Auckland Council website.
This website has changed
This is the former Auckland City Council website, which has some of the information and services you need if you live or do business in the area. Go to the main Auckland Council website to access the complete range of council services.
Skip navigation
Plans, policies and reports
Plans, policies and reports

Hauraki Gulf Islands  review

<< Back to contents

Issues and options papers

Traffic Generation


Issue
Rule 6B1.1.4, Traffic Generation, of the Hauraki Gulf Islands District Plan states that where any activity is likely to cause any adverse effects on the capacity of the adjoining road network, it shall only be permitted where the adverse effect is to be mitigated by measures to upgrade the road design and formation or to control traffic movements (including at any intersection).

The explanation for the rule is that some activities can have a significant effect on the volume of traffic using a roading network and also on the flow of traffic. The rule is used in conjunction with the requirements for parking and vehicle access to ensure that access to a site and manoeuvring of vehicles does not interfere with the safe and efficient operation of the roading network.

District Plan administrators have raised concerns about the wording of the rule. To be effective to administer, rules should have a definable 'trigger point', where it is possible to determine that consent is required. Stating that consent is required where an activity 'is likely to cause any adverse effects on the capacity of the adjoining road network' is subjective terminology and its administration is based on opinion. The Courts have held (McLeod Holdings Limited v Countdown Properties Limited [1990] 14 NZTPA 362 (CA)) that rules must be certain and if a council retains a subjective discretion within a rule then that rule may be void for uncertainty. There is no guidance in the current rule to indicate what might be an 'adverse affect' on the capacity of the adjoining road network. The reason/explanation states that some activities can have a significant effect on the volume and flow of traffic. However, there is a difference between activities that can have a significant effect on the volume of traffic and any activity that is likely to cause any adverse effects on the capacity of the adjoining road network.

Other means of controlling traffic are by requiring resource consent for activities providing parking for more than 100 vehicles. Rule 12.9.1.1A of the Isthmus Plan states that any permitted, controlled or discretionary activity providing parking for more than 100 vehicles requires consent as a controlled activity. Rule 12.4.1.2 of the North Shore City District Plan states that any permitted or controlled activity which generates a turnover of vehicles that exceeds 100 vehicles per day requires consent as a limited discretionary activity.

Therefore, there are other, more quantifiable, methods for assessing the impact of traffic- generating activities.

Possible approaches

You may have a better or alternative approach to those outlined below. If so, we would like to hear from you.

  • Retain the status quo with ultra-vires rules.
  • Remove Rule 6B1.1.4, Traffic Generation, from the District Plan. Do not replace the rule with another similar traffic rule.
  • Remove Rule 6B1.1.4, Traffic Generation, from the District Plan and replace with a quantifiable rule.

Note:

While this issue paper can be read in isolation, it is best read in association with the issue papers relating to: