Tag: Unitary Plan

Unitary Plan Hearings Under-Way

·

Day One Begins

 

From Auckland Council

Hearings on shaping Auckland’s development underway

 

New Zealand’s largest planning review gets underway in Auckland today with an Independent Hearings Panel beginning its deliberations on Auckland Council’s  Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

The hearing is before Environment Court judge, David Kirkpatrick who chairs the Panel, and seven panel members. There are also 15 mediators and facilitators who will help resolve issues through expert conference and mediation.

The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan sets the rules about how the Auckland region will develop over decades, including what can be built and where, and how to protect the environment and Auckland’s built and cultural heritage.

More than 9500 submissions were made on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.  The Panel will consider the views of submitters – plus a further 3500 submitters who have responded to the original submissions – over 74 topics.

Judge Kirkpatrick said the hearing is the biggest ever in New Zealand planning history because it involves the Regional Policy Statement and both the Regional and District Plan documents all wrapped up  in one document.

“There’s been a huge number of submissions and a high level of public participation – and that’s a good thing for such an important document,” said Judge Kirkpatrick.

He said the requirements of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act made this hearing different from the traditional adversarial planning hearing. The Act has a requirement that the Panel use pre-hearing processes and mediation to help identify the most appropriate planning position for the Auckland region.

“So there’s a large level of the ‘Good of the Auckland region’ objective here rather than simply saying which side wins and which side loses,” said Judge Kirkpatrick.

“With the complex issues involved we have to have a very clear high-level regard for the sustainable management of the resources of the whole Auckland region. If we adopted a solely technical approach to our task we would ‘miss the wood for the trees’.”

He said the Panel is working to an extremely tight timeframe to complete its report to Auckland Council by July 2016 on changes it thinks should be made to the plan.

The Panel will be working through a process ‘from the general to the particular’.  It will start with the Regional Policy Statement issues such as rural/urban growth, residential and industrial growth and higher level transport issues. It will then deal with the more specific rule-based issues and then move on to the site-specific changes.

“It’s important that we have integration between the higher-level objectives and strategy of the plan and the methods on the ground,” said Judge Kirkpatrick.

“We could compromise a policy very easily by simply by having exceptions to the rules which give away its validity.”

Judge Kirkpatrick said the Panel is endeavouring where possible to come to decisions on issues when the Panel hears from submitters.

“It’s better that we do it when we hear from people, but we acknowledge that as we go through we are likely to have to go back and reconsider some of the things we have decided.

“We need to make sure that our decision-making has been consistent throughout and that the recommendations we are making to Council produce an integrated set of planning provisions.”

—————————-

 

The Hearings’ Order Paper

 

The Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel website can be found here: http://www.aupihp.govt.nz/

 

Talking Auckland will keep a roving update from the Hearings Panel as relevant information comes to hand

 

First Unitary Plan Pre-Hearing to get Under-Way

·

Ironically on Further Submissions

 

Okay this one is more for your Unitary Plan wonks (like me) but it pays to keep an eye on Unitary Plan Hearing Panel proceedings to gauge the debate and reactions on the Proposed Unitary Plan.

Last night I saw from the Unitary Plan Page (the one the Hearings Panel runs) a Procedural Minute from the Chair – Judge Kirkpatrick in regards to the Further Submission process recently completed.

Before I embed the material just a note on the Hearings Panel and relevant information:

 

From the Unitary Plan Independent Panel Procedures Page:

Some of the important things to note about the hearing process are listed here.

  • You will only be contacted about pre-hearing meetings and hearing sessions if you have said on your submission that you wish to be heard, or if you have contacted the panel office to let us know that you wish to be heard.
  • If you are a submitter but do not wish to be heard, your submission will still be considered by the Panel when making their recommendations on the Plan.
  • Hearing sessions and pre-hearing meetings are open to the public and the media as observers. Only submitters or their representative and their witnesses are allowed to speak.
  • Expert conferences and mediations are not open to the public. This is because discussions at those meetings should encourage an open exchange of views and may need to be on a “without prejudice” basis. Panel decisions do not get made at these meetings.
  • The Panel will expect all submitters who wish to be heard, or their representative and any witnesses they call, to attend in person. In some circumstances the Panel may agree to other arrangements, but that will need to be arranged in advance of a hearing session.
  • Because of the large number of submissions and the limited time available, submitters will be given a fixed amount of time at the hearing to make their main points. There will generally not be time to read in full your submission or evidence to the Panel.
  • If you are required by the Panel to attend any pre-hearing meeting it is important that you do attend. If you do not have a reasonable excuse for not attending, the Panel may exclude you from the rest of the hearing process.
  • The Panel’s hearing rooms at 205 Queen Street have limited capacity. Pre-hearing meetings and hearing sessions that have a large number of submitters and a high level of expected public interest may be held in other locations. Please check this website for details.
  • If the number of people at the hearing exceeds the maximum allowed for building safety, priority will be given to the people who need to be there for that part of the hearing to proceed.
  • All records of hearing and pre-hearing processes will be available on the IHP website, unless there is good reason for withholding any particular information under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
  • All publicly available documents for the hearing sessions will be placed on this website. Parties involved in a hearing session will be sent a link to the website so they can go direct to the documents relating to their hearing session. Other arrangements will be made if you cannot access the website.
  • The hearings will not be transcribed. The hearings will be recorded digitally and a copy of the audio record can be provided on request.

Source: http://www.aupihp.govt.nz/procedures/

—–

Meaning anything I post in regards to the pre hearings or hearings is public information unless stated otherwise.

 

The “Procedural Minute” that was recently issued in regards to Further Submissions (that recently closed)

 

The Letter of the upcoming Pre Hearing Conference

 

From what I can gather the Memorandum of Counsel is on the Further Submission process, the complexity of the Unitary Plan, and Auckland Council’s large submission to the Unitary Plan. The applicants have asked the Hearings Panel in this case for an IT expert and independent planning consultant to assist people through both the Unitary Plan and the Unitary Plan website. While the pre hearing is to go ahead it seems the Panel will decline this request by the applicants (hmm I could have done that for them having waded through all 7,000 pages of that cumbersome document a few too many times).

However, it is to note that we could see the Hearings grind down if pre hearings and hearings get stuck on the complexity of the Unitary Plan let alone anything else including rezoning at site specific level.

 

As for my submission I had five oppose it and one in support. Going to be fun times ahead