MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING FIXTURES COMMITTEE HELD ON TUESDAY, 21 AUGUST 2007 AT 11.07 AM

1. APOLOGIES

   That the apology from Cr C Caughey for early departure be accepted.

   CARRIED

2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

   That the minutes of the Planning Fixtures Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 14 August 2007 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

   CARRIED

3. EXTRAORDINARY BUSINESS

   There was no extraordinary business.

4. SIGNS BYLAW APPLICATIONS

   4.1. 215 SYMONDS STREET, EDEN TERRACE

   That the application by Oggi Advertising Limited for an exemption from Part 27B (2007) of the Auckland City Council Consolidated Bylaw to maintain the three existing billboards which are located in the Mixed

   Use Zone at 215 Symonds Street, Eden Terrace described as LOT 9 & PT LOT 10 DP 4672, CT 48C/693 be declined for the following reasons:

   1. The billboards are not consistent with the objectives of the Bylaw since:
      • they are located in an inappropriate location, as billboards are not permitted in the Mixed Use zone; and
      • the Mixed Use Zone provides for residential activity and consequently a higher level of amenity is anticipated.
   2. The billboards have a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity of the area. They are visually dominant in the surrounding streetscape and do not appear as an integrated element of the building. The billboards partially cover windows and do not respect or positively relate to the architectural features of the building.

   ADVICE NOTE

   That the three existing billboards shall be removed within 20 working days of the date of this decision.

   CARRIED

   [ATTACHMENT 4.1A]

5. RESOURCE CONSENT APPLICATIONS AND OTHERS

   5.1. 60 SANDFORD WAY, RAKINO ISLAND

   That the notified non-complying activity land use application by Hurakia Lodge Ltd to construct a driveway, retaining walls and jetty abutment within Land Unit 20 under the Operative Plan and Land Unit Rural 3 under the Proposed Plan at 60 Sandford Way, Rakino Island be deferred for  a maximum of three weeks because of the need for additional information to enable the Committee to make a decision. The Committee requests that the applicant provides a final detailed plan for landscaping along the section of driveway, including the retaining walls, starting from 40 metres east of the boat shed and extending up to the dwelling and visitor facility, including implementation and maintenance. The plan shall include the following:

   • Native plant species (preferably ecosourced) that are intended to provide partial screening of the concrete driveway
   • Incorporate recommendations made by Sally Peake with regard to retaining wall screening on page 4 of her report entitled "Landscape and Visual Assessment Addendum", and dated July 2007
   • The plan is to specify plant sizes at the time of planting and intended species
   • The exact number of proposed plantings.
   • Consideration can be given in the landscaping plan to a staged approach to the planting.

   CARRIED

   5.2. 172 REMUERA ROAD, REMUERA

   That, pursuant to sections 93 and 94 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this application be processed without notice because:

   • The adverse effects on the environment of the activity will be minor, and
   • Written approval has been given by every person who may be adversely affected by the activity.

   That, pursuant to section 94C, there are no special circumstances to warrant notification.

   Pursuant to sections 104B and 104D of the Resource Management Act 1991, the non-complying activity land use application by Glen Esk Properties Ltd. to undertake additions and alterations and site works that:

   • Involves additions and alterations to an existing dwelling in the residential 2b zone
   • Involves additions and alterations to an existing dwelling in the residential 2b zone under Plan Change 163
   • Infringes the height in relation to boundary control as it relates to the eastern boundary by a maximum vertical height of 0.75 metres over a maximum horizontal length of 2.2 metres along the western boundary by up to 4.35m
   • Infringes the height in relation to boundary control as it relates to the western boundary by a maximum vertical height of 1.05 metres over a maximum horizontal length of 4.303 metres
   • Infringes the maximum height control by 3.24m
   • Infringes the Volcanic Cone View Protection Plane by 2.24m

   at 172 Remuera Road, Remuera described as Lots 1 & 2 DP 65886, CT NA24A/832 & NZ24A/833 be granted consent.

   Pursuant to section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this resource consent will expire five years after the date of commencement of consent unless, before the consent lapses:

   1. the consent is given effect to; or
   2. an application is made to the consent authority to extend the period of the consent, and the consent authority decides to grant an extension after taking into account the statutory considerations, set out in section 125(1)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991.

   Pursuant to section 113 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the reasons for this non-complying activity consent are as follows:

   Relevant Statutory Provisions

   The following provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 were relevant in the assessment of this application:

   • Sections 104, 104B (discretionary or non-complying activities) 104D and 108

   Relevant Plan Provisions

   The relevant planning documents considered were:

   Auckland City District Plan 1999 - Isthmus Section and in particular the following:

   • Clause 7.6.2 (Residential 2 Objectives and Policies)
   • Clause 7.8.1.3 (Building in Relation to Boundary)
   • Clause 7.8.1.2 (Maximum Height)
   • Clause 5C.7.6.5 (Volcanic Cone View Protection Zone)
   • Clause 4.3.1.2B (Development Control Modification)
   • Clause 4.3.2.6 (Discretionary Activities)
   • Plan Change 163.

   Principal Issues in Contention

   The application was not the subject of a contested hearing as the Council generally concurs with the applicant's assessment. Accordingly, there were no issues in contention.

   Summary of Evidence

   This application was not the subject of a contested hearing. Whilst no evidence has been provided, Council has considered the following specialist reports:

   • The Assessment of Effects prepared by Denis Nugent of Nugent Consultant's Ltd, undated
   • A memo by Council's Consultant Architectural Planner Mike Watson, dated 26 July 2007.

   Main Findings of Fact

   The Committee considers that the main 'findings of fact' are:

   • Having had regard to the professional views contained within the application documents and peer reviews, it is considered that the effects of the proposal on the environment would be minor. In particular, it is considered that:
     • o adverse effects of the proposal with regard to Dominance and Shading, Privacy and Character and Construction would be minor, and
     • o there would be no adverse effects with regard to Volcanic Cones, Streetscape and Neighbourhood Character.
   • Adversely affected persons have provided written approval for the proposal.
   • The proposed infringement of the Volcanic Cone View Protection Plane is not contrary to the Objectives and Policies relevant to the control.

   Reasons for the Decision

   The reasons for this non-complying activity consent are as follows:

   1. The granting of consent to the application would have minor adverse effects on the environment. In particular, adverse effects of the proposal with regard to dominance and shading, privacy and character and construction would be minor.
   2. The granting of consent to the application is consistent with the objectives and policies of the District Plan, and, in particular, the relevant objectives and policies for the Residential 2b zone. The granting of consent to the application is consistent with the relevant criteria for discretionary activities, in particular, those criteria relating to height in relation to boundary and maximum height.
   3. The imposition of the following conditions will ensure that the effects of granting the application are mitigated, in particular, that hours of construction are limited and that exterior finishing harmonises with the original dwelling.
   4. The application is consistent with the objectives and policies of the District Plan and the sustainable management purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991.
   5. The Auckland Regional Council has accepted the section 93/94 assessment for non-notification and thereby accepting that the potential adverse effects of this proposal will be no more than minor.

   Conditions

   Pursuant to section 108 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this consent is subject to the following conditions:

   Activity in Accordance with Application and Plans

   1. The activity shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and all information submitted with the application, being described as "Alterations and Additions to House at 172 Remuera Road Auckland For Glen Esk Properties Ltd." drawing '101' revision 'C', prepared by Salmond Reed Architects, dated July 2000.

   Monitoring

   2. The consent holder shall pay to the Council a consent compliance monitoring charge of $381.44 (inclusive of GST) plus any further monitoring charge or charges to recover the actual and reasonable costs that have been incurred to ensure compliance with the conditions attached to 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 holder will be advised of any further monitoring charge or charges as they fall due. Such further charges are to be paid within one month of the date of invoice.

   Hours of Construction

   3. All demolition, earthworks and construction works shall be restricted to the hours from 7.30am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday and from 8.00am to 1.00pm Saturday. No such work shall occur on Sundays or public holidays.

   Exterior Finishing

   4. New exterior building detail shall match with existing original detail. The exterior finishes shall generally be paint finished. The exterior colour scheme shall harmonise with the existing house.

   ADVICE NOTES

   1. Pursuant to section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this resource consent will expire five years after the date of commencement of consent, unless, before the consent lapses;
      • The consent is given effect to; or
      • An application is made to the consent authority to extend the period of the consent, and the consent authority decides to grant an extension after taking into account the statutory considerations, set out in section 125(1)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991.
   2. The applicant is advised that there may be trees on the property which come within the tree protection rules set out in 5C.7.3 of the District Plan and these cannot be cut, trimmed or have work undertaken below the dripline without a prior resource consent. If the applicant wishes to undertake the above mentioned work, a resource consent application will need to be made to the Council. Consent will not necessarily be granted to such an application. Any work undertaken near protected trees should be done in accordance with Annexure 5 of the District Plan.
   3. The applicant needs to obtain all other necessary consents and permits, including those under the Building Act 1991, and comply with all relevant Council Bylaws. It is further noted that this consent does not constitute building consent approval. Please check as to whether or not a building consent is required under the Building Act 1991. If a building consent application is already lodged with Council or has already been obtained, you are advised that, unless otherwise stated, the use shall not commence until conditions of this resource consent have been met. Furthermore, if this consent and its conditions alter or affect a previously approved building consent for the same project, you are advised that a new building consent may need to be applied for.
   4. A copy of this consent shall be held on site at all times during the establishment and construction phase of the activity.
   5. The consent holder is requested to notify Council, in writing, of their intention to begin works, a minimum of seven days prior to commencement. Such notification shall be sent to the Team Leader, Compliance Monitoring and shall include the following details:
      • name and telephone number of the project manager and site owner
      • site address to which the consent relates
      • activity to which the consent relates
      • expected duration of works.
   6. If you disagree with any of the above or with any additional charges relating to the processing of the application, you have a right of objection pursuant to section 357 of the Resource Management Act 1991 and which shall be made in writing to Council within 15 working days of notification of the decision. Council will, as soon as practicable, consider the objection at a hearing. Pursuant to section 116, the consent may not commence until such time as any objection or appeal has been decided or withdrawn.

   CARRIED

   5.3. 14-20 WAIMARIE STREET, ST HELIERS

   Pursuant to section 104C of the Resource Management Act 1991, the non-notified Restricted Discretionary Activity land use resource consent application by Greg Olliver to remove a Melia tree and relocate a Pohutukawa tree and a Queen Palm tree at 14 - 20 Waimarie Street, St Heliers be granted consent.

   Lapsing of consent

   Pursuant to section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this resource consent will expire two years after the date of commencement of consent unless, before the consent lapses;

   1.  the consent is given effect to; or
   2. an application is made to the consent authority to extend the period of the consent, and the consent authority decides to grant an extension after taking into account the statutory considerations, set out in section 125(1)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991.

   Council considers that because trees are living organisms, two years is an appropriate timeframe in which to undertake the works. A longer period is inappropriate as the tree could grow significantly within this time.

   Pursuant to section 113 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the following matters have been taken into account in making the decision set out above:

   Relevant Statutory Provisions

   The following provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 were relevant in the assessment of this application:  

   • Sections 104, 104C and 108 (restricted discretionary activity)

   Relevant Plan Provisions

   The relevant planning documents considered were:

   Auckland City Operative District Plan 1999 - Isthmus Section and in particular the following:

   • Clause 5C.7.3.3.C (General Tree Protection)

   Principal Issues in Contention

   The application was not the subject of a contested hearing as the Council generally concurs with the applicant's assessment. Accordingly, there were no issues in contention.

   Summary of Evidence

   This application was not the subject of a contested hearing, however, Council has considered the following information:

   • The arborist report prepared by The Specimen Tree Company, dated 12 June 2007
   • The application form submitted by The Specimen Tree Co Ltd on behalf of Greg Olliver, dated 13 June 2007;

   Main Findings of Fact

   The Committee considers that the main 'findings of fact' are:

   • The application relates to the removal of a Melia tree and the relocation of a Pohutukawa tree and a Queen Palm tree located at 14 - 20 Waimarie Street, St Heliers.
   • The subject site is zoned Residential 6a under the Auckland City Operative District Plan (1999).

   Reasons

   The reasons for this restricted discretionary activity consent are as follows:

   1. The Melia tree is a specimen of poor form because of previous inappropriate tree cutting methods and it is considered that the tree will never develop into a quality example that could otherwise justify retention of the tree in this instance.
   2. Any adverse environmental effects of the proposed removal of a Melia tree will be mitigated as long as replacement tree planting is carried out to maintain general tree coverage upon the site.
   3. The relocation of a Pohutukawa tree and a Queen Palm tree to alternative locations within the subject site is deemed to be an acceptable option to preserve the vegetative coverage upon the site.
   4. The relocation of a Pohutukawa tree and Queen Palm tree will enable proposed earthworks upon the site to facilitate the creation of a proposed building footprint.
   5. Granting of consent will not be contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of the District Plan, or the Act's focus of sustainable management of physical and natural resources.

   Conditions of Consent

   Pursuant to section 108 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this consent is subject to the following conditions:

   1. To give effect to this consent and prior to any site works commencing pertaining to:
      • the removal of the Melia tree
      • the relocation of a Pohutukawa and Queen Palm tree

      at 14 - 20 Waimarie Street, St Heliers, the property owner shall obtain all other necessary consents and permits, including those under the Building Act 2004, in respect to the construction of a new dwelling upon the site and comply with all relevant Council Bylaws.

   2. All tree work shall be carried out by a competent arborist in accordance with accepted arboricultural practice.
   3. The Melia tree shall be the only protected tree felled and removed from the site of 14 - 20 Waimarie Street, St Heliers.
   4. Within the first appropriate planting season immediately following the removal of the Melia tree, the applicant/consent holder shall plant one (1) appropriate replacement tree within the property.  The replacement tree shall be of a 45ltr grade or equivalent and a minimum height of 1.8 metres at the time of planting. The replacement tree shall be maintained thereafter.
   5. The consent holder shall notify Council's area arborist in writing - (fax 353 9186) when the replacement tree planting required as a condition of consent has been completed. This notification shall include the size, species and location of the replacement trees.
   6. With reference to the Arboricultural Implication Report for 14 - 20 Waimarie Street, St Heliers, compiled by Rhys Caldwell from The Specimen Tree Company Limited, dated 12 June 2007, the Pohutukawa tree (tree 1) and the Queen Palm tree (tree 2) shall be transplanted to the positions upon the site as shown on the Topographical Site Survey Plan by Wood and Partners and appended 'B' to the Specimen Tree Company report.
   7. The Pohutukawa tree and Queen Palm tree shall be transplanted in accordance with The Specimen Tree Company Limited Arboricultural Implication Report for 14 - 20 Waimarie Street, St Heliers, dated 12 June 2007, point 7.0, 7.1 to 7.15 inclusive - Transplant Methodology.
   8. Should the Pohutukawa tree or Queen Palm tree die, or upon the advice of Council's arborist appear to be in an irreversible state of decline within or at the end of the twelve (12) month maintenance period, two (2) replacement specimen trees of a minimum container size of PB1500 (or equivalent) and height of 4.0 metres when planted shall be planted in the same locations as the relocated Pohutukawa tree and Queen Palm tree and shall thereafter be maintained.

   Tree Bond

   9. Prior to the commencement of work on the site the consent holder shall lodge the sum of $25,000 with the Council as security for the performance of conditions (7) and (8).
      1. The consent holder shall either lodge the bonded sum with the Council as a cash deposit or execute a guaranteed bond agreement, with a registered trading bank as the surety.
      2. The bond document shall be prepared by Council. The consent holder shall pay to the Council any costs incurred by the Council in relation to the preparation, execution, variation or release of the bond.
      3. The bond shall be held for a minimum period of 18 months from the date of planting. The bond shall be released when, in the opinion of the Council (Resource Consents Monitoring Leader), conditions (7) and (8) have been satisfied, and the consent holder has paid the Council's costs.

   ADVICE NOTES

   1. If the tree/s to which this consent relates are not located on land owned by the consent holder, the approval of the tree owner/s or an order to be made by the court under section 129C of the Property Law Amendment Act 1952 may need to be obtained to give effect to the consent.
   2. A copy of this consent should be held on site at all times during work on trees.
   3. If you disagree with any of the above conditions you have a right of objection pursuant to section 357 of the Resource Management Act 1991 which shall be made in writing to Council within 15 working days of notification of the decision. Council shall as soon as practicable consider the objection at a hearing.

   CARRIED

   5.4. 67 GRAMPIAN ROAD, ST HELIERS

   That, pursuant to sections 93 and 94 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this application be processed without notice because:

   • There will be no adverse effects on the environment resulting from the change to condition (1), and
   • There are no persons considered to be adversely affected by the proposed change to condition (1).

   That, pursuant to section 94C of the Resource Management Act 1991, there are no special circumstances to warrant public notification of the application

   Pursuant to sections 104B and 127 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the application by M and A Corbett to change condition (1) of the resource consent (LUC20060533301) at 67 Grampian Road, St Heliers described as LOT 20 DP 59331, CT 14A/904 be granted consent.

   Pursuant to section 113 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the following matters have been taken into account in making the decision set out above:

   Relevant Statutory Provisions

   The following provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 were relevant in the assessment of this application:

   • Sections 93, 94, 104, 104B and 127
   • Part II

   Relevant Plan Provisions

   The relevant planning documents considered were:

   Auckland City District Plan 1999 - Isthmus Section, and, in particular, the following:

   • Objectives and Policies 7.6.2.1 (Residential 2b zone)

   Principal Issues in Contention

   The application was not the subject of a contested hearing as the Council generally concurs with the applicant's assessment. Accordingly, there were no issues in contention.

   Summary of Evidence

   Council has considered the following reports:

   • The Assessment of Effects prepared by Anne and Michael Corbett, dated 8 May 2007
   • The Surveyors Certificate and Plan prepared by Michael James of Brian Cowley Surveying Limited, dated 23 April 2007
   • Correspondence from Antonia Hannah at 5 Berowald Place, Kohimarama, neighbour to the northeast of the site.

   Main Findings of Fact

   The Committee considers that the main 'findings of fact' are:

   • That there will be no adverse effects from the proposal as any effects will be mitigated by the design of the addition, existing fencing and vegetation and separation distances.
   • That, as confirmed by the applicant's Licensed Cadastral Surveyor, the proposal does not infringe the height in relation to boundary rule on the northeastern boundary and does not increase building coverage on the site.
   • That the neighbour at 5 Berowald Place, Kohimarama, to the northeast of the site, is not considered to be adversely affected by the granting of this consent.
   • That the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives and policies of the Auckland City Operative District Plan - Isthmus Section 1999.

   Reasons for the Decision

   The reasons for this discretionary activity consent are as follows:

   1. The granting of consent to the applicant's proposal to amend condition (1) will have no adverse effects on the environment. In particular, the proposal will have no adverse shadowing, privacy or dominance effects as these will be mitigated by the changed roofline to the addition, and by the existing block wall.
   2. The applicant's proposal is consistent with the objectives and policies of the Operative District Plan, and the sustainable management purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991.
   3. The proposed change to condition (1) does not create additional infringements to the District Plan since, as confirmed by the applicant's Licensed Cadastral Surveyor, the proposal does not infringe the height in relation to boundary rule on the northeastern boundary and does not increase building coverage on the site.

   Revised Condition

   Pursuant to section 127, condition (1) of the consent be amended to read:

   1. (The proposed activity shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and all information submitted with the application, being:
      • Plans entitled "Corbett Addition" sheets 1, 2 and 2A drawn by Seebeck Design Group and dated 17 May 2007
      • Plan entitled "Site Plan of 67 Grampian Road" drawn by Brian Cowley Surveying Ltd and dated March 2007

   and all referenced by Council as LUC20060533301.

   ADVICE NOTES

   1. Please be advised that this consent is to be read in conjunction with the originally approved consent, and that this consent does not negate the need to comply with the balance of the conditions of consent.

   CARRIED

   5.5. 310 NEW NORTH ROAD, KINGSLAND

   That, pursuant to sections 93 and 94 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this application be processed without notice because:

   • The adverse effects of the activity on the environment will be minor, and
   • There are no persons considered to be adversely affected by the activity.

   That pursuant to section 94C of the Resource Management Act 1991, there are no special circumstances to warrant public notification of the application.

   Pursuant to section 104B of the Resource Management Act 1991, the discretionary activity land use application by Telecom Mobile Limited to install a new mobile network utility antenna that:

   • Infringes the maximum height control for the Mixed Use zone by 5 metres

   at 310 New North Road, Kingsland, described as LOTS 2-3 DP 61063, CT 18C/652, be granted consent.

   Pursuant to section 113 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the following matters have been taken into account in making the decision set out above:

   Relevant Statutory Provisions

   The following provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 were relevant in the assessment of this application:

   • Sections 104, 104B (discretionary activity), 108 and Part II

   Relevant Plan Provisions

   The relevant planning documents considered were:

   Auckland City District Plan 1999 - Isthmus Section, and, in particular, the following:

   • Clause 8.6.10 (Mixed Use Zone Objectives and Policies)

   Plan Modification 90, and, in particular, the following:

   • Clause 4A.4.12 (Discretionary Activities)
   • Clause 4A.4.3 (Network Utility Services Objectives)
   • Clause 4A.4.4 (Network Utility Services Policies).

   Principal Issues in Contention

   The application was not the subject of a contested hearing as the Council generally concurs with the applicant's assessment. Accordingly, there were no issues in contention.

   Summary of Evidence

   This application was not the subject of a contested hearing. Whilst no evidence has been provided, Council has considered the following specialists' reports:

   • The Assessment of Effects prepared by Chris Horne of Incite Ltd, dated June 2007
   • The report prepared by Trevor Fong of Alcatel-Lucent Ltd, dated 11 June 2007
   • The memo prepared by Scott Paton of Auckland City Council, dated 10 August 2007
   • The memo prepared by Ruben Naidoo of Auckland City Council, dated 12 July 2007.

   Main Findings of Fact

   The Committee considers that the main 'findings of fact' are:

   • The proposal maintains the existing residential, open space and streetscape amenity of the area by being located in a dead space to the rear of an existing building and screened by surrounding trees and the existing building on the subject site.
   • The light industrial and traffic interchange characteristics of the surrounding area ensures that any adverse visual amenity and cumulative effects generated by the proposal are no more than minor.
   • The height of the antenna ensures that any potential exposure of the general public to electromagnetic radiation is negligible.

   Reasons for the Decision

   The reasons for this discretionary activity consent are as follows:

   1. The granting of consent to the applicant's proposal will generate no more than minor adverse effects on the environment. In particular, the proposal will have a minor adverse effect on the existing visual amenity of the site and surrounding area because of the cumulative visual effects created by the antenna. These effects are considered to be acceptable because of the light industrial nature of the site and surrounding environment, as well as the screening of equipment cabinets on the ground by existing trees and the adjacent vehicle barrier.
   2. The granting of consent to the applicant's proposal is consistent with the relevant assessment criteria for discretionary activities, and, in particular, that which relates to the proposal's non-compliance with the relevant development and performance standards regarding maximum height.
   3. The imposition of the following conditions will ensure that the adverse effects generated by the proposal are no more than minor.
   4. The applicant's proposal is consistent with the objectives and policies of the Operative District Plan, and the sustainable management purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991.
   5. The height of the antenna ensures that any potential exposure of the general public to electromagnetic radiation is negligible.

   Conditions of Consent

   Pursuant to section 108 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this consent is subject to the following conditions:

   Activity in Accordance with Application and Plans

   1. The proposed activity shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and all information submitted with the application, being described as:
      • 'Telecom Mobile Ltd, New North Road Network Site, 310 New North Road, Eden Terrace', Site and Land Plan, drawn by Opus International Consultants Ltd, code 7104, sheet 1, revision R2, dated 06/08/07, date stamped by Council 15 August 2007;
      • 'Telecom Mobile Ltd, New North Road Network Site, 310 New North Road, Eden Terrace', Site and Land Plan, drawn by Opus International Consultants Ltd, code 7104, sheet 2, dated 06/08/07, date stamped by Council 15 August 2007;

      all referenced by Council as LUC20070435301.

      Monitoring

   2. The consent holder shall pay the Council a consent compliance monitoring charge of $[187.38 (inclusive of GST), plus any further monitoring charge or charges to recover the actual and reasonable costs that have been incurred to ensure compliance with the conditions attached to 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 $187.38 (inclusive of GST) 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.

      Construction

   3. The minimum top of cabinet plinth/platform level shall be a minimum of RL 59.5mn as recommended by Opus Consultant's report dated 13/7/07.

      Operation

   4. Upon request from Council, at no lesser intervals than annually, the consent holder shall provide written confirmation to the Resource Consent Monitoring Leader that the proposed antennae are being operated in compliance with Part 28 of Auckland City's Consolidated Bylaw 1998 -Radio Frequencies. This confirmation shall be produced by a registered engineer or equivalent expert qualified in the field of radio frequencies.
   5. In the event of non-compliance with Part 28 of Auckland City's Consolidated Bylaws 1998-Radio Frequencies, the subject antenna shall cease operation until compliance can be met. Any costs associated with the cessation or operation of all or part of the facility, or the realignment or repositioning of antennas shall be the responsibility of the consent holder.
   6. Prior to the proposed facility commencing operation a warning sign shall be placed next to the antenna, to warn any workers or any other members of the public gaining access to this area, of the risk and detailing the extent of the affected area.

   ADVICE NOTES

   1. Pursuant to section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this resource consent will expire five years after the date of commencement of consent unless, before the consent lapses;
      1. the consent is given effect to; or
      2. an application is made to the consent authority to extend the period of the consent, and the consent authority decides to grant an extension after taking into account the statutory considerations, set out in section 125(1)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991.
   2. The antennas are to be operated so that the radiated field does not exceed 112.5 mW cm-2 for panel antennas and 250 mW cm-2 for dish antennas as measured according to NZS 6609: Part 2: 1990 at any point where people (other than those workers defined within the New Zealand Standard NZS 6609) could reasonably be exposed.
   3. The applicant is advised that there are trees on the property which come within the tree protection rules set out in 5C.7.3 of the district plan and these cannot be cut, trimmed or have work undertaken below the dripline without a prior resource consent. If the applicant wishes to undertake the above mentioned work, a resource consent application will need to be made to the Council. Consent will not necessarily be granted to such an application. Any work undertaken near protected trees should be done in accordance with Annexure 5 of the district plan.
   4. The applicant needs to obtain all other necessary consents and permits, including those under the Building Act 2004, and comply with all relevant Council Bylaws. It is further noted that this consent does not constitute building consent approval. Please check as to whether or not a building consent is required under the Building Act 2004. If a building consent application is already lodged with Council or has already been obtained, you are advised that, unless otherwise stated, the use shall not commence until conditions of this resource consent have been met. Furthermore, if this consent and its conditions alter or affect a previously approved building consent for the same project, you are advised that a new building consent may need to be applied for.
   5. A copy of this consent shall be held on site at all times during the establishment and construction phase of the activity.
   6. The consent holder is requested to notify Council, in writing, of their intention to begin works, a minimum of seven days prior to commencement. Such notification should be sent to the Team Leader, Compliance Monitoring (fax: 353 9052) and include the following details:
      • name and telephone number of the project manager and site owner
      • site address to which the consent relates
      • activity to which the consent relate
      • expected duration of works.
   7. If you disagree with any of the above conditions or with any additional charges relating to the processing of the application, you have a right of objection pursuant to sections 357A and 357B of the Resource Management Act 1991 which shall be made in writing to Council within 15 working days of notification of the decision. Council will as soon as practicable consider the objection at a hearing. Pursuant to Section 116, the consent will not commence until any objection or appeal has been withdrawn or decided.

   CARRIED

6. APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS

   6.1. 6 FLORIDA PLACE, GLENDOWIE

   1. That any three persons from the following panel, as nominated by the Planning Fixtures Committee, be appointed commissioners to hear and determine an application to remove a Gum tree at 6 Florida Place, Glendowie.

      The panel is Cr L Leighton (Chairman), Cr W A Christian and Board Member J Welch (and alternates Cr N Raffills, Board Member H Wallace and Board Member H Stonyer).

   2. That the Chairman be authorised to appoint an alternate Commissioner in the event that none of the above are available.

   CARRIED

   6.2. 29A ATKIN AVENUE, MISSION BAY

   1. That any three persons from the following panel, as nominated by the Planning Fixtures Committee, be appointed commissioners to hear and determine an application to prune a generally protected Pohutukawa tree at 29A Atkin Avenue, Mission Bay.

      The panel is Cr L Leighton (Chairman), Cr W A Christian and Board Member J Welch (and alternates Cr N Raffills, Board Member H Wallace and Board Member H Stonyer).

   2. That the Chairman be authorised to appoint an alternate Commissioner in the event that none of the above are available.

   CARRIED

   6.3. 129D CARSONS ROAD, WAIHEKE ISLAND

   1. That any three persons from the following panel, as nominated by the Planning Fixtures Committee, be appointed commissioners to hear and determine an application to construct a new six bedroom dwelling and barn, and conversion of an existing dwelling into a visitor facility at 129D Carsons Road, Waiheke Island.

      The panel is Cr G A Mulholland (Chairman), Cr G Fryer and Board Member K-A Harvey (and alternates Cr F Storer, Board Member R Ericson, Cr N Abel, Mr G Macfarlane (alt Chair), Mr J Hill, Mr C Stewart, Ms K Sinclair and Ms K Ryan).

   2. That the Chairman be authorised to appoint an alternate Commissioner in the event that none of the above are available.

   CARRIED

   6.4. 219 GREAT SOUTH ROAD (ALSO 225, 241, 247, 259 AND 261), GREENLANE

   1. That any two persons from the following panel, as nominated by the Planning Fixtures Committee, be appointed commissioners to hear and determine an application for dispensation from Part 27 of the Auckland City Consolidated Bylaw to construct eight freestanding signs on six sites along Great South Road, Greenlane.

      The panel is Mr R Gee (Chairman) and Ms J Hudson (and alternates Ms K Sinclair, Ms K Ryan, Mr J Hill and Ms C Hawley).

   2. That the Chairman be authorised to appoint an alternate Commissioner in the event that none of the above are available.

   CARRIED

   6.5. 29-31 EDEN CRESCENT, AUCKLAND CENTRAL

   1. That any five (with a minimum of three) persons from the following panel, as nominated by the Planning Fixtures Committee, be appointed commissioners to hear and determine an application to erect a building on the site at 29-31 Eden Crescent, Auckland Central.

      The panel is Mr R Gee (Chairman), Mr J Hill, Ms L McGregor, Cr F Storer and Mr G Falconer.  

   2. That the Chairman be authorised to appoint an alternate Commissioner in the event that none of the above are available.

7. REQUESTS FOR SERVICE ARISING FROM SITE VISITS AND MEETINGS

   CARRIED

8. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC : LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL INFORMATION AND MEETINGS ACT 1987

   That the public be excluded from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

   The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

   This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

   Item no.	General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)	Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution
   C1	380 Cowes Bay Road, Waiheke Island - Environment Court Appeal	The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason to withhold exists under section 7.	Section 7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage. In particular, an appeal has been lodged with the Environment Court against the Council's decision to approve land use consent for vehicle access, including the removal of native vegetation, site works and driveway gradient greater than 1:4 to a proposed jetty and boat ramp within the Coastal Marine Area at 380 Cowes Bay Road, Waiheke Island. The disclosure of information at this stage could be used by other parties to gain improper advantage prior to court proceedings.	S48(1)(a): The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason to withhold exists under section 7.

   CARRIED

   There being no further business the Chairman declared the meeting closed at 1.25 pm.