Transcript Tauranga City Council

Spatial Planning
Is it new or just a new name?
Ken Tremaine
RMLA Queenstown Branch Seminar
25 August 2011
KEN TREMAINE
CONSULTING LTD
Introduction (1)
• Since the new Auckland Council has to prepare a
spatial plan, are there learnings that could be
applied to other parts of New Zealand?
• Using experience of growth strategies in
Whangarei, Auckland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty, the
Hawkes Bay, Taupo and Canterbury I will give an
overview of:
– the statutory requirement to prepare a Spatial
Plan for Auckland;
– ‘Auckland Unleashed’ (the Auckland Plan
discussion document); and
2
Introduction (2)
– the relationships between the Spatial Plan,
RPS, RLTS and RLTP, District Plans,
TYPs/LTCCPs, other strategies, and a future
unitary/regulatory plan for Auckland
• Today’s discussion will also consider:
– the limitations of the statutes involved; and
– the need for alignment between RMA 1991
plans and the infrastructure and funding plans
prepared under other statutes
3
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act
2009 – Section 79
The starting point for Auckland spatial planning:
• Auckland Council must prepare and adopt a spatial
plan
• Spatial Plan purpose: to contribute to Auckland's
social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing through a comprehensive and effective longterm (20-30 years) strategy for growth and
development
• The Spatial Plan will—
– Set a strategic direction for Auckland (integrating
social, economic, environmental, & cultural
objectives);
4
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act
2009 – Section 79 (continued)
– Outline a high-level development strategy that will
achieve that direction and those objectives;
– Enable coherent and co-ordinated decision making
by the Auckland Council (as the spatial planning
agency) and other parties to determine the future
location and timing of critical infrastructure,
services, and investment within Auckland in
accordance with the strategy;
– Provide a basis for aligning the implementation
plans, regulatory plans, and funding programmes
of the Auckland Council.
5
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act
2009 – Section 79 (continued)
• The Spatial Plan must—
– Recognise and describe Auckland's role in NZ;
– Visually illustrate how Auckland may develop
in the future, including growth sequencing and
infrastructure provision;
– Provide an evidential base to support decision
making;
– Identify the existing and future location and mix
of land use activities within specific geographic
areas as well as critical infrastructure, services,
and investment (including eg. services relating
to cultural/social infrastructure, transport, water
supply);
6
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act
2009 – Section 79 (continued)
– Identify within Auckland, nationally and
regionally significant:
• recreational /open-space areas
• ecological areas that should be protected from
•
•
development
areas with environmental constraints on
development eg flood-prone or unstable land
landscapes, areas of historic heritage value,
and natural features; and
– Identify policies, priorities, land allocations, and
programmes and investments to implement the
strategic direction and specify how resources
will be provided to implement the strategic
direction
7
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act
2009 – Section 80:development, adoption & implementation
• The Auckland Council:
– must involve central government, infrastructure
providers, communities, private and rural sectors,
and other parties (as appropriate) throughout the
preparation and development of the spatial plan
– must adopt the spatial plan in accordance with the
special consultative procedure
– may amend the spatial plan, at any time (in
accordance with the above 2 criteria)
– must endeavour to secure and maintain the support
and co-operation of central government,
infrastructure providers, communities, private and
rural sectors, and other parties (as appropriate) in
the implementation of the spatial plan
8
The Auckland Plan: Step 1 - Auckland
Unleashed
• Auckland Unleashed: The Auckland Plan
Discussion Document
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Proposed Goals
The Big Picture
Auckland Past and Present
People and Quality of Life
People and Economy
People and Environment
People and Place
People and Infrastructure
Implementation, Monitoring and Review
• Released in March 2011
• Submissions closed 31 May 2011
9
The Auckland Plan Timeframes
• Document will be available for public consultation
between late August – November 2011
• For adoption by December 2011
• Will underpin the 2012-21 Ten Year Plan
especially capital, depreciation and general
budget needs
• Auckland Council will operate an integrated rating
regime from July 2012
10
Other Initiatives – Local Government Reform
• Central Government is undertaking a review of the
local government system called Smarter
Government, Stronger Communities: towards better
local governance and public services
• The purpose of this review is to consider and
address questions relating to:
– The structure, functions and funding of Local
Government, including the usefulness of unitary
authorities for metropolitan areas;
– The relationship between Local Government and
Central Government, including the efficiency of local
government participation
• Not sure where this will take spatial planning
11
Other upper North Island Influences
• NZTA Inter Regional Freight analysis
• An Upper North Island Strategic Alliance (UNISA) - a
formal co-operation agreement between Auckland,
Bay of Plenty, Northland and Waikato regions and the
major metropolitans within these regions
– It is about developing a closer working relationship
on mutual interest matters
– The UNISA partners are intending to undertake
collaborative work on areas such as economic
development, transport and tourism
– There is potential to take this approach further
12
Where is all this stuff currently off to? (1)
• It has energised the local government sector to look
at itself
• Upper NI regions and TAs are asking: Do we need
to stay on the case here? Where do we fit given
Government’s emphasis on growing the Auckland
economy? Are we still part of the action??
• The influence of the 8 Cabinet papers prepared (and
released in March 2011) to coincide with the public
consultation on Auckland Unleashed:
http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Legislative-Reviews-RoyalCommission-on-Auckland-Governance-Index?OpenDocument#spatial
• The recent release of work commissioned by MED
on how the Auckland, Hamilton and Bay of Plenty
urban economies work (i.e. Ascari report)
13
Where is all this stuff currently off to? (2)
• The tensions between agglomeration investment
theory and a wider regional-upper North Island
perspective
• The Auckland Unitary Plan will follow during 2012
• Some mutually interested councils looking at
shared services and other mechanisms off the
back of the Auckland Plan
• The Phase 2 RMA 1991 reforms is currently on
hold till sometime in 2012
• Our challenge: what is the role of the RMA 1991
in spatial planning, given the challenges of the
RMA processes??
14
How will current spatial plan thinking add
value? (1)
• It will sharpen up strategic thinking
– Key physical, economic, social and cultural areas
– Will assist with developing key linkages and taking
a broader inter-regional perspective
• Integration
– Long term land use
– Infrastructure
– Funding
• It will assist us to better understand development
feasibility. Post the GFC very little development is
economic though life won’t remain like this
15
How will current spatial plan thinking add
value? (2)
• Growth strategies are having to review locations,
staging and timing to determine whether
development will occur where it is planned, and
whether it is still feasible
• There has been a significant drop in land values,
developer profits and market confidence
• The loss of DC revenue has caused fiscal stress for
some councils
• A number of councils are questioning the pure
‘growth pays for growth’ philosophy
16
Can it happen as a voluntary collaboration or would it require legislative change?
• Auckland – the legislative model is the LGA 2002
• The UDS in Greater Christchurch, Future Proof in
Greater Hamilton, SmartGrowth in the western BoP,
and HPUDS in Hawkes Bay are all voluntary
initiatives under the LGA 2002 which are anchored
through:
– RMA 1991 (RPS and DPs)
– LGA 2002 (TYPs/LTCCPs)
– LTMA 2003 (RLTS, RLTP)
• Cannot legislate for effective relationships but a
voluntary approach assists relationship
development, building of trust, and anchors ongoing
17
implementation
Do we need any further statutory
amendments? (1)
The short answer is yes. But how and when?
• 3 long term statutes RMA 1991, LGA 2002, LTMA 2003
– none fit together well
• Not much Government leadership or will for statutory
amendment. MfE thinks the Phase 2 RMA reforms is all
we need!!
• Amendments will be required to anchor the Auckland
Plan in the RMA 1991
• Central Government will probably enable spatial
planning for the growth areas of NZ through the Phase 2
RMA reforms but this is not all we need
• RMA amendments can’t mandate detailed
physical/community infrastructure planning or funding.
Neither can it link the critical land use and transport
18
funding. Only LGA amendments can do this
Do we need any further statutory
amendments? (2)
• There needs to be more effective legislative support for
the current range of tools. For example RPS provisions
such as urban limits, and residential densities
• Some jurisdictions of the Environment Court want to
consider the appropriateness of such tools on a case by
case basis meaning that these issues are re-litigated in
different regions eg. there are emerging issues in
Canterbury where the Court is questioning such tools
• There is no nationwide approach underpinned by agreed
implementation tools that have legislative backing or
support
• Is it time for a NPS on urban growth management as
well as urban design? An opportunity to define the tools
19
Do we need any further statutory
amendments? (3)
• Should there be a hierarchy of spatial plans/growth
strategies (both regional & sub-regional)? What level
of detail should the regional spatial plan contain if it is
to be effective?
• Need to rationalise the planning framework so spatial
planning is not an addition but supplants the RPS and
Regional Plans; the District Plan is but one tool for
spatial plan implementation
• Spatial plans could lead the future direction of a
region based on the LGA 2002’s 4 well beings. This is
a valuable approach as Government retrenches to the
centre, has decreasing regional presence apart from
Auckland, and planning/decision making becomes
more centralised eg health
20
Some concluding observations (1)
• A spatial plan is a powerful tool. We do some of it
currently in a number of areas, but we need to join up
the dots. Need to take a wider, more comprehensive
regional approach
• What is done in any particular area will depend on local
circumstances. It will always be to a large extent an
application of fundamental principles overlaid with
‘horses for courses’
• There are often tensions between a regional council
and any large metropolitan as to “who is in charge
around here?” Negotiated collaboration like UNISA,
has to be agreed before there will be any enduring
progress
21
Some concluding observations (2)
• Don’t expect much Central Government leadership. It
will be to a large extent a follower rather than a leader
here. It will always be happiest championing voluntary
initiatives
• Where the Local Government reforms will head (if
anywhere effective) is a post election call
• We need to remember that a lot of the tools in the
spatial planning toolkit are not new. It’s how we apply
them more effectively in response to:
– Post-GFC challenges; and
– Central Government’s interest in growing the upper
North Island economy
22
Some concluding observations (3)
• Also what statutory assistance do we need, when
•
•
there doesn’t seem to be a single silver bullet?
Developing a strong inter-statutory relationship
between 3 parallel planning statutes (i.e. the RMA
1991, the LGA 2002 and the LTMA 2003) is the
challenge
If you want to move ahead, get on with it and shape
your own outcomes!
23