A U C K L A N D C O U N C I L
Decision following the hearing of an application for resource consent
SUBJECT: Application by Newton Technology Centre Limited under Section 88 of the Resource Management Act 1991 for resource consent to construct a new six-storied building at the rear of the site at 127-131 Newton Road,
Eden Terrace to provide for 16 residential apartments and associated parking that will connect to an existing four-storied office complex to provide a mixed-use development on the site.
Hearings Commissioners: The Application was heard by independent Hearings
Commissionersconsisting of:
Miss L McGregor (Chair)
Mr G Hill
Ms K Sinclair
Council Officers: Mr E Williams
Ms N Bishop
Ms P Vasisht
Team Leader Resource Consents
Reporting Planner
Traffic Engineer
Mr S Paton Senior Development Engineer
Mr A Karndacharuk Principal Consent Specialist Central
Ms J McKee Committee Secretary - Hearings
APPEARANCES:
For the applicant:
Submitters:
Mr S Havill
Mr A Khudair
Mr B Hall
Mr M Kearney
Norwich Industries Ltd represented by Mr R Waddell
Kester Holdings Ltd represented by Mr I Malins
TM, DAM and SM Cavanagh represented by Mr M
Cavanagh
Janine Corrick Chimera Trust represented by Ms J
Corrick
Chivalry Enterprises Limited represented by Mr M Norton
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
1

APPLICATION DESCRIPTION
Application and Property Details
Application Number (s): R/LUC/2010/2158
Site Address:
Applicant's Name:
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
Newton Technology Centre Limited
Lodgement Date: 26 May 2010
Hearing Commencement: 9.28am, 22 December 2010
Hearing Closed: 3.36pm, 22 December 2010
THE SITE AND ITS LOCALITY
The site is situated in an established commercial area and is zoned Mixed Use in the
Operative District Plan 1999 – Isthmus Section. It is 1871 m
2 in area and is located on the southern side of Newton Road, opposite the intersection of Newton Road and Upper
Queen Street in Eden Terrace. The site also has a frontage to the currently unformed but legal paper road (being a portion of Macaulay Street) at the rear.
The application site is rectangular and slopes south-west toward the Basque Park valley, dropping from RL 78 m in its north eastern corner to RL 68.5 in the south western corner. The site is currently developed with a four-storied office complex (which is to be retained as part of this proposal) on its northern portion close to the Newton Road frontage with parking to the rear. The parking is located on a formed impervious surface at ground level and on a mezzanine level that partially covers the at-grade parking.
The surrounding environment has a mixed-use character, comprising residential
(particularly apartments), retail, light industrial, recreational and commercial premises.
In particular, land to the east (133-135 Newton Road) is zoned Mixed Use and is occupied by a development of that nature. That site contains a modern building housing retail and warehousing activities with the upper levels occupied by 27 residential apartments constructed in the mid 2000’s. Land to the north west of the subject site
(121 Newton Road), is zoned Mixed Use and occupied by a multi storied hotel/nonpermanent accommodation building known as the ‘Comfort Inn’.
To the west of the application site, 2 Diamond Street is also zoned Mixed Use and has been developed with 11 terraced townhouses, one of which is owned by the
Cavanaghs. The townhouses are separated from the application site by a large wooden retaining wall. It seems from the resource consent granted for 2 Diamond Street around
1998
1
, which was produced to us, that what is now a residential townhouse development was intended to be used solely as offices. The design of the townhouses on the plans that were consented to in 1998 had no rear windows facing the boundary with the application site, but did have sky lights in the ceiling, and thus any overlooking that may occur now is the product of the apparently un-consented conversion of the townhouses to residential use at a time which was not made known to us.
Land directly to the south, across the unformed portion of Macaulay Street, (20 and 22
Norwich Street) is zoned Mixed Use and occupied by dwellings which have vehicle access off Macaulay Street. Other neighbouring properties at 18, 24-26 and 28 Norwich
Street are zoned Mixed Use and are occupied by commercial/light industrial premises.
1
Auckland City Council reference HO/98/02897 and JN:185037
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
2

Nearby Basque Park provides for recreational use for both residents and workers in the
Newton area and is zoned Open Space 2.
As the layout of the site in terms of its relationship to neighbouring streets is a little complicated, it is shown in the following figure:
On the above figure the application site is bordered in red and the affected portion of
Macaulay Street (which is presently a paper road) is shown in blue.
THE PROPOSAL
The application seeks to construct a new six-storey building at the rear of the site at
127-131 Newton Road. The new building will provide for 16 residential apartments and associated parking and will be connected to an existing four-storey office complex providing for a mixed-use development on the front (Newton Road) portion of the site.
An existing parking complex (over two levels) associated with the office complex and located to the rear of the site will be removed as part of the current proposal.
The proposed 16 residential apartments will each consist of two bedrooms and a balcony with a minimum area of 9 m
2
accessed from the indoor living area. Each unit will have a total gross floor area of between 80 m 2 and 82 m 2 . The apartments will be located in the three upper levels of the proposed building (referred to as Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 on the application plans). Six residential apartments are proposed on
Levels 1 and 2 and four apartments on Level 3. Two of the four apartments on Level 3 will have access to their own 42 m
2
deck that will have views across Macaulay Street to nearby Basque Park.
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
3

The lower three levels of the proposed building (referred to as Parking FL -1, Parking FL
-2 and Parking FL-3 on the application plans) will predominantly provide for parking, storage and rubbish collection facilities associated with the apartments as well as office activity.
Following an amendment to the application plans after discussions between the applicant and the Council, pedestrian access to the apartments from Newton Road will be provided along the western side of the existing office complex by way of a covered corridor within the existing building structure. This access will terminate at the rear of the existing office building and pedestrians will have the option to reach the upper levels by stairs or by lift. Rubbish storage for the apartments will be provided on Parking FL -3 and is within close proximity to the proposed rubbish and collection area that will be located along Macaulay Street when the relevant portion is formed. Further rubbish and storage areas associated with the commercial office building will be located on Parking
FL -2.
Earthworks
Earthworks on the subject site will be mainly limited to the foundation and footings of the proposed building and, in particular, construction of the basement level. The foundation design will be required to address the perched water tables referred to in the evidence of the applicant’s engineer, Mr Kearney
2
. Modifications are required to the existing vehicular crossings and carriageways located along the eastern and western boundaries of the site which will provide access from Newton Road to the proposed carpark.
The proposal will result in a total volume of earthworks of 2847.4 m
3
over an area of
1591.5 m
2 of earthworks. In our experience, that is not a particularly large volume although we do note from our individual site visits that the topography at the rear of the site can be expected to cause difficulty for the vehicles involved in this aspect. We understand that this part of Macaulay Street was formed in the past but fell into disrepair after considerable damage was done to its surface by works associated with neighbouring developments undertaken many years ago. Given the likelihood of a repeat performance, we have included conditions of consent to address the potential impact on neighbouring properties while the earthworks and construction activities for the current development are taking place.
The Commissioners had very few questions at the hearing about the construction activity and earthworks as the engineering reports prepared by KEA Consultants Ltd and Tonkin & Taylor and lodged in support of the application had done a particularly good and comprehensive job of covering all the relevant aspects, including those usually of concern to us in relatively large developments such as this. Further geotechnical investigations and design will be undertaken at the building consent stage when the Council’s engineering staff will focus on the precise detail of the proposal. Mr
Kearney recommended in his evidence
3
that a detailed geotechnical review of the proposed retention and excavation construction sequencing be undertaken prior to the commencement of work, and also that a dilapidation survey of adjacent buildings should be carried out. These recommendations are reflected in the conditions.
The site is recorded by the Council as being potentially contaminated as it was once used for vehicle servicing which did not have a dangerous goods licence. Mr Kearney pointed out that previous construction works on the land involving excavation would most probably have removed any possible contamination, meaning the potential for any
2
Paragraph 2.8
3
Paragraph 2.9
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
4

residual contamination can be expected to be very low. We were given no reason to disagree with his conclusion.
Access and Parking
Vehicle access to the site from Newton Road is currently gained through two existing crossings located along the eastern and western boundaries of the site. This arrangement is to be amended in part by this proposal. In particular, two additional crossings will be provided at the south of the site and used for exit movements.
The existing vehicle access located on the western boundary is 3.7 m wide and will provide for one way entry movements. The existing access on eastern boundary has a width that tapers between 5.7 m and 3.7 m at its southern end and will provide for twoway traffic flow. Two additional crossings will provide one-way egress movements from
Parking FL-3 and Parking FL-1 to the portion of Macaulay Street at the rear of the site once it has been formed.
A minimum of 69 parking spaces is required to be provided on site in association with the proposal. The application anticipates that 76 spaces will be provided over three levels.
The existing office building located on the front portion of the site has a GFA of 2108 m
2 and subsequently has a parking requirement of 50 parking spaces (calculated at 1 space per 40 m
2 of office GFA in accordance with Rule 12.8.1.1 of the District Plan). In addition, the parking requirement for the proposed residential apartments ranges between 16 and 32 (calculated at a maximum of 2 spaces per two-bedroom residential unit and a minimum of 1 parking space in accordance with Rule 8.8.10.10). The applicant proposes to provide 24 parking spaces for the residential apartments, 16 of which will be stacked.
The applicant’s advice at the hearing
4
, based on its experience at 135 Newton Road, was that about 70% of the tenants are expected to be students who are in residence between February and November each year. Few of these students own or use a vehicle, and cycle racks will be provided in the development.
In addition to the provision of parking for residents, residential developments in the
Mixed Use zone are required to provide visitor parking. The visitor parking requirement associated with this development is three (calculated at 1 space per 5 residential units in accordance with Rule 8.8.10.10). However, the proposal envisages that no visitor parking will be provided on the site. The application proposes instead that visitors can have the exclusive use of parking spaces associated with the office activity during the evenings and weekends (i.e. outside business hours). In accordance with the New
Zealand Standard: NZS 4121:2001 Design for Access and Mobility, three accessible parking spaces are required and will be provided.
A loading space will be provided on Parking L-3 and will accommodate truck-loading activities for both the residential and commercial activities. A courier space is to be provided on FL-1 and will predominantly serve the commercial activity. Trucks gaining access to the loading space will do so from the eastern ramp from Newton Road and will park at the southern end of the ramp before being loaded or unloaded. Trucks will then be required to exit the site onto the part of Macaulay Street that has yet to be formed. But as the loading space is shown on the application plans at the rear on the unformed part of Macaulay Street, and trucks and vans logically need to be able to get to it without having to travel right through the site, it appears logical to us that the new portion of the road must be constructed so that two-way movements are possible.
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
5

We pause here to record that on their site visits the Commissioners noticed a number of Wilsons Parking signs displayed on the site. It was confirmed during the hearing that any public parking activity conducted on the site requires consent and, further, that no such consent has been granted for this location. That parking activity is therefore unlawful and as a result must cease forthwith.
The proposal involves a number of infringements of the Operative District Plan provisions. These were listed and described in detail in the Section 42A report
5
.
Overall, the application is required to be considered as a discretionary activity.
The effect of this is that when considering an application for a discretionary activity a consent authority must have regard to Part 2 of the Resource Management Act (its
“Purpose and Principles”, contained in Sections 5 to 8), and Sections 104, 104B and where relevant Sections 105 and 107. In the present case, no issues arise in terms of either of Sections 105 or 107.
The statutory considerations in Section 104 provide the legal framework within which the application is to be addressed. Among other things, this framework requires consideration of any actual or potential effects on the environment; the relevant provisions of any applicable national environmental standards, national policy statements (including the NZ Coastal Policy Statement); regional policy statements and regional plans (both operative and proposed); and any other relevant and reasonably necessary matters to determine the application. There were no national environmental standards or national policy statements drawn to our attention as being applicable to the current proposal.
All the considerations are subject to Part 2 of the Act, which prevails over other provisions of the RMA or provisions in planning instruments (e.g. district plans) in the event of a conflict. Section 5 states the overriding purpose of the RMA and Sections 6,
7 and 8 contain principles intended to provide additional guidance as to the way in which that statutory purpose is to be achieved.
The application of Section 5 involves an overall broad judgement as to whether a proposal will promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.
The Act’s use of the terms “use, development and protection” are a general indication that all resources are to be managed in a sustainable way, or at a rate which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing, and for their health and safety.
Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the RMA provide further context and guidance to the constraints found in Sub-sections 5(2)(a),(b) and (c) of the Act. The commencing words to each of these later sections differ, thereby laying down the relative weight required to be given to each.
Section 6 of the RMA lists matters of national importance which need to be recognised and provided for and includes among other things (and in no order of priority), the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes, the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna, and the protection of historic heritage. None of those issues arose in the present case.
4
Evidence of Mr Havill, page 4
5
Pages 14 to 16 of the Council agenda
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
6

Section 7 of the RMA requires a consent authority to have “particular regard” to those matters it lists. Section 7 matters are similarly not expressly ranked in order of priority.
Therefore, all relevant aspects of this section are to be considered equally.
Section 8 of the RMA requires a consent authority to take account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. This section of the RMA recognises the relationship of Tangata
Whenua with natural and physical resources and encourages active participation and consultation with Tangata Whenua.
There were no issues raised in terms of either Section 7 or 8 of the Act that we must address in this decision.
Section 104(2) allows any effects that may arise from permitted activities set out in a national environmental standard or a plan to be excluded from the assessment of effects related to the resource consent. This is known as the “permitted baseline” test. The
‘baseline’ constitutes the existing environment (excluding existing use rights) against which a proposed activity’s degree of adverse effect is assessed. Generally it is only the adverse effects over and above those forming the baseline that are relevant when considering whether the effects are minor. We have a discretion whether or not to apply the assessment of the permitted baseline to any proposal. In this case there is no relevant baseline that would assist us.
Under section 104B a consent authority may grant or refuse consent for a discretionary activity and, if consent is granted, may impose conditions. This section requires us to have particular regard to:
•
the purpose of the Act; and
•
the relevant provisions of the Auckland Regional Policy Statement; and
•
the objectives and any relevant policies in each of the regional and district plans.
All of those aspects are covered in the following section of the report, which for the purpose of Section 113 of the Act includes a discussion of the principal issues in contention, the relevant evidence presented at the hearing, and our main findings of fact.
DISCUSSION
Section 104(1)(a) – Actual and Potential Effects on the Environment
Macaulay Street
The principal issue in contention at the hearing was that part of the proposal which addressed formation of the eastern section of Macaulay Street. This is currently a
‘paper’ road and is required to be constructed to enable vehicles to exit from the site. It theoretically provides a second road frontage for the properties at 20 to 30 Norwich
Street and part of No. 32, although the steepness of the terrain is such that in some cases that frontage may prove difficult to achieve and in any event considerable retaining structures and safety barriers will be required.
The Norwich Street residents aired their concerns about the detail of its construction and how the newly formed road would function, particularly in terms of their own access to it and also the impact on their prospective new entrances of any street parking that it might involve. They are worried that because the remaining portion of Macaulay Street will be constructed in conjunction with the current proposal for exit movements only, the new road will effectively provide only for one-way movements whereas provision for two-
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
7

way traffic is required for it perform for all the properties alongside the carriageway. In
Ms Corrick’s case, while her property technically has frontage to Norwich Street, in fact the only practical vehicle access is from Macaulay Street (just beyond its intersection with Diamond St) because her property was developed very close to, and at a higher level than, Norwich Street. She stressed that the Macaulay Street construction proposal is therefore much more than an amenity concern for the Chimera Trust.
But. the road lies beyond the boundaries of the application site. As a result, the
Commissioners have no jurisdiction to determine this aspect of the project. We can therefore do nothing to assist the Norwich Street residents such as Mr Norton, Mr
Waddell, Mr Malins of Kester Holdings, and Ms Corrick who appeared and expressed their concerns about access, including where the road will be grade-separated from existing access points, and the detail of the road construction and construction management, and its future use. If we were to stray into these issues, our decision on the application itself could be challenged on the basis of an excess of jurisdiction.
We note however that it was advised in the Section 42A report prepared for the Council by Ms Bishop that the construction (including earthworks) of Macaulay Street is a permitted activity, subject to the asset owner’s approval
6
, in accordance with Rule
4A.4.6B(ii) of the Operative District Plan 1999 – Isthmus Section. Her advice was that construction of this part of Macaulay Street could be undertaken as of right without resource consent. We were provided with evidence in the Section 42A report that conditions on previously granted resource consents for 133-135 Newton Road, which was developed by the same applicant (or a party closely related to it) required the formation of this road but this has never occurred.
As the approval of the asset owner (the Council – Auckland Transport) is required, we expect the Council will have its own requirements about its formation before the construction can take place. We expect that these requirements will take account of the interests of other neighbouring owners and that they will be consulted with in some detail as it was apparent to us at the hearing that there is considerable frustration as to whether their concerns are appreciated and/or understood. Certainly Mr Karndacharuk assured us in his final comments to the hearing that the new portion of Macaulay Street will be a cul-de-sac and that there was sufficient carriageway to implement access for all adjoining properties which have frontage. We record also Mr Havill’s advice in the
Reply on behalf of the applicant that consultation will be required to reach a solution that works for everyone.
As formation of the road has been required by previous consents in which this applicant was involved and has clearly not been undertaken, the consent comprised by this decision requires that the road is to be formed before the development can occupied for any purpose. We expect this may go at least some way toward relieving the “saga of frustration” described by Mr Norton in his evidence and echoed in a sizeable bundle of correspondence with the Council that was produced by Ms Corrick as part of her presentation for the Chimera Trust.
Pohutukawa Tree
The application further anticipates consent being given for the removal of a semi-mature
Pohutukawa that has grown in the road reserve. Again, this is beyond the application site and we have no jurisdiction to consider it as part of this proposal. We understood from a response by Mr Williams that the Council will agree to its removal.
6
I.e., the Council
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
8

Pedestrian Access to the Development
The submitted design had potential for conflict between vehicles and pedestrians because it relied on existing driveways for pedestrian connectivity and as a result pedestrian movements on the site would not be segregated from vehicles. Following discussions with Council officers, the application was amended to show a separate pedestrian access into the building from Newton Road. We find that amendment to be practical and a necessary safety measure.
We note that one of the application plans, A021, included an encroachment onto
Council land. This encroachment is logically outside the application site and that plan accordingly requires amendment to remove it. This is being required by one of the conditions of consent.
The other issues in contention at the hearing were the effects of the new building in terms of amenity on the neighbouring “townhouse” development in Diamond Street which are of concern to the Cavanagh family, and how the proposed mixed use development will connect with and relate to Macaulay Street. Traffic movements were the dominant aspect of this latter concern. We now discuss these in turn.
Amenity Effects
The amenity effects raised were the impact of the new building in general terms, and specifically the impact of the proposed development on the adjacent properties at 2
Diamond Street.
Ms Corrick considered the building would dominate the proposed new road as well as her property across the road (with a second frontage to Norwich Street). She said it would also dominate Basque Park and with the already existing high density housing on the south side would create a “gold fish bowl” effect for park users. Given the number of multi-storey buildings on the Newton Road ridge, we find that we do not agree with her.
For the applicant, Mr Havill addressed the prospect of shading of the 6 ‘residential’ units at 2F-2K Diamond Street and produced photographs of the units concerned. We understood from Mr Cavanagh that all but one of these units are occupied. The units now include rear windows about a metre above ground level which would be adjacent to a concrete panel retaining wall. Mr Havill’s opinion was that any loss of light and potential impact would be minor because:
•
the units are consented as offices;
•
the window size is relatively small;
•
the windows are currently screened by vegetation (and we note that his photographs demonstrated this);
•
the erection of a fence would achieve the same outcome as the proposed retaining wall.
The proposal includes landscape vegetation associated with the concrete panel retaining wall to be established on the boundary with 2 Diamond Street which would serve to mitigate its effect. The implementation and maintenance of the landscaping has been secured by a condition of consent. [Apart from the strict legal obligation that any consent holder has to comply with all the conditions of a resource consent, we were supplied a further measure of confidence through the evidence that was tabled on behalf of Mr Shahroodi of Newton Technology Limited. This included photographs of his existing Gamma Computers development in Newton Road which show the building and
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
9

associated planting in pristine condition along with the notation “after 10 years still looks
like new”.]
Mr Cavanagh explained to us that the windows at the rear of the 2F Diamond St townhouse his family owns are the only windows in the back bedroom. We mentioned earlier that the plans consented for this development showed no windows on the rear face of either level of the block of units immediately adjacent to the application site.
These plans, which are labelled “proposed business development”, were drawn by
Davis Design Ltd for Castlerock Group and sheet 2 shows the east elevation of “block
2”. A ‘skydome’ is marked on the roof of the rear first floor room on the plans and it is reasonable to presume that this was included in substitution for a window. How and when the business development was converted to residential townhouses, and whether that was lawfully achieved, was not made known to us.
Our finding in terms of the amenity impact of the proposed development on the buildings at 2 Diamond Street, bearing in mind the uncertainty about the lawfulness of the modifications to the rear wall of the units there and the change in use since that development was consented, is that subject to the landscape mitigation proposed and required by the consent conditions, the effect on that development will be, or can be made to be, no more than minor.
Traffic Effects
Mr Bryce Hall is a very experienced expert traffic engineer. He prepared a Traffic
Impact Assessment (“TIA”) that was lodged as part of the application materials and gave evidence at the hearing. The TIA was peer-reviewed for the Council by Ms Vasisht who is also an experienced traffic engineer. Both experts independently reached the conclusion that there will be no significant traffic-related issues such that consent to the proposal should be declined.
They disagreed initially on two of the proposed conditions of consent that were recommended to the Commissioners for consideration. These conditions address movements in and out of the site on Newton Road. By the conclusion of the hearing this disagreement had been reduced to one condition which we discuss shortly.
Newton Road is a regional arterial road which carries a significant volume of traffic, with peak flows of 2800 vehicles an hour and around 35000 vehicles each day. As well as providing access for the immediate area, it functions as an entry to and exit from the north-western motorway for Ponsonby, the central city, and the Mount Eden and
Newmarket areas, and also connects with the top of Upper Queen Street. It is thus a very important component of the central city roading network. By contrast, when the portion of Macaulay Street at the rear of the site is formed, Mr Hall expects it to carry around 100 to 150 vehicles a day with peak flows of about 20 to 30 vehicles an hour.
The existing formed portion of Macaulay Street (west of Diamond Street) carries around
500 vehicles a day with peak hour flows of about 50 vehicles an hour.
The application site is opposite the intersection with Upper Queen Street and traffic lights have been installed to manage the flows through this intersection. This results in short breaks in the flows, allowing slightly easier exit movements from Diamond and
Exmouth Streets than were previously the case before the lights were installed in 2009.
Mr Hall provided details of the crash history on this part of Newton Road, much of which related to the period prior to the traffic lights. There were 17 crashes on the intersection immediately outside the site between 2005 and 2009, with 12 at the intersection with
Exmouth Street and 15 on the St Benedicts Street intersection during the same period.
While this was not a particularly attractive record, Mr Hall’s conclusion was that the current proposal would not exacerbate any of the intersection issues.
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
10

Figure 5 of Mr Hall’s evidence showed the existing and proposed vehicle access arrangements. The existing (and new) accesses and exits are parallel to the eastern and western boundaries of the site and at present all movements are made to and from
Newton Road. The proposal is for access onto the site to continue to be made from this major arterial, with exit movements being made from the rear of the site along Macaulay
Street. He said later in his evidence
7
that movements associated with the residential component of the proposal will occur on the western access while the office use would be distributed between both accesses.
Mr Hall’s Figures 5 and 6 also showed exit movements from the eastern access with both right and left hand outward turns onto Newton Road. He said the western access will provide for one-way southbound traffic flow. We take it from this unqualified evidence and the associated Figures that no exit movements will be made onto Newton
Road from the western access. Given the high volumes of traffic the arterial carries and the potential for conflict between its traffic and vehicles leaving the application site, it is appropriate that a condition of consent secures this intention.
As Mr Hall said, the main effect on the road network associated with the development will be that generated by additional turning movements to and from the site on Newton
Road. The main impact would be from the vehicles turning right from the eastern access. His Figure 6 estimated that there would be one such movement in the morning peak hour and 4 in the evening peak, based on the existing commercial use of the site.
He considered that the impact of turning vehicles associated with the proposal to be no more than minor.
While Mr Havill had advised in opening that the applicant accepted all the recommended conditions of consent, Mr Hall disagreed with two of them. These were recommended conditions 28 and 29 (which are now conditions 26 and 27). Condition 28 (now 26) said:
The two vehicular accesses from Newton Road shall be entry only, and directional arrows shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Team Leader
Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with Auckland Transport while recommended condition 29 (now 27) required:
The two vehicular ingresses from Newton Road shall be left turn entry only and appropriate signage shall be installed indicating this to the satisfaction of the
Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with Auckland
Transport.
Mr Hall disagreed that there should be no exit movements from the eastern access as contemplated by recommended condition 28, saying the existing exit traffic flows from this point are low. He also proposed a re-wording of condition 29 that prevented rightturn movements into the eastern access, but which would still allow right turns into the western access. (The eastern access is more or less in the middle of the Upper Queen
Street intersection.)
After hearing Mr Hall’s evidence, Ms Vasisht agreed with his proposed amendment to condition 29 but continued to maintain her view that there should be no exit movements from the eastern access.
The Commissioners have therefore had to find in favour of one of these expert witnesses. After considering the reports and the evidence given - including the responses to our questions, the crash history, the fact that the eastern access is located in a major intersection, and the applicant’s statement (recorded above on page 6) that
7
Paragraph 5.3
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
11

about 70% of the tenants of the development will not own vehicles (and will therefore obviously not be concerned about vehicle exit movements) - we have determined that
Ms Vashist’s viewpoint should be upheld. What is now condition 27 has been amended accordingly (and both conditions have been amended to replace the antiquated word
“vehicular” with “vehicle”.
Section 104(1)(b)(i) and (ii) – relevant National Environmental Standards and other
Regulations; Section 104(1)(b)(iii) – relevant provisions of a National Policy
Statement
As noted earlier, there are no relevant national environmental standards, national policy statements, or other regulations that arise for consideration in the current case.
Section 104 (1)(b)(v) and (vi) – Objectives and Policies
Under the Mixed Use zoning provisions, residential units are a permitted activity where all development controls are complied with. Mr Havill reminded us in his evidence for the applicant that since the introduction of the Mixed Use provisions in 2004, there have been numerous successful applications for residential units similar to those proposed here.
He referred to a number of objectives and policies for this zone pointing out in the course of his evidence that the proposal advanced these by providing a residential activity close to main public transport routes and through not being located next to any residential zones. The proximity of the development to public transport is consistent with Plan Change 6 to the Auckland Regional Policy Statement also. Ms Bishop had come to similar conclusions in the Section 42A report. We note also that none of Mr
Havill’s evidence on these matters was disputed.
Having considered all of the District Plan provisions referred to us in the evidence and background materials we have found that the proposal will be consistent with the relevant objectives and policies.
Section 104(1)(c)
There were no “other matters” raised for the purposes of Section 104(1)(c).
CONCLUSION
After considering all of the application materials, the requests for further information and the responses, the submissions lodged by those persons who were notified, and all of the evidence given at the hearing, pursuant to Section 104B of the Act, the
Commissioners have determined that consent is granted to the application by Newton
Technology Limited, subject to conditions.
Reasons for the decision
The reasons for the Commissioners’ decision to grant consent to this application are:
(a) Subject to compliance with the conditions imposed on the consent, the proposal will generate no more than minor adverse effects on the environment, and in particular:
- There will be no more than minor adverse effects on the amenity values of the surrounding environment as the proposed building is of a scale that is consistent with the existing built form of the wider environment in the area;
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
12

- The effects on traffic generation and the road network operation will be minor in each of the wider context, vehicle access to and from the site, and
Macaulay Street;
- There will be no more than minor construction effects which will be limited to earthworks, soil stability, sediment control, site contamination, vibration and construction noise and traffic.
(b) The proposal will generate positive effects on the environment. These effects include:
Enhancement of the existing streetscape of Macaulay Street; -
- Providing additional residential accommodation in the area that will provide for the economic, cultural and social wellbeing of the occupier, users of the site and the community at large; and
- The strategic location of the development should encourage the use of alternative modes of transport such as walking, cycling and public transport.
(c) The proposal is consistent with the relevant assessment criteria for the activities comprised by the application.
(d) The imposition of the conditions below will ensure that the effects of the proposal are minor. In particular, the requirement that the development may not be occupied until the unformed portion of Macaulay Street has been constructed should serve to alleviate a long-standing point of contention for residents of
Norwich Street who also have frontage to this part of Macaulay Street.
(e) The proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives and policies of the
Operative District Plan and the Auckland Regional Policy Statement (including
Plan Change 6).
(f) The proposal will promote the sustainable management purpose of the Resource
Management Act.
DECISION ONE
Pursuant to Section 37 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the
Commissioners have resolved to accept the late submission of Chivalry
Enterprises Limited on the grounds that there is some doubt about whether or not the submission was actually lodged later than the statutory deadline, the applicant was not opposed to its acceptance, and no party would be prejudiced if it was to be taken into account.
It is recorded that a submission was also lodged with the Council by Mr Peter
Watts on behalf of the Watts Family Trust. As the Trust was not one of the parties nominated by the Council for the limited notification of the application, the submission is informal and therefore cannot be taken into account.
DECISION TWO
Pursuant to Section 104B of the Act, consent is granted to the discretionary land use application by Newton Technology Centre Limited to construct a six-storied building on the site at 127 Newton Road, Eden Terrace, legally described as Lot 1
DP 117861 CT NA90D/852 which requires consent under the Operative Auckland
City District Plan 1999 – Isthmus Section because the application:
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
13

•
•
•
Includes the construction of a new building
Includes excavations in the Mixed Use zone
Includes approximately 1591.5 m
2
of earthworks in an area with an average slope of 4%
•
•
•
•
Includes development and use of land known to be subject to instability
The use of land known to be potentially contaminated
Infringes the daylight to existing habitable rooms window control
Infringes the maximum number of vehicle crossings as it applies to the site by two, whereby two are allowed and four are proposed
•
Includes a parking shortfall of three as no visitor parking spaces are proposed to be provided
•
•
•
Includes the provision of 48 stacked parking spaces
Includes the provision of one loading space whereas two are required
Involves an internal basement parking access ramp along the western façade of the building with a gradient of 1:6 on Parking FL-3, where a gradient of 1:8 is required
•
Involves an internal basement parking access ramp along the western façade of the building with a gradient of 1:59 on Parking FL-1, where a gradient of 1:8 is required
•
Involves an internal basement parking access ramp along the eastern façade of the building with a gradient of 1:75 on Parking FL-1, where a gradient of 1:8 is required
•
Includes a carriageway along the eastern boundary that tapers between 5.7 m and 3.7, where a minimum width of 6 m is required
•
Includes a carriageway along the western boundary that has a width of 3.7 m, where a minimum width of 6 m is required
•
•
Includes access within an Interchange Control Area
Includes access within a Defined Road Boundary.
Relevant Statutory Provisions
The following provisions of the Act were taken into account in determining the application:
•
Part 2 and Sections 104, 104B (discretionary activity) and 108.
Relevant Plan Provisions
The planning documents considered were:
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
14

•
•
•
•
Auckland City Operative District Plan 1999 – Isthmus Section and in particular, the following:
•
Part 4 – General Provisions and Procedures
Part 4A – General Rules
Part 6 – Safety
Part 8 – Business Activity
Part 12 – Transportation.
Summary of evidence
The following evidence was taken into account when reaching the decision:
Materials Submitted with the Application
•
The Assessment of Environmental Effects prepared by Eclipse Group
Limited, dated May 2010
•
The Acoustic Design Report prepared by Hegley Acoustic Consultants, dated December 2009
•
The Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Traffic Planning Consultants
Limited, dated December 2009
•
The landscaping plans, titled ‘Landscaped Plan and Schedule for 127-131
Newton Road, prepared by Peers Brown Miller Ltd, dated 28 July 2010, sheets 1 -3
•
The Landscape Design Statement and Planting Maintenance Guidelines prepared by Peers Brown Miller Limited, dated 29 July 2010
•
The Infrastructure Assessment Report for Drainage and Water Supply prepared by Hydraulic Services Consultants NZ Limited, dated 6 August
2010
•
The Preliminary Geotechnical Report prepared by Tonkin & Taylor Ltd, dated August 2010
•
The Additional Traffic and Parking Information prepared by Traffic Planning
Consultants Limited, dated 12 August 2010
Council Reports
•
The Section 42A report prepared by Nicola Bishop, Planner, Resource
Consents of the Auckland Council
•
An engineering memorandum prepared by Raymond Koay of the former
Auckland City Council, dated 29 September 2010
•
An engineering addendum prepared by Golder Associates (NZ) Limited, dated 2 December 2010
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
15

•
An urban design memorandum prepared by Hannah Ickert of the former
Auckland City Council, dated 7 September 2010
•
A traffic assessment memorandum prepared by Pragati Vasisht of the former Auckland City Council, dated 9 September 2010
•
A traffic assessment addendum memorandum prepared by Pragati Vasisht of Auckland Transport, dated 1 December 2010
•
An environmental health memorandum prepared by Ruben Naidoo of the former Auckland City Council, dated 17 June 2010
•
An environmental noise memorandum prepared by Jacqueline Ahmu of the former Auckland City Council, dated 29 September 2010
Correspondence
•
•
•
An email from Auttapone Karndacharuk, dated 30 November 2010
An email from the applicant, dated 23 November 2010
The submissions validly lodged following the limited notification of the application
•
The evidence relating to the matters within the Commissioners’ jurisdiction that was presented at the hearing of the application.
CONDITIONS OF CONSENT
Pursuant to Section 108 of the Act, this consent is subject to the following conditions:
Predevelopment conditions
Administrative Charges
(1) Pursuant to section 116 of the Act, this consent (or any part thereof) shall not commence until such time as all charges pursuant to section 36, owing at the time of notification of the Council’s decision is notified, are paid to the Council in full.
Activity in Accordance with Application and Plans
(2) (a) The proposed activity shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and all information submitted with the application, being:
•
The Assessment of Environmental Effects entitled ‘Assessment of Effects’ prepared by Eclipse Group Limited and dated May
2010; including the following reports and subsequent information:
-
-
The Acoustic Design Report entitled ‘Proposed
Apartments 131 Newton Road, Newton’ prepared by Hegley
Acoustic Consultants, and dated December 2009
The Traffic Impact Assessment entitled ‘Proposed
Apartment Development, 127-131 Newton Road, Eden
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
16

•
•
-
-
-
Terrace’, prepared by Traffic Planning Consultants Limited, and dated December 2009
The landscaping plans, titled ‘Landscaped Plan and
Schedule for 127-131 Newton Road, prepared by Peers
Brown Miller Ltd, dated 28 July 2010, sheets 1 -3
The Landscape Design Statement and Planting
Maintenance Guidelines entitled ‘127 Newton Road,
Auckland’, prepared by Peers Brown Miller Limited, and dated 28 July 2010
The Infrastructure Assessment Report for Drainage and
Water Supply entitled ‘131 Newton Road, Proposed
Apartment Development’, prepared by Hydraulic Services
Consultants NZ Limited, and dated 6 August 2010
-
-
The Preliminary Geotechnical Report entitled ‘Newton
Technology Limited, 127-131 Newton Road’, prepared by
Tonkin & Taylor Ltd, and dated August 2010
The Additional Traffic and Parking Information prepared by
Traffic Planning Consultants Limited entitled ‘Proposed
Development, 127-131 Newton Road, dated 12 August 2010
Application plans prepared by Dimension Surveyors Ltd, titled
‘Topographical Plan – 131 Newton Road’, and labelled:
Reference number
Title
Sheet 1 of 3 Topographical
Plan
Sheet 2 of 3 Topographical
Plan
Sheet 3 of 3 Topographical
Plan
Architect/Author Date
Dimension
Surveyors Ltd
Dimension
Surveyors Ltd
Dimension
Surveyors Ltd
12.10.2009
12.10.2009
12.10.2009
Application plans prepared by KEA Consultants Ltd, titled ‘127-
131 Newton Road’, and labelled:
Reference number
RC 100 (Rev
D)
RC 101 (Rev
D)
RC 200 (Rev
B)
RC 300 (Rev
A)
Title
Service Lane
Concept Plan and
Longsection
Service Lane
Cross Sections and Details
Tracking Curve
Plan & 10 Year
Flow Calculation
Sediment Control
Plan
Architect/Auth or
KEA
Consultants
Ltd
KEA
Consultants
Ltd
KEA
Consultants
Ltd
KEA
Consultants
Date
11.08.2010
11.08.2010
11.08.2010
03.12.2009
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
17

•
RC 310 (Rev
A)
Sediment Control
Standard Details
Ltd
KEA
Consultants
Ltd
03.12.2009
Application plans prepared by Architects Pacifika (NZ) Ltd, titled
‘Proposed Development at 127-131 Newton Road, Auckland’ and labelled:
Reference number
A011
Title Architect/Author Date
A012
A013
A021 ***
A022(2)
A023(1)
A024
A025
A026
A027
A031
A032
A033
A034
A041
A042
A043
A044
A045
Existing Site
Plan
Proposed Site
Plan
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Earthworks Plan Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
Parking FL-3
Parking FL-2
Parking FL-1
Apartment Floor
Plan – Level 1
Apartment Floor
Plan – Level 2
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Apartment Floor
Plan – Level 3
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Roof Plan Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
South Elevation Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
West Elevation Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
East Elevation Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
North Elevation Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Section 1 Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Section 2
Section 3
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Section 4 Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
3D Perspective – Architects
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
16.12.2009
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
18

A046
Proposed
Development
3D Perspective –
Proposed
Development
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
Architects
Pacifika (NZ) Ltd
16.12.2009
*** subject to plan A021 being amended to remove both the awning encroachment onto Council land and the steps within the proposed footpath that are currently shown in its content.
The above materials have been referenced by the Council as
R/LUC/2010/2158.
(b) The foundation design is required to address the perched water tables referred to in the engineering evidence of Mr Kearney delivered at the hearing conducted on 22 December 2010.
(c) In the event of any inconsistency between the approved plans and supplementary documentation, the plans will prevail.
Monitoring Charges
(3) The consent holder shall pay the Council a consent compliance monitoring charge of $1500 (exclusive of GST), plus any further monitoring charge or charges to recover the actual and reasonable costs incurred to ensure compliance with the conditions of this consent. (This charge is to cover the cost of inspecting the site, carrying out tests, reviewing conditions, updating files, etc, all being work to ensure compliance with the resource consent).
The consent compliance monitoring charge shall be paid as part of the resource consent fee and the consent holder will be advised of the further monitoring charge or charges as they fall due. Such further charges are to be paid within one month of the date of invoice.
Earthworks and Management Plans
(4) Prior to the commencement of any physical work on the site, the consent holder shall submit the following for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central:
(a) A site management plan that shall include specific details relating to the construction and management of all works associated with the approved development (including procedures for dust management);
(b) A silt and sediment control plan;
(c) A reporting and monitoring plan which is to include, but not be limited to, a monitoring procedure and programme for the building and ground settlements. This plan shall also specify the maximum permitted ground movements and deformations in any direction for existing adjacent buildings, structures, underground services, public roads and pathways and procedures for monitoring groundwater levels; and,
(d) A safety plan for proposed earthworks and retaining works to be submitted by the consent holder’s geotechnical engineer;
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
19

(e) A communications plan to advise affected parties (who for the avoidance of any doubt include the immediate neighbours on Newton
Road and the owners/occupiers of 18-28 Norwich Street) of the contact details of the persons responsible for management of the site during the earthworks and construction phases, as well as advising of the planned construction, the scope of the construction, its duration, the hours of operation, an explanation of the approved construction traffic management plan, the approved construction noise and vibration management plan, major stages in the development timetable, and also any actual and potential interruptions to their access on Macaulay Street.
(5) Prior to commencement of any physical works on the site, the consent holder shall submit each of a Construction Management Plan, Construction
Noise and Vibration Management Plan, and Construction Traffic
Management Plan for review and approval by the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central in accordance with the following directions:
Construction Management Plan
This Plan shall include specific details relating to the construction and management of all works and include but not be limited to:
(a) A construction methodology for the basement excavation and retention of the excavation faces, including the stages of excavation, and groundwater control measures;
(b) Specific details relating to avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse effects, including (but not limited to) the effects of vibration during the demolition, earthworks, construction and management of all works associated with the development;
(c) A plan of action to remedy any adverse effects which may occur to any adjacent property during construction.
(d) Confirmation that sufficient equipment, materials and personnel will be available on site to ensure that any necessary measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects will be implemented;
(e) Measures to be adopted to maintain the site in a tidy condition in terms of disposal/ storage of rubbish, storage and unloading of building materials and similar construction activities;
(f) Measures for waste management which include designated sites for refuse bins, and for recycling bins for glass, plastic and can storage and collection in accordance with the Council’s waste reduction policy;
(g) Location of workers’ conveniences (“portaloos”);
(h) Dust control measures;
(i) Location of site hoardings. No hoardings on the site shall contain any advertising materials (whether affixed permanently or otherwise);
(j) Measures to ensure ongoing access for the properties located at 18 to
30 Norwich Street.
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
20

Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (“CNVMP”)
The CNVMP shall include but not be limited to:
(k) A description of the final construction methodology, including a list of potentially noisy plant and equipment, the estimated noise levels and the approximate locations on the site;
(l) Predicted noise levels and where the predicted noise levels exceed the relevant standard, specific noise mitigation measures which must be implemented. These measures may include but not be limited to acoustic screening, alternative equipment etc;
(m) Noise monitoring to be undertaken during each phase of the works so that the current Construction Noise Standard NZS6803 is complied with. Additional monitoring shall be undertaken in the event of any complaints being received by either the consent holder or the Council;
(n) In the event of the measured noise levels exceeding the current
Construction Noise Standard NZS6803 , the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central must be notified immediately and further mitigation options shall be investigated and implemented with the prior approval of the Council;
(o) Measures to be adopted to ensure compliance with the general
Vibration Standard DIN 4150 Part 3: 1986 “Structural Vibration in
Buildings – Effects on Structures” during the earthworks and construction periods, along with the consent holder’s proposals for vibration monitoring. Additional monitoring shall be undertaken in the event of any complaints about vibration from the earthworks or construction activity undertaken on the site being received by either the consent holder or the Council;
(p) In the event of the vibration levels exceeding the Vibration Standard, the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central must be notified immediately and further mitigation options shall be investigated and implemented with the prior approval of the Council
(q) A complaints management system to be implemented for the entire construction period. The detail provided in the CNVMP must specify the persons responsible for maintaining a complaints register to be held on the site, the procedures to be followed in investigating and resolving complaints, and procedures for reporting all complaints promptly to the Council; and
(r) The name and contact telephone numbers of the site manager and/or other person(s) responsible for supervision of the works, implementation of the Construction Noise and Vibration Management
Plan, and complaint receipts and investigations.
Construction Traffic Management Plan (“CTMP”)
The CTMP shall include but not be limited to:
(s) Proposed numbers and timing of truck movements throughout the day including identification of heavy vehicle routes which avoid residential streets;
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
21

(t) Ingress and egress to and from the site for construction vehicles;
(u) Procedures for managing construction traffic, including delivery vehicles; and
(v) In the event that earthworks and/or construction are proposed to be carried out during the period when the Rugby World Cup 2011 tournament is being conducted in Auckland, the consent holder’s proposals to avoid conflicts with RWC traffic (including public transport).
In addition, the aforementioned management plans shall include the following details:
(w) Details of the site manager, including their contact details (phone, facsimile (if any), postal address and email);
(x) The location of a large noticeboard on the site that clearly identifies the name, telephone number and address for service of the site manager; and,
(y) Any road closure notices or approvals obtained from the Council’s
Roading Department.
The above details shall be shown on a site plan and supporting documentation as appropriate. The consent holder shall implement and maintain each of the approved Construction Management Plan, the approved CNVMP, and the approved CTMP throughout the entire earthworks and construction period
(6) Prior to commencement of any works on the site, the consent holder shall submit a Lighting Plan for review and approval to the satisfaction of the
Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with the
Council’s urban design staff. The approved Lighting Plan is to be implemented and maintained for the life of the development.
(7) Prior to commencement of any works on the site, the consent holder shall submit a dilapidation survey of all adjacent buildings, which for the avoidance of doubt includes the buildings opposite the rear of the site between Macaulay and Norwich Streets, for review by and the approval of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central. Each of these properties is to be re-inspected within 6 months of completion of the development and a copy of this second survey is to be provided to the
Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central for review. Any damage caused to any of these properties by construction of the development is to be remedied at the consent holder’s cost entirely within one year of completion of the development.
(8) Prior to commencement of any works on the site, the consent holder shall engage a chartered professional engineer experienced in geotechnical engineering and familiar with the preliminary Geotechnical Report prepared by Tonkin & Taylor Ltd (dated August 2010 ref: 27466) (“the Project
Engineer”) to submit a final geotechnical report for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
This report shall detail results of any further geotechnical investigation of the site including a review of the proposed design and construction method to ensure that any design assumptions made during the resource consent
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
22

stage are appropriate and also a review of the proposed excavation and construction sequencing. The report shall also include an assessment of the local and global stability of the proposed retaining walls along Macaulay
Street.
(9) Prior to earthworks commencing, a wheel wash and stabilised vehicular entrance shall be installed and used on the site during the full period of site works and construction to ensure that loose material is not deposited on roads. The wheel wash shall be designed and installed in accordance with the ARC Technical Publication 90 (“TP90”).
(10) Prior to the commencement of building works, the consent holder shall submit a Pedestrian Circulation Plan and Entrance Plan for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring
– Central in liaison with the Council’s urban design staff. This plan shall include detailed drawings of improved entrances both internally and to the streetscape along with site wide indicative movements. The approved
Pedestrian Circulation Plan and the approved Entrance Plan are each to be implemented and maintained for the life of the development.
Landscaping Plan
(11) A detailed landscaping plan based on the landscape plan and planting maintenance guidelines provided with the application materials is to be submitted for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Team Leader
Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with the Council’s urban design staff prior to the commencement of building works. The approved landscaping plan is to be implemented within the first planting season following completion of the development (if not earlier) and continually maintained for the life of the development.
Development in progress conditions
Construction Hours
(12) All construction work, including noise-generating activities associated with the preparation for the commencement of work such as deliveries, loading and unloading of goods, transferring of tools, etc., demolition and earthworks, and any noisy activities in the vicinity of the site associated with the proposed development, shall be carried out only between the hours of 7.30 am and 6.00 pm Mondays to Saturdays. No such work may be carried out on Sundays or public holidays.
Earthworks and Sediment Control
(13) The consent holder shall implement suitable sediment control measures in accordance with the ARC Technical Publication 90 prior to any site works/ earthworks commencing, and thereafter maintain these measures for the duration of those works to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central, to ensure that all stormwater runoff from the site is managed and controlled so that no silt, sediment or water containing silt or sediment is discharged into stormwater pipes, drains, channels or soakage systems.
(14) In the event that any sediment (or other) material is deposited on the street, the consent holder shall take immediate action at its own expense to clean
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
23

the street to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring
– Central.
(15) All site works, foundation and retaining design and construction shall be carried out under the supervision of the Project Engineer. All works shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and
Monitoring – Central.
(16) The Project Engineer shall inspect any pile holes and foundations together with the subgrade to confirm the nature of the materials encountered and to verify the design assumptions. A Producer Statement Construction Review for this part of the work shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Council to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring –
Central.
(17) Prior to the commencement of bulk excavation, all excavations within a line drawn at 1 vertical to 2 horizontal from an adjacent boundary shall be retained with an approved retaining structure designed for at rest soil parameters under static loads and to NZS1170.5 for seismic loads. These retaining structures shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Team Leader
Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
(18) Within one month of completion of foundation and retaining works, the
Project Engineer shall certify in writing to the satisfaction of the Team
Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central that all foundations have been specifically designed and reference the August 2010 Tonkin & Taylor report for all foundations for the proposed building and any retaining walls greater than 0.5 m in height.
(19) All stormwater from any new hard surfaces (roofs, patios, driveways, etc), and any groundwater collected from behind retaining walls, including the retaining wall below the access driveway, shall be collected and disposed of to an appropriate reticulated or otherwise approved Council system to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
(20) The use of driven piles is prohibited on the site.
Parking Area
(21) All parking spaces shall be formed, provided with an all weather surface, drained, marked out prior to the occupation of the premises and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and
Monitoring – Central.
(22) All stacked parking spaces associated with the office activity as shown on the application plans A022(2) and A023(1) shall be allocated to a single tenancy. A sign is to be placed and maintained in a prominent location on site to state this. Signage shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Team
Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central prior to occupation of the premises.
(23) Signage shall be installed to distinguish the visitor parking areas from the residential parking areas to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
24

(24) A convex mirror shall be installed near the entry into Parking FL-1 from the eastern Newton Road access and to the satisfaction of the Team Leader
Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with Auckland Transport.
(25) No part the site is to be used for public parking by any means whatever unless a resource consent for that activity has first been obtained from the
Council. This consent does not constitute approval for any public parking activity to be conducted on the site. (For the avoidance of any doubt, the existing Wilsons parking operation on the site is not consented and must cease immediately.)
Vehicle Crossings
(26) The two vehicle accesses on Newton Road shall be entry only, and directional arrows shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Team Leader
Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with Auckland Transport.
All vehicle exit movements from the site, on either access, shall be to the rear (by way of Macaulay Street).
(27) Right turn entry movements into the eastern vehicle access on the site from
Newton Road shall be prohibited. Appropriate signage shall be installed indicating this to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and
Monitoring – Central in liaison with Auckland Transport.
Site Contamination
(28) If physical indicators of contamination (i.e. discoloured, stained or odorous soil or groundwater) which has not previously been investigated is discovered during any earthworks activity the consent holder shall immediately cease the works and undertake an investigation of the area in accordance with the requirements of the ANZECC Guidelines for the
Assessment Management of Contaminated Sites and to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
In the event the investigation identifies contamination, the consent holder shall prepare a detailed Remediation Action Plan to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central. The
Remediation Action Plan shall include a timetable for undertaking the remediation. The approved Remediation Action Plan is to be implemented.
(29) The consent holder shall ensure that excavated materials that require off site disposal are appropriately disposed of to the satisfaction of the Team
Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
Surveyor’s Certification
(30) The consent holder shall engage a registered surveyor to certify to the
Council in writing prior to work progressing beyond the foundation stage that either:
(a) work completed to this stage is in accordance with the levels and dimensions on approved plans; or
(b) there are differences between the approved plans in levels and dimensions of work completed to this stage, but the differences do not breach or increase non-compliance with the Operative Auckland
City District Plan (Isthmus Section), provided that what remains to be
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
25

built beyond this stage will be constructed in accordance with approved plans.
In the event of (b), the certificate shall also specify the differences involved.
In either event, work shall not proceed beyond this stage until receipt of the above required certificate to the satisfaction of the Team Leader
Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
Mechanical Ventilation
(31) The consent holder shall install a mechanical ventilation system within the building in accordance with G4 of the Building Code and to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central.
Post development conditions
(32) None of the buildings (or part thereof) on the site may be occupied for any purpose until such time as Macaulay Street has been constructed and formed to the satisfaction of the Council (Team Leader Compliance and
Monitoring – Central). (Note: It is recorded in this regard that no part of the site may be used for public parking unless a resource consent has first been obtained for that purpose.)
(33) Prior to occupation of the buildings, the consent holder shall develop a
Refuse Management Plan that considers the visual impact on the public realm and potential obstruction of pedestrian movement routes by rubbish collection and disposal. This Plan shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring – Central in liaison with the
Council’s urban design staff. The approved Refuse Management Plan is to be implemented and maintained for the life of the development.
(34) After the completion of the building works, the consent holder shall engage an engineer specialising in acoustic design to submit for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Team Leader Compliance and Monitoring
– Central certification that the building has been built in compliance with the internal noise limits set out in Rule 8.8.10.6(c) of the Operative District Plan.
ADVICE NOTES
1. This resource consent will lapse five years after the date of commencement unless:
(a) it is given effect to before the end of that period; or
(b) an application is made and granted prior to the expiry of that period for a time extension. The statutory considerations that apply to extensions are set out in section 125 of the Resource Management Act
1991.
2. A copy of this consent shall be held on site at all times during the establishment and construction phase of the activity.
3. The consent holder is requested to provide written notification to the
Council of its intention to begin works, a minimum of seven days prior to commencement. Such notification should be sent to the Resource Consent
Monitoring Team Leader (email: rcmadmin or fax: 353 9186) and include the following details:
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
26

•
•
• site address to which the consent relates activity to which the consent relates name and telephone number of the project manager and the site owner
• expected duration of works.
4. If the canopy on the rear of the development is to be retained, an air space licence is first required to be obtained from the Council.
5. Consent is required to be obtained from the Council as owner for the removal of the Pohutukawa tree in the road reserve at the rear of the site
(eastern section of Macaulay Street).
6. The consent holder shall obtain all other necessary consents and permits, including those under the Building Act 2004, and must comply with all relevant Council Bylaws. This consent does not constitute building consent approval. Please check whether a building consent is required under the
Building Act. Please note that the approval of this resource consent, including its conditions, may affect a previously issued building consent for the same project, in which case a new building consent may be required.
7. The consent holder is advised to consult with and to obtain consent from
Metrowater prior to any works commencing on site that are close to public drains or services.
8. All care shall be taken during construction of the development to preserve the integrity and stability of the adjacent road reserve and underground services and neighbouring sites.
9. Engineering plan approvals will be required for modifying the existing public drainage system.
10. The proposed private stormwater line and catchpit near Diamond Street shall be public. This will require the use of 225 mm diameter pipe and 800 mm x 500 mm 1.2 m lintel catchpit.
11. Subject to section 198 of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s
Policy on Development Contributions, a development contribution will be payable on this development. An assessment notice for this amount will be sent in due course.
12. Any building over or adjacent to public drains needs to be constructed to
Council standards and may require a piled foundation to at least the invert level of the drain. Note that unless specific preventive measures are undertaken the foundations must not lie within the zone of influence (taken to be 45 degrees out from the invert level of the sewer to the ground level) of this utility. Further, any recommendation with regard to works/installation of walls or foundations in the vicinity of this utility must have written approval and acceptance from the utility owner. Further details shall be provided with the Building Consent application.
13. This consent does not relieve the consent holder of its responsibility to apply for any other consents which may be required by bodies such as the
New Zealand Historic Places Trust. This consent is issued under the
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
27

Resource Management Act 1991 and does not remove the need to comply with all other applicable statutes (including the Property Law Act), regulations, Bylaws, and rules of law.
14. The scope of this resource consent is defined by the application made to the Council and all documentation supporting that application.
15. As part of the application, it was proposed that Macaulay Street will be formed as road in accordance with Council standards including the provision of kerbing and channelling, cesspits, footpaths and vehicle crossings as appropriate. The consent holder is required to apply for an
Engineering Plan Approval for this work and this application needs to be submitted to the Auckland Council’s Development Engineering section and to be approved prior to works commencing. The plans to be submitted should include detail of a speed hump at the western end of this section of
Macaulay Street and the proposed access points for each of the properties at 18 – 30 Norwich Street (inclusive).
Leigh A McGregor
(Chair)
Date:
...........................................
...........................................
127-131 Newton Road, Eden Terrace
LUC No.: R/LUC/2010/2158
28