd

Want to comment? Go to the forum.

 

Attribution: Council notice, story written by Bob Dey for the Bob Dey Property Report.

Continue Reading

Whitford Village expansion approved

Published 19 January 2011

Commissioners have approved Manukau plan change 27, which will double the size of the Whitford Village urban zone. They’ve restricted section sizes in the existing village but allowed gross housing density of 1:576m² in the new housing area.

Opponents had wanted the new development area to have lot sizes in the range of 1000-1200m², in keeping with the existing village.

Other decisions allow for flexible density and, although apartments won’t be allowed, there’s provision for development which could amount to the same thing. Cluster development is provided for, but with a limit on dwelling numbers in the cluster.

The Whitford Village special policy area covers 20.4ha at the head of Turanga Creek, 3km beyond the Auckland region’s metropolitan urban limit at Cockle Bay & Flat Bush. On the southern boundary is the designation for the proposed Whitford bypass, the creek is on the east.

Plan change 27 was notified on 13 February 2009, evidence was heard in August 2010 and councillor commissioners Anne Candy (chairman), Maggie Burrill & Sylvia Taylor issued their decision on 21 December. It was publicly notified on 12 January.

The commissioners “acknowledge and have carefully considered the view expressed by some submitters who sought a no-growth or low rural-residential density form of development for Whitford Village”, but said they were satisfied with the proposal which had resulted from a thorough & sound planning process: “That process began in 1995 when the Manukau City Council publicly notified its proposed district plan and continued through community visioning workshops, the formation of a Whitford working party, a Whitford Village study, a Whitford Village growth management strategy developed using structure planning principles, and extensive consultation including 4 different growth options.”

The commissioners said the limited expansion of Whitford Village, subject to tailored design & environmental guidelines, was appropriate because:

plan change 27 promotes development of a contained area which is contiguous to the existing villagethe Turanga Creek & escarpment, the proposed Whitford Bypass & Whitford Park Rd provide defendable long-term boundaries to the expanded village. This is further strengthened by the conservative & stringent development approach adopted for the Whitford rural areathe scale of development provided for by the plan change enables alternative options for infrastructure for the village as a whole to be considered (specifically for wastewater & stormwater).

The commissioners determined that the Whitford Village special policy area structure plan map 2 (contained in the design & environmental guidelines) should be amended by raising the minimum net site area for existing sites from 600m² to 800m² and introducing the following standards in the Whitford Saleyard residential zone:

a maximum number of 105 additional households are to be alloweda maximum of 10 households may be contained within buildings between 8-12m highno more than 10 sites can be less than 350m² and the minimum net site area will be 200m²no more than 5 household units in any one location can be formed as a clustered developmentrear yards of 8m will apply, anda variety of front yard setbacks must be demonstrated through a comprehensive development plan.

In the Whitford Saleyard residential zone the arrangement & range of housing units is no longer specified on special policy area structure plan map 2: “This map is now more schematic. However, all development within the area will be subject to assessment & approval of a comprehensive development plan.

“The design & environmental guidelines that apply to all future development within the Whitford Village special policy area have been modified & clarified. Additionally, the design & environmental guidelines are contained in the district plan.”

On the crucial factor of wastewater disposal, the commissioners decided disposal should be through connection to the metropolitan reticulated system. The commissioners set out provisions for roof water collection, including tank sizes according to the number of bedrooms.

Alastair Ray, for Whitford Properties Ltd, Regis Farm Ltd & Regis Holdings Ltd, gave evidence that the plan change as proposed was more likely to deliver “anywhere [suburban] subdivision”. He said that, for Whitford’s village character to be developed & enhanced as the village grows, certain characteristics of layout & buildings needed to be recognised. He acknowledged that many of the characteristics which he stated in his evidence are recognised & described in the design & environmental guidelines. However, he expressed concern about density from a design point of view, and the need to contribute to the creation of a compact functioning village centre. In his opinion an average housing density of 1 household unit:600m² would result in a form of development & density that contributed to the character of the village. His presentation showed an optimal number of 105 houses of a developable area of 4.86ha and including some 1.19ha of shared space. This would allow for a gross housing density of 1:576m².

The commissioners said urban design evidence at the hearing supported development at (or about) an overall density of 1 household unit:600m², subject to a maximum number of new dwellings and flexibility about the configuration & arrangement of various sized lots.

They amended the plan change by introducing alternative mechanisms to allow flexible density, subject to a maximum number of dwellings in the Whitford Saleyard residential zone.

Objectors were also concerned that a large number of tall buildings could be erected, changing the nature of the village. The commissioners decided: “An 8m maximum building height is consistent with the existing maximum height of residential buildings in the village. The commissioners have determined that apartments are no longer generally provided for in the plan change. However some flexibility in household unit configuration is still enabled in a limited number of circumstances.

“In order to achieve the anticipated outcomes for building forms (as set out in the design & environmental guidelines,) a higher maximum height of 12m for buildings collectively containing 10 household units will allow larger buildings accommodating more than one dwelling ‘in proportion’, such as 2 semi-detached dwellings built to look like a single manor-style house. Alternatively, the plan change provides flexibility to create ‘key’ buildings to define parts of a streetscape and/or reflect the historical character of the village (of steeply pitched roofs).”

Not part of the plan change, but mentioned anyway, was the 12.8ha site at 679 Whitford Rd, which is west of the plan change area and separated by roads & other rural 2-zoned properties. It was subject of an earlier study area but ultimately excluded from the plan change for the village. Planning consultant David MacPherson, on behalf of Whing Shing Property (NZ) Ltd & Victor Li, told the hearing 20-25 new lots could be created there, which wouldn’t create any adverse effects on amenity/character, servicing, transport, urban form or social infrastructure, but would add to lifestyle choice.

Earlier stories:

12 March 2009: Whitford plan change open for submissions

17 October 2008: Council wants informal feedback to refine Whitford Village plan change

 

Want to comment? Go to the forum.

 

Attribution: Council release, story written by Bob Dey for the Bob Dey Property Report.

Continue Reading

Whitford plan change open for submissions

Published 12 March 2009

Manukau City council has opened plan change 27 for the development of Whitford Village to public consultation. The submissions period opened on Monday and closes on Friday 27 March.

 

The Whitford Village special policy area covers 20.4ha at the head of Turanga Creek, 3km beyond the Auckland region’s metropolitan urban limit. On the southern boundary is the designation for the proposed Whitford bypass, the creek is on the east.

Plan change 27 would allow limited further development of the existing residential & business areas of the village. Development of a new residential area on the land south of the village and up to Saleyard Rd is also proposed, and a pedestrian linkage is proposed between the existing houses & the proposed new residential area to the south.

The plan change would provide for an extra 430 residents in the village.

The council said it had taken a design-led approach to the plan change to make sure any development is high quality and maintains a special village character: “A key part of the plan change is the design guidelines for development, for example making sure streets cater well for pedestrians and buildings work well with each other & the environment.”

Plan change 27 would allow limited growth within the boundaries formed by existing roads (Whitford Park Rd & Saleyard Rd) & the Turanga Creek. In detail:

 

·         The existing business 1 & business 5 zones & some sites in the residential settlement unserviced zone are to be rezoned Whitford business zone. The new zone is similar to the business 1 zone but with additional guidance & direction on urban design provided by special guidelines that form part of the plan change

·         An existing area of residential settlement unserviced zone is to be rezoned from residential settlement unserviced zone to Whitford residential zone, with additional guidance & direction on urban design provided by the guidelines

·         The area between Whitford Park Rd, Saleyard Rd, Turanga Creek & the existing residential area is to be rezoned from rural 1 to Whitford Saleyard residential. This area will have the same average residential density as the Whitford residential zone but, subject to strict guidelines, the zoning will allow a higher intensity of development within larger areas of open space

·         Some areas around the margins of the Turanga Creek are to be designated & rezoned to public open space zone 5

·         Future development in the Whitford Village must be based on reticulated wastewater services being available. The plan change makes provision nearby on the southern corner of Whitford Park & Sandstone Rds for a land-based wastewater disposal system.

 

Earlier story:

17 October 2008: Council wants informal feedback to refine Whitford Village plan change

 

Council website: Whitford plan change

 

Want to comment? Email [email protected].

                                       

Attribution: Council release, story written by Bob Dey for the Bob Dey Property Report.

Continue Reading

Council wants informal feedback to refine Whitford Village plan change

Published 17 October 2008

Manukau City Council is seeking public feedback on proposed district plan change 27, which would allow development of Whitford Village.

 

The council will hold an information day on Friday 31 October 3-7pm at Whitford Village Hall, as part of an informal feedback period to help refine the plan change before it’s notified.

 

The period for informal feedback closes on Friday 14 November. The plan change follows previous public consultation in 2005.

 

Acting regional & city planning Peter Reaburn said yesterday provision would be made for limited further development of the existing residential & business areas of the village. Development of a new residential area on the land south of the village and up to Saleyard Rd is also proposed. A pedestrian linkage is proposed between the existing houses and the proposed new residential area to the south.

 

New developments would be required to connect to a reticulated wastewater system.  Provision is made in the plan change for a land-based disposal system that would be designed to serve the whole of the village.

 

The proposed plan change would provide for an extra 430 residents in the village.

 

Mr Reaburn said the council had taken a design-led approach to the plan change: “This will help to make sure any development is high quality and maintains a special village character. Design & environmental guidelines for development are a key part of the plan change. For example, making sure streets cater well for pedestrians and buildings work well with each other & the environment.”

 

Council website: Whitford plan change

 

Want to comment? Email [email protected].

                                       

Attribution: Council release, story written by Bob Dey for the Bob Dey Property Report.

Continue Reading

Allen proposes 6-lot cluster at Brownhill Rd

Published 25 May 2008

Jurisdiction: Manukau

 

Neighbourhood: Whitford

 

Applicant: Wayne Allen Ltd (Amanda & Wayne Allen, Whitford)

 

Application detail: 133 Whitford Park Rd & 38 Brownhill Rd, application to subdivide 2 sites to create 7 lots plus one access lot; 6 of the lots (ranging from 2501-3659m²) are to be clustered near Brownhill Rd; the subdivision is a non-complying activity under both the rural 1 zone & the provisions of plan change 8

 

Notification date: 24 May

 

Submission closure date: Monday 23 June

 

Other details: Mr Allen is a director of Regis Holdings Ltd & several other Regis companies, Stanford Group Ltd & Whitford Properties Ltd.

 

Plan change 8

 

Earlier stories:

17 December 2007: Whitford subdivision

20 November 2005: Whitford rural plan change out to further submissions, with variation to follow

18 September 2005: Regional policy decision could stop Whitford development plans

9 July 2005: Manukau notifies Whitford rural catchment

 

Want to comment? Email [email protected].

 

Attribution: Council notice, story written by Bob Dey for this website.

Continue Reading

Morgenstern plans 49ha Whitford countryside subdivision

Published 5 April 2008

Jurisdiction: Manukau City Council & Auckland Regional Council

 

Neighbourhood: Whitford

 

Applicant: Morning Star Enterprises (Farm Estates) Ltd (Arthur Morgenstern, Papakura)

 

Application detail: 600-Whitford-Maraetai Rd, subdivide 48.73ha into 11 countryside living lots of 3600m² plus 2 lots of 19.46ha & 23.67ha, a non-complying activity under the city council’s rural 1 zoning.

 

The site is also zoned Whitford rural B & C under Manukau’s plan change 8, contains land within the road corridor, scenic amenity, catchment management overlay and the coastal overlays, making it a non-complying activity requiring consent.

 

ARC consents are required for earthworks & discharge of treated stormwater from about 24,000m² of post-development impervious area.

 

Notification date: 1 April

 

Submission closure date: Wednesday 30 April

 

Other details: Mr Morgenstern is director of Hamina Enterprises Ltd, Innovative Housing Ltd, Landmark Property Development Ltd, Morning Star Development Ltd, Morningstar Enterprises Ltd (renamed Kingdon Undertaking Ltd on 4 March), Morning Star (St Lukes Garden Apartments) Ltd, St Lukes Holdings Ltd & Whitford Ranch Ltd.

 

Earlier stories:

24 October 2007: Morgenstern seeks consent for 25 lifestyle blocks on Pt View Drive

7 August 2007: Morgenstern seeks retrospective approval for St Lukes apartment changes

20 November 2005: Whitford rural plan change out to further submissions, with variation to follow

18 September 2005: Regional policy decision could stop Whitford development plans

9 July 2005: Manukau notifies Whitford rural catchment

11 June 2001: Camperdown case a test of planning rules and planning sense

11 April 2001: Verissimo’s Camperdown project goes to hearing

 

Want to comment? Email [email protected].

 

Attribution: Council notices, story written by Bob Dey for this website.

Continue Reading

Whitford subdivision

Published 17 December 2007

Jurisdiction: Manukau

 

Neighbourhood: Whitford

 

Applicant: Terroir Trading Trust

 

Application detail: 40 Brownhill Rd, application to subdivide 6.392ha to create 3 lots of 5.1037ha, 6000m² & 6883m², zoned rural 1 and also zoned Whitford rural A under plan change 8. Brownhill Rd runs off Whitford Park Rd opposite the Whitford Park Country Club.

 

Notification date: 15 December

 

Submission closure date: Tuesday 12 February

 

Want to comment? Click on The new BD Central Forum or email [email protected].

 

Attribution: Council notice, story written by Bob Dey for this website.

Continue Reading
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux