and Other Matters) Order 2016 Consent Footprint Amendments€¦ · 3.1 Overview of amendments 10...

Application for Resource Consents under the Resource Management Act 1991 as modified by the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016

Consent Footprint Amendments

Mangamaunu

Half Moon Bay

Okiwi Bay South

Date:

March 2018

i

Application for Resource Consents: Restoration Work, Consent Footprint Amendments 2018

Table of contents

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purpose of this application 2 1.3 Resource consents sought and duration 4 1.4 Scope and structure of this AEE 4

2 Consenting Process 5 2.1 Approvals obtained to date 5 2.2 The Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters)

Order 2016 5 2.3 Works covered by the OIC – ‘restoration work’ on the ‘coastal route’ 6 2.4 The Agency 6 2.5 Controlled activity status (Clause 6 of the OIC) 8 2.6 Content of this application (Clause 7 of the OIC) 8 2.7 Non-notification and processing timeframe (Clause 8 of the OIC) 9 2.8 Written comments from specified persons (Clauses 9 and 10 of the OIC) 9

3 Broad description of the proposed restoration work 10 3.1 Overview of amendments 10 3.2 Summary overview 10 3.1 Mangamaunu 11 3.2 Half Moon Bay 14 3.3 Okiwi Bay South 16 3.4 General matters applying to all works 18

3.4.1 Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) 18 3.4.2 Erosion and sediment control 18 3.4.3 Stakeholder communication 19

4 Information sharing 20 4.1 Restoration Liaison Group 20 4.2 Other relevant parties 20 4.3 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 21

5 Broad description of the sites 22 5.1 Overview 22

5.1.1 Geophysical setting 22 5.1.2 Existing transport infrastructure on the coastal route 22 5.1.3 Social and economic environment 23 5.1.4 Archaeology values 23 5.1.5 Cultural values 23 5.1.6 Marine reserves 24

5.2 Access to the coastal marine area 24 5.3 Mangamaunu 24 5.4 Half Moon Bay 25 5.5 Okiwi Bay South 26

6 Desktop assessment of the potential effects of the activity 27

7 Conditions of consent 31

8 Conclusion 34

ii


Appendix A: Consent application form

Appendix B: Design drawings

Appendix C: Existing OIC approvals summary

Appendix D: Technical reports

Appendix E: Resource consent conditions

Appendix F: Coastal Route Access Plans

Appendix G: Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

1


1 Introduction

1.1 Background

On 14 November 2016 a magnitude 7.8 earthquake, and subsequent aftershocks, caused significant damage to land, buildings, and infrastructure across the upper South Island and lower North Island. Along the coastal route between Clarence and Oaro, extensive damage to the transport corridor resulted in the closure of State Highway 1 (SH1) and the Main North Line (MNL) for much of 2017.

The NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail formed a partnership and established the North Canterbury Transport Infrastructure Recovery Alliance (NCTIR), tasked with restoring the transport infrastructure. The alliance is made up of the NZ Transport Agency, KiwiRail, Fulton Hogan, Downer, Higgins and HEB Construction supported by specialist experts across many different fields.

Figure 1: Damage to the transport corridor from the Hurunui / Kaikoura earthquake of 14 November 2016

Over the past 14 months, NCTIR has undertaken extensive repair works to return services to MNL and SH1 in August and December 2017 respectively. Further works are required over the course of the next one to two years to fully restore the transport corridor to safe and effective functionality, as well as a series of projects to improve and enhance the safety and resilience of the coastal route.

All works to-date have been authorised in accordance with an extensive suite of environmental approvals obtained throughout 2017 (see Section 2.1 for further details). These approvals established a consent ‘footprint’ along the length of the coastal route from Oaro to Clarence within which a diverse range of restoration work could be undertaken. This “footprint” approach was critical to provide the flexibility for construction methodology and

2


design to respond to the fragile post-earthquake environment and ongoing storm events that have occurred (i.e. Cyclone Cook and Cyclone Debbie in April 2017, and Cyclone Gita in February 2018).

The types of work already authorised for the restoration and reinstatement includes (but is not limited to):

Realignments of SH1 and MNL to avoid major slip sites and/or improve resilience against slip sites;

New coastal protection structures such as seawalls and rock revetment, and repairs to existing coastal protection structures;

Repairs and replacements of bridges, retaining walls, tunnels, and other transport infrastructure and furniture;

Bulk earthworks to remediate slips, reconstruct the transport corridor, and dispose of excess material;

Slip and rockfall mitigation structures and works;

Temporary facilitation and support activities such as offices, laydown areas, and fuel storage;

Safety and improvement enhancements to SH1 and MNL, including with respect to geometry, safety barriers, and shoulder widening;

A series of amenity and stopping areas to enhance access and recreational opportunities;

A 20 km (approximate) shared path for pedestrians and cyclists between Okiwi Bay and Mangamaunu.

1.2 Purpose of this application

Ongoing design refinement of the recovery work has led to the need to make amendments to the existing consent footprints at three locations along the coastal route. This design refinement has been driven by a range of factors including achieving minimum levels of safety and resilience; ensuring the design is constructable; and delivering value for key stakeholders, the wider Kaikoura community and the New Zealand taxpayer. The three locations requiring amendments as a result of this multi criteria design refinement are as follows:

Mangamaunu – an amendment to enable greater room alongside the road and rail corridor to provide the proposed amenity area and safety improvements, and enhance access and safety to the surf break.

Halfmoon Bay – an amendment to enhance the safety of an “out of context” curve and address the resilience of the transport corridor by increasing the distance from the existing slopes. Halfmoon Bay has been significantly impacted by recent storm events.

Okiwi Bay South – an amendment to address an “out of context” curve thereby enhancing the safety of the road corridor at this location.

The locations are illustrated in Figure 2 overleaf.

This Assessment of Effects on the Environment (AEE) supports resource consent applications made by the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail. The applications are made under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) as modified by the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016 (OIC).

An application form is contained in Appendix A, and design drawings relating to each site are contained in Appendix B.

3


Figure 2: Locations subject to this application where changes to the existing consented footprint are required

Mangamaunu

Okiwi Bay South

Halfmoon Bay

4


1.3 Resource consents sought and duration

Consistent with the approach taken to date, the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail each seek new resource consents under the RMA for the works subject to these applications (see Section 3 for a description of the works at each location).

Table 1: Resource consents sought by NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail

RMA section and consent type

Consent authority

Duration sought Comment on duration

Section 9 land use KDC Unlimited

To provide for permanent structures and works.

CRC Unlimited

To provide for permanent structures and works.

Section 12 coastal permit

CRC 35 years To provide for construction works, ongoing maintenance, and use and occupation of the coastal marine area for permanent structures.

Section 14 water permit

CRC 15 years To provide for temporary water takes, diversion and damming activities associated with construction activities and ongoing maintenance and operations activities.

Section 15 discharge permit

CRC 15 years To provide for the construction activities, and any discharges associated with the ongoing operation of the stormwater network.

1.4 Scope and structure of this AEE

The remaining sections of this report cover the following:

Section 2: Details on the consenting process relevant to restoration work on the coastal route

Section 3: Broad description of the restoration work on the coastal route

Section 4: Consultation and information sharing undertaken

Section 5: Broad description of the sites

Section 6: A desktop assessment of the potential effects of the restoration work

Section 7: Proposed conditions of consent

Section 8: Conclusion

5


2 Consenting Process

2.1 Approvals obtained to date

As explained further in subsequent sections below, in recognition of the urgent need to restore the coastal route the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016 (OIC) significantly modifies the usual processes of the various environmental legislation, including the RMA, by:

Providing certainty that applications will be granted;

Fast-tracking processing timeframes and guaranteeing non-notification; and

Limiting the information requirements of applications to broad details.

Appendix C of this report contains a comprehensive list of all environmental approvals obtained to date under the OIC by the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail. This includes:

multiple resource consent packages under the RMA;

a global concession under the Conservation Act 1987 and Reserves Act 1977;

a global wildlife permit under the Wildlife Act 1953;

a global freshwater fisheries permit under the Freshwater Fishery Regulations 1983;

a global marine mammals permit under the Marine Mammals Protection Act 1971; and

an archaeological authority under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014.

The majority of approvals for restoration work were obtained prior to 31 March 2017. A further package focussed on the SH1 safety, improvements and resilience works was granted in July 2017. Other minor adjustments to the consent footprint occurred throughout the latter half of 2017.

Due to the urgent nature of the recovery, coupled with unforeseen events such as Cyclones Cook and Debbie, the design and subsequent consenting processes necessarily followed a process of iteration and refinement as changing circumstances or new information came to light. Consequently, many of the resource consents obtained later in the process partially modify or overlap with earlier consent packages. The activities subject to this current application are a further continuation of this approach. At some stage in the future the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail intend to consolidate all the consents into a comprehensive suite.

The OIC is due to expire on 31 March 2018. The amendments sought under these applications will therefore be the last amendments obtained under the modified OIC process. Should further amendments to the consent footprint be required in the future these will be subject to the normal processes under the relevant environmental legislation.

2.2 The Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016

Following the earthquake event, the Government enacted the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Act 2016, which commenced 13 December 2016. The purpose of this legislation was to assist earthquake-affected areas and its councils and communities to respond to, and recover from, the impacts of the Hurunui/Kaikōura earthquakes.

The Recovery Act also provided for the Governor-General to grant, by way of an Order in Council, exemptions from or modifications to provisions of the Resource Management Act (amongst other legislation). The OIC was then enacted on the 20 December 2016 which

6


provided modifications to normal consenting processes so that works could proceed at pace while ensuring environmental management and protection.

2.3 Works covered by the OIC – ‘restoration work’ on the ‘coastal route’

The works required at Mangamaunu, Half Moon Bay and Okiwi Bay are restoration work following the earthquake event. Restoration work is defined in the OIC as:

(a) means any activity that, because of or in connection with the Hurunui/Kaikōura earthquakes, is necessary or desirable to undertake to, without undue delay, restore the coastal route and enable it to be used fully, effectively, and safely; and

(b) includes any activity necessary or desirable for—

(i) the repair and rebuilding of the coastal route; and

(ii) safety enhancements to, and improvements to the resilience of, the coastal route.

The three sites are located on the coastal route. The OIC defines the Coastal route as:

(a) means —

(i) State Highway 1, between Clarence River and the Oaro rail overbridge; and

(ii) the railway line known as the Main North Line, between 125 km MNL (south of Phoebe Station) and 330 km MNL (north of Tunnel 24); and

(b) includes all land, infrastructure, and other property adjacent to or associated with the coastal route described in paragraph (a)

The full extent of the coastal route is illustrated on Figure 3 overleaf.

2.4 The Agency

These applications are being made jointly by KiwiRail and the NZ Transport Agency. Under the OIC, “The Agency” is a term to refer collectively to both organisations.

7


Figure 3:'Coastal Route' as defined by the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016

Coastal route – State Highway 1 (road)

Coastal route – Main North Line (rail)

Clarence River

Oaro

330 km MNL

125 km MNL

8


2.5 Controlled activity status (Clause 6 of the OIC)

Clause 6 of the OIC states that all restoration work, where it would ordinarily require a resource consent, is to be assessed as a controlled activity. Clause 6(3) states that the consent authority must grant a resource consent for the restoration work.

The matters of control, and therefore the consent authority’s power to impose conditions, is restricted to the matters in Clause 6(4):

(a) the management of the effects of the restoration work on—

(i) areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna:

(ii) fresh water quality:

(iii) heritage, cultural, and archaeological values:

(iv) landscape, natural character, and visual amenity:

(v) coastal processes:

(vi) coastal water quality:

(vii) marine mammals and seabirds:

(b) the management of construction work, stormwater, marine biosecurity, hazardous substances, spills, artificial lighting, dust, noise, and vibration.

Proposed conditions are discussed further in Section 7 of this report.

2.6 Content of this application (Clause 7 of the OIC)

Clause 7 of the OIC modifies section 88 of the RMA by providing a clear requirement for the content of what a resource consent application must include as follows:

(a) a broad description of the work: [Section 3 of this report]

(b) a broad description of the site at which the work is to occur, including a map of the corresponding area: [Section 5]

(c) a desktop assessment of the potential effects of the work: [Section 6]

(d) any conditions that the agency proposes for the consent: [Section 7]

(e) a description of any consultation undertaken in relation to the work. [Section 4]

Each of these items are addressed in the sections of this report.

For the avoidance of doubt, as Clause 8(b)(i) does not require the consent authority to have regard to the matters in Section 104(1)(b) of the RMA1, this content is not provided in this application.

1 Section 104(1)(b) refers to any relevant provisions of a national environmental standard, other regulations, a national policy statement, a New Zealand coastal policy statement, a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement, and a plan or proposed plan.

9


2.7 Non-notification and processing timeframe (Clause 8 of the OIC)

Clause 8 of the OIC states that an application for resource consent must not be publicly notified or given limited notification. It does require though that the consent authority seek written comments from specified persons and a summary of those comments be made publicly available (see section below).

Clause 8(2)(b)(iv) states that the consent authority must grant the consent within 21 working days2 of lodgement. This is inclusive of the 15 working day timeframe for written comments discussed below.

2.8 Written comments from specified persons (Clauses 9 and 10 of the OIC)

The consent authority can invite written comment from specific parties/organisations that are identified in Clause 9 as soon as practicable after lodgement. Those persons then have 15 working days to make comments. This will provide important feedback for the Councils to assist in their assessments of the works and any conditions that may be appropriate as to how the works are implemented and how any environmental effects arising from implementation are managed.

It is important to note that Clause 9(5) and (6) make it clear that the written comments process is not to be treated in the same way as a submission process that would normally apply under the RMA. In particular, the parties cannot appeal or object to the consent authority’s eventual decision.

Clause 10 states that before the consent authority makes its decision it must consider the comments and prepare a summary of those comments. The summary, along with the consent authority’s response to the issues raised, must be made publicly available on the Internet at the same time, or before, the decision on the application.

2 The definition of working day under Clause 2 of the OIC includes Saturdays and Sundays.

10


3 Broad description of the proposed restoration work

3.1 Overview of amendments

The proposed works are focused on design refinements and strategic improvements which will enable the Agency to continue to repair, rebuild and enhance the safety and resilience of the coastal route so that it can be used fully, effectively and safely without undue delay.

The amendments seek to ensure the restored coastal route is fit for purpose and constructable, while also balancing the aspirations of key stakeholders and the wider community. As such the design amendments described in this section have been subject to extensive refinement through preliminary consultation and feedback from the members of the Restoration Liaison Group (RLG) (see Section 4 for further detail).

Drawings for the works have been prepared by NCTIR designers on behalf of the Agency and are attached to this application in Appendix B. The proposed works will be further refined as design progresses in parallel with the consenting and construction processes. This consent is intended to provide for this design development where it remains generally in accordance with this application and contributes to the repair and rebuild of a safe and resilient coastal route.

3.2 Summary overview

To assist with understanding the extent of the proposed changes, Table 2 below provides an overview of the activities authorised in comparison to the changes sought which are subject to this application. As noted previously, these changes have been driven by a range of factors including achieving minimum levels of safety and resilience, ensuring constructability, and delivering value for key stakeholders, the community and the New Zealand taxpayer.

One key matter requiring consideration as part of balancing all of these objectives was to avoid where possible, additional encroachment below Mean High Water Springs (MHWS) as part of the recovery work. This matter was expressed by the RLG and as a consequence, design was substantially revisited at these locations and the table below reflects adjusted footprints that are necessary below MHWS.

Table 2: Existing authorised activities and proposed changes to consent footprint

Site Currently authorised activity Proposed activity

Location Description

Description Approximate new footprint below MHWS

Okiwi Bay South

Realignment of SH1 and MNL seaward to improve resilience due to a large slip (referred to as Slip 9).

Changes to the consented footprint due to adjustment of the SH1 and MNL geometry.

0.16ha

Halfmoon Bay Realignment of SH1 and MNL seaward to adjust road geometry at Halfmoon Bay to improve safety, and to improve resilience due to a challenging hill slope (referred to as Slips 3, 4 and 5).

Changes to the consented footprint as a result of design refinement of the coastal protection structures.

0.45ha

11


Site Currently authorised activity Proposed activity

Mangamaunu An amenity and parking area to improve safety and coastal marine access, being one of a series of new facilities proposed along the Kaikōura coastline to enhance access and recreational opportunities. The facility incorporates the southern end point of a proposed shared path for pedestrians and cyclists extending northward to Okiwi Bay.

None

Changes to the consented footprint required to enable the protection of the shared path and MNL from coastal erosion.

None

3.1 Mangamaunu

The already consented amenity area and shared path at Mangamaunu seek to showcase this highly valued area by improving existing informal parking areas and providing safer access to the beach and nationally significant surfbreak in this location. A photo showing Mangamaunu is included in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4: Mangamaunu 2017 viewed looking north

The consented amenity area at the southern end of Mangamaunu Bay comprises a parking area overlooking the nationally significant surfbreak – located on the headland between the transport corridor and beach as shown in Figure 4. This new amenity area will be connected to SH1 via an access road and shared path which join SH1 at the existing Kiwa Road intersection.

12


The purpose of this amenity area is twofold:

1. To provide improved facilities for surfers and other visitors; and 2. To remedy the risks associated with the existing unsafe informal parking area on the

landward side of SH1, where visitors have to negotiate a blind corner and cross both SH1 and the MNL to access the beach.

The approved consented design for the shared path and access road extended onto the beach at Mangamaunu and included coastal protection in the form of a vertical seawall structure (or similar) along the coastal edge. The construction of this vertical seawall structure required a relatively small footprint as it removed the need for any sloping structures extending onto the beach towards MHWS.

Since this design was consented, further ground investigation has identified a number of constraints including a sharp elevation change down to the beach just to the south of the proposed amenity area. Further coastal assessment work has also been carried out by the project’s coastal specialists to assess the effects of different designs on coastal processes, in particular recognising the national significance of the surfbreak at Mangamaunu. These additional investigations have resulted in the desire to provide for alternative design options which may be used instead of vertical structures, which have greater potential to reduce beach access opportunities and generate wave reflection which may adversely affect the nationally significant break.

Another constraint at this site is that the shared path and access must be set back a minimum of 4m from the MNL for safety reasons. This limits the landward extent to which the shared path, access road and amenity area can be safely located.

As a result of these factors it is proposed to shift the permanent consent line seaward to provide for the option of a more gently sloping embankment structure instead of a vertical structure. This will provide the necessary footprint to accommodate the shared path, access area and amenity area while also ensuring all works remain above MHWS (and outside of the Mangamaunu Mataitai) and provide better access to the beach and surfbreak than a vertical structure.

To allow for these potential design changes the new consent line will shift seaward an average of 5-10m (up to a maximum of approximately 16m) from the previous permanent consent line. This permanent works area does not extend below MHWS and all temporary construction works will be carried out above MHWS as much as practicable. The sloping embankment will likely be constructed of fill overlaid with rock protection. A foundation (likely 3-4m deep) will need to be constructed at the toe of this embankment for stability. Cobbles excavated from within the footprint of works will then cover up this foundation and extend up the toe of the embankment to shape it into the existing beach. Access to the surfbreak will still be possible down the sloping embankment and onto the beach. A preliminary visualisation (to be viewed as indicative only) has been prepared in relation to this area and is included in Figure 5 below for context.

13


Figure 5: Indicative view from Mangamaunu amenity area

The RLG has provided feedback on the proposed design at this site which has resulted in the footprint of works being reduced as much as possible taking into consideration all relevant factors and constraints as outlined above. Innovative options to refine this design further and potentially reduce the footprint will continue to be investigated to reduce the overall disturbance and occupation where possible. This includes the ongoing involvement of the project’s coastal specialists in all design decisions to ensure the best practicable outcomes are achieved at this nationally significant site.

Plans showing the amended design subject to this application are contained in Appendix B.

14


3.2 Half Moon Bay

Half Moon Bay is subject to some of the greatest levels of upslope geotechnical risk along the coastal route due to the presence of multiple large and complex slope failures above the road and rail corridor. In addition, there is a dangerous out of context curve on the road along the inside of Half Moon Bay which has been the cause of numerous accidents including truck rollovers in the past. A photo showing this existing environment is included in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6: Half Moon Bay 2018

The existing consented design at Half Moon Bay includes a seaward realignment with a seawall extending along the full seaward edge. Since this preliminary design was consented, extensive further investigation work has been completed both on the ground and from a design, value and risk analysis perspective. This further investigation has revealed a number of challenges with the already consented alignment including the level of safety and value it would deliver, and the need to construct any works offline now that SH1 and the MNL have been reopened.

In order to overcome all of these issues, an initial amended design was prepared which would have resulted in shifting the permanent consent line in the order of 20-30m seaward along an approximately 1.65km stretch of the coast at Half Moon Bay. This additional footprint would have enabled substantial straightening of this stretch of road and the replacement of a seawall with a large rock revetment structure along the seaward edge of the realigned transport corridor. Significant sections of this consented area would have extended below Mean High Water Springs (MHWS) and required considerable construction phase environmental controls. This initial concept design was presented to RLG in February 2018 and received robust feedback around the potential environmental effects, and the numerous values associated with this stretch of coast. On the back of this feedback, the design has been revised considerably to better balance the need to provide options to

15


improve safety and resilience in strategic locations, while also minimising the overall footprint of works as much as practicable.

The revised proposal subject to this application includes amendments to the existing consented design at both the southern and northern end of Half Moon Bay. At the southern end, there will be an increase in the consent footprint which will be limited to an approximately 450m stretch where the most dangerous out of context road curve is located. The proposed increase in consented area will be in the order of 20-30m seaward and will straighten this dangerous alignment and also provide space for the shared path.

At the northern end of Half Moon Bay, the increase in consent footprint will be limited to a seaward shift of approximately 10m along three sections totalling 1050m in length. This increase in footprint will provide for minor road and rail straightening and the construction of the shared path. The seaward edge of the realigned transport corridor will likely be comprised of an embankment with rock revetment coastal protection. This rock revetment may be comprised of natural rock where available or concrete x-blocs (or similar). A 5m temporary construction zone will be required outside of the permanent works area for the duration of works.

Overall, the increase in consented area will improve the safety rating of SH1 and the MNL, while also balancing the need to deliver value and minimise seaward encroachment as much as practicable. The construction methodology in this area will continue to include careful consideration of environmental controls to minimise the potential for discharges into the CMA.

Options to relocate potential flora and fauna habitat within the new footprint (such as relocating areas of the gravel beach within Half Moon Bay to a suitable location) will be investigated and may be carried out with the guidance of the Project Ecologists, as described further in the ecology assessment in Appendix D.


16


3.3 Okiwi Bay South

Okiwi Bay is a large sweeping bay with the road and rail corridor perched on a narrow shelf at the southern end, opening out into sand dunes within the bay proper, with the coastline rising into conservation estate in the hills beyond. Extensive work has already been carried out within Okiwi Bay including stockpiling and materials processing, and a realignment at the southern end of Okiwi Bay to avoid Slip 8. This area is shown in Figure 7 below.

Figure 7: Southern end of Okiwi Bay (including Slip 8) in 2017

There is an existing consented design to avoid this slip which comprises a rock revetment structure extending into the CMA to provide space for SH1 and the MNL to be realigned seaward. This realignment has already been partially completed to allow SH1 and the MNL to reopen. However, the realignment works undertaken to date, while facilitating the corridors to open, have reduced the overall level of service and safety in this location (compared to the pre-earthquake situation) by introducing a new out of context curve on SH1.

Design amendment options are proposed to resolve this safety issue and potentially restore SH1 to a pre-earthquake level of service. As part of these amendments, additional footprint is also required for the new shared path to be constructed.

17


Initial design work was completed to come up with the best option from a safety and resilience perspective. This involved a proposed increase in the consented footprint of up to 15m seaward along a distance of approximately 1km at the southern end of Okiwi Bay and around Slip 8. This additional footprint would have accommodated a large revetment structure which would have extended below MHWS for a length of approximately 250m. Feedback on this proposal was obtained from various environmental specialists and the RLG which has resulted in the design being refined substantially.

As a result of these refinements, two options are proposed as part of this application to resolve the outstanding safety issues at Okiwi Bay:

Option 1: Realign and straighten the road and rail to achieve a pre-earthquake level of service by installing rock revetment coastal protection on the seaward side to provide more space.

Option 2: Retain the existing post-earthquake alignment but protect it with rock revetment on the coastal side, and install additional road safety measures such as barriers and signage.

To provide for both of these options the permanent works consent line will on average be shifted approximately 10m (up to a maximum of 17m) beyond the existing consent line along a length of approximately 200m (reduced from the originally proposed 1km length). An additional 5m temporary construction zone will be required outside of the permanent works area for the duration of works. The total length of proposed works below MHWS has been reduced to approximately 100m from the originally proposed 250m.


18


3.4 General matters applying to all works

Works to reinstate SH1 and the MNL have been underway since late 2016 and are substantially advanced, with the road and rail network progressively reopening in the latter half of 2017. As part of these works there are numerous management processes in place, including measures relating to environmental controls, health and safety and stakeholder communication. These processes continue to be refined and adapted to best fit individual circumstances at specific worksites. This approach has been effective in ensuring works are conducted to the highest standard practicable. The works described in this application will continue to be managed in the same manner with a focus on creating practical, high quality outcomes as part of the new controlled delivery framework. A summary of the key general matters which will continue to apply to all works described in this application is below.

3.4.1 Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been prepared and is in place for all works. The CEMP forms an overarching management document which is supported by a number of work procedures to manage potential construction effects. The CEMP addresses all of the following:

fill management;

construction method;

dust control;

dewatering;

blasting;

hazardous substances use, handling and storage, including of explosives;

environmental emergency response, including:

oil and fuel spills;

failure of protection works or earthworks;

spill management;

refuelling and maintenance of vehicles and equipment;

waste management;

site environmental communication;

severe weather events; and

environmental training and awareness.

Revision of the CEMP as appropriate will continue as the detailed design and construction methodology for the works are developed. The CEMP takes an adaptive management approach on the ground to respond to individual site circumstances, with ongoing monitoring and advice delivered to construction teams via dedicated Environmental Advisors. Monthly audits are also carried out by Canterbury Regional Council, with a 100% compliance track record achieved to date, and these audits will continue in relation to all works described in this application.

A copy of the CEMP is included in Appendix G.

3.4.2 Erosion and sediment control

An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) is in place to address the potential erosion and sediment measures required during the proposed earthworks and coastal works. The materials and methodologies have been designed to meet the relevant project requirements, and the requirements of NZ Transport Agency’s Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for State Highway Infrastructure (September 2014). In summary, the ESCP includes details on the following:

19


the proposed measures for each part of the project;

the key environmental risks in relation to geographic form and the receiving environment;

the process for decommissioning the measures;

details of the staff that will manage the measures, including installation, maintenance and decommissioning of the structures;

measures to record incidents;

measures to undertake ongoing visual assessments of the structures and measures; and

the process to respond to any failures, including ecological assessments.

The ESCP continues to be effectively implemented throughout the corridor and is updated throughout the project to ensure the ESCP continues to be appropriate for the suite of works being undertaken.

3.4.3 Stakeholder communication

A robust stakeholder communication plan is in place to support all restoration work and will continue to operate in relation to the works described in this application. The objectives of this communication plan are to:

Ensure the communities on SH1 and the MNL between Clarence and Oaro are well-informed about design and construction activity throughout the Coastal Route.

Build confidence that the works will improve safety, journey reliability, access and public amenities and bring long-term economic benefits to the region.

Proactively engage with the media to ensure communities are kept up to date on progress locally, regionally and nationally.

A range of strategies are used to achieve these objectives including:

Meeting landowners and occupiers throughout the corridor on a regular basis to keep them informed of design and construction activity, and providing consistent points of contact for any ongoing queries or concerns.

Regular digital and paper publications of programme progress including the bi-weekly bulletin.

Maintenance of online platforms to keep the public informed including the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail Facebook pages, and the P2C website which includes up to date traffic and travel information.

20


4 Information sharing

4.1 Restoration Liaison Group

The Restoration Liaison Group (RLG) was established in January 2017 by NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail. The purpose of the RLG is to facilitate communication between key stakeholders and to help inform the design, management and monitoring of all transport infrastructure construction works. The members of the RLG was defined in the Order In Council legislation. RLG members’ advice and insight has continuously helped to achieve the best possible social, economic, environmental and cultural outcomes for the restoration project and the Canterbury and Kaikōura regions. It is important to note that this group is a forum for each participant organisation to express and inform, on matters that are important to them and their organisations. Sometimes, a balancing of priorities has been required to achieve the collective outcome of opening a resilient and safe road and rail corridor.

The RLG is comprised of representatives from the following organisations:

Kaikōura District Council;

Environment Canterbury;

Marlborough District Council;

Hurunui District Council;

Department of Conservation;

Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga;

Kaikoura Marine Guardians;

Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu; and

Ngati Kuri – Te Runanga o Kaikōura (through their mandated representatives of Mahaanui Kurataiao Ltd);

The RLG has had considerable input into the designs submitted as part of this application. This was principally through the workshop held on Wednesday 28th February 2018 where preliminary designs were presented to RLG to enable them to inform the design. Robust feedback was provided which primarily related to minimising the overall footprint of works within the coastal environment, particularly below MHWS to minimise potential ecological effects, and ensuring public access to important parts of the coastal corridor.

Following this feedback the design was revised substantially. This has included reducing the total area of works outside the existing consented footprint by around ten hectares, of which approximately six hectares of footprint has been removed from below MHWS. Innovative design and construction processes will continue to be employed where possible to construct within the existing consent footprint, while also achieving the required minimum levels of service and safety.

The advice and insight of the RLG continues to be highly valued by both the design and construction teams. This forum will continue to inform detailed design and construction as it progresses.

4.2 Other relevant parties

In conjunction with the RLG, the Agency has informed the Kaikōura Board Riders Association and Mangamaunu Marae ahead of lodging this application due to the design amendments proposed at Mangamaunu and their previous interest at this location. We understand that KDC and ECan are likely to invite written comments from these parties as part of the formal written comments process as detailed in Section 2.8 of this application.

21


4.3 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011

Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu is seeking recognition of Customary Marine Title for the Common Marine and Coastal Area along the entire Coastal Route under Section 95 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 20113. Customary Marine Title recognises the relationship of an iwi, hapū or whānau with a part of the Common Marine and Coastal Area, and establishes various rights over this area.

Under Section 62(3) of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 applicants seeking resource consent in the Common Marine and Coastal Area must notify and seek the views of any group that has applied for recognition of Customary Marine Title in that area. The Agency is committed to an ongoing relationship with Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu, and has provided notification of the footprints contained in this application in this regard, feedback has also been provided through the RLG process.

3 The Ministry of Justice has received approximately 380 applications for Crown engagement (for more information refer to: https://www.justice.govt.nz/maori-land-treaty/marine-and-coastal-area/applications/). The majority of these claims are still being processed and full details including their extent have not yet been made publicly available. Once these details are made publicly available by the Ministry of Justice it is possible there may be other overlapping claims along the Coastal Route.

https://www.justice.govt.nz/maori-land-treaty/marine-and-coastal-area/applications/

22


5 Broad description of the sites

5.1 Overview

This section provides an overview of the broader coastal route setting. The subsequent sections provide a broad description of the three sites subject to this application – Mangamaunu, Half Moon Bay and Okiwi Bay.

5.1.1 Geophysical setting

The whole of the coastal route lies within a dynamic environment that is subject to a range of natural events, including earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, and coastal accretion and erosion.

With respect to earthquakes, the Kaikōura area straddles the converging Australian and Pacific Plates and as a result the area has a number of large fault systems, including; the Alpine, Awatere, Clarence, and Hope Faults4. As a result of the Kaikōura earthquake sequence, coastal uplift has occurred along much of the coastal route. GNS Science initial estimates indicate that the coast has risen between 0.5m and 2m, from the area about 20km south of Kaikōura to Cape Campbell in the north5. The Kaikōura earthquake has resulted in uplift along the coast with the location of MHWS effectively moving seaward.

In general, the area is characterised by varying landscapes, from farmland and river valleys to a coastline dominated by steep slopes and cliffs, combined with rough gravel beaches and limestone rocky outcrops6.

5.1.2 Existing transport infrastructure on the coastal route

SH1 between Picton and Christchurch is classified as a National Strategic High Volume State Highway and has traffic volumes of between 2500 to 4000 vehicles per day for most of the route, with approximately 16-20% of traffic being heavy commercial vehicles such as freight trucks7. The coastal route section of SH1 is also a tourist route for motorists and cyclists, and a local purpose route servicing the forestry and agriculture sectors. The coastal route is a key transport linkage, locally, regionally and nationally.

Along the SH1 coastal route there is the highway, two sets of twin tunnels (Paratitahi and Raramai) at 11 km and 14 km south of Kaikōura respectively and a number of bridges and culverts crossing rivers and streams.

The MNL is the only north-south railway between Picton and Christchurch, serving the freight industry and also the scenic tourist journey called the ‘Coastal Pacific’. The coastal section of the MNL is around 200 km of track, including 24 tunnels and a number of bridges, including a viaduct across the Okarahia River.

The highway and rail corridor and the immediately adjacent areas are generally highly modified to provide for the protection and stability of the road and rail transport networks. The transport infrastructure present along the route includes seawalls, coastal protection structures, bridges, culverts, tunnels, embankments, rockfall protection structures and carriageways.

Damage to SH1 and MNL is extensive across the full extent of the coastal route, especially where the networks are in close proximity to the CMA and coastal cliffs and slopes. In other areas, uplift has caused bridges to become separated from the piles and foundations. Works

4 Rattenbury, M.S, Townsend D.B, Johnston, M.R., 2006, Geology of the Kaikōura Area, Institute of Geological & Nuclear Science 1:250 000 Geological Map 13 (GNS, 2006) 5 http://info.geonet.org.nz/display/quake/2016/11/17/Coastal+Uplift%3A+How+has+the+Kaikoura+Coastline+Changed 6 GNS 2006 7 James, Andrew (2016) SH1 Picton to Christchurch (Ashley River Bridge) Strategic Case. NZ Transport Agency

23


to repair this damage are substantially advanced under the existing suite of approvals held by the Agency.

5.1.3 Social and economic environment

The main townships that the coastal route passes through are Kaikōura, Ward, Seddon, and Blenheim. The coastal route traverses a number of small communities, singular baches and small bach communities, small businesses including fishers, food outlets, cafes and guest accommodation. The journey (driving or travelling by rail) along the coastal road is itself part of the tourism experience valued in this area.

Recreational activities along the route outside of the main townships include; fishing, walking tracks, scenic lookouts, picnic spots, camping, and waters sports such as kayaking, surfing, swimming, and diving. Various serviced and non-serviced/informal camping areas are located along the coast.

Tourism is a key industry in the Kaikōura District due to the scenic landscapes, marine ecology and recreational activities on offer. Key tourist and business activities that are located on or adjacent to the coastal route (outside of the main townships) include restaurants, motels, airport, golf course, cave tours, accommodation providers, crayfish sales, river rafting activities, and others.

Recreational and commercial fishing is carried out along the Kaikōura Coast section of the coastal route with a range of regulations and limits in place, which are managed through the Ministry of Primary Industries.

5.1.4 Archaeology values

An archaeological assessment for the entire coastal route is included in Appendix D of this report. In summary, there are a number of known archaeological and heritage sites present in the vicinity of the coastal route works. Although these sites are not necessarily within the works area, they indicate a general presence of archaeological material in the wider works area.

An assessment of the values of the various sites along the coastal route can be found in Section 6 of the archaeological values assessment.

5.1.5 Cultural values

Cultural Impact Assessments (CIA) have been prepared previously by Mahaanui Kurataiao as part of earlier recovery works. These CIA’s for the areas which are subject to this application and are included in Appendix D of this report. Below is a brief summary of the values discussed in the CIAs. It is important to note that there is an ongoing expression of cultural values by the representatives of the RLG as the program has developed. A summary is provided below.

Wāhi ingoa (placenames) on the landscape illustrate the Māori relationship with landscape. Ara tawhito, or a network of trails, is present throughout Te Waipounamu (South Island). These represent historic travel and trade corridors. The Kaikōura coast provided the main coastal corridor, with other trails providing access inland. These trails are responsible for access to the coastal marine and forest areas, and support the history of settlement and population movements in the area.

The Kaikōura coastline is rich in mahinga kai, and is of importance to the Ngāi Tahu way of life, being an important social and economic activity. Resources in the area include various plant species, freshwater fish and kai manu (birds). The earthquakes have already impacted these resources.

24


As part of these works, Te Runanga o Kaikōura have mapped Culturally Sensitive Zones, intended to assist with the resource management process. These Culturally Sensitive Zones include the areas within the works sites across the southern section of the coastal route. These zones include sites of Ngati Kuri cultural significance and Ngai Tahu tribal property land. In general, they are located at the coast and along the river bed areas. The location of these areas are shown on the maps contained with the CIAs.

5.1.6 Marine reserves

There are a number of marine reserves and protected areas located in the CMA adjacent to the SH1 and MNL corridor along the coastal route. The areas that are located in proximity to the proposed work sites are:

The Hikurangi Marine Reserve;

The Kaikōura Whale Sanctuary / Te Rohe o Te Whanau Puha;

Otumatu Rocks Wildlife Sanctuary (south of Goose Bay); and

Mataitai Reserve at Oaro and Mangamaunu, and the Oaro / Haumuri Taiāpure – reserves to protect traditional food gathering areas through prohibiting commercial fishing.

5.2 Access to the coastal marine area

The marine area along the Kaikōura coast is accessed for a variety of recreational activities including fishing, diving and shellfish gathering. Various formal and informal parking areas are also used by visitors stopping to take photos, view wildlife and other similar activities. Plans showing the location of access and stopping areas throughout the Coastal Route are attached in Appendix F.

5.3 Mangamaunu

Mangamaunu is an iconic sweeping bay just north of Kaikōura at the edge of the Hapuku River Delta where SH1 and the MNL occupy a wide coastal platform backed by old coastal cliffs and farmland on the inland side.

The coast at this location comprises moraine deposits, glacial outwash gravel and local fan gravels and silts at the delta, some of which have been transported along the coast to form the beach. The beach is backed by moderately steep ranges with numerous small valleys that drain to the coast.

The coast is exposed to relatively high wave energy, particularly during southerly storm conditions, but low tidal currents. The beach has been supplied by sediment discharged from the Hapuku River and transported from the delta. The beach growth is limited due to episodic sediment supply from the river and the headland control to the north.

The earthquake has resulted in an effective seaward translation of coastal processes due to the 0.6 m uplift experienced in this area. This has resulted in less wave effects on the higher parts of the uplifted coastline. It has also generated significant sediment supply due to landslips both along the coast and within the catchments that discharge to the coast. This is likely to result in increased sediment supply over a period of decades since the earthquake compared to the previous period of time.

Offshore of this coast are the popular and nationally recognised surf breaks at Mangamaunu and the Meatworks (recognised in the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement), and as a result this shore is well used for recreational activities and frequently experienced from the sea by surfers.

25


The intertidal and coastal margin area comprises rock cobbles and stony beaches that curve around the southern headland into Mangamaunu Bay. The steepness of beach and bank above varies. The beach substrate is predominantly gravel and cobbles, with habitat suitable for coastal bird species including feeding and nesting habitat for At Risk and Threatened species such as variable oystercatcher and banded dotterel, as well as roosting for shags, gulls and terns. Seals also occasionally haul out on the beach.

A small stream flows through the already consented amenity area, from the base of the adjacent hill under the MNL and SH1 and through the gravels on the beach side of the amenity area. The stream habitat and surrounding vegetation includes tall flaxes and cabbage trees. In some locations steep vegetated banks include large cobbles and boulders providing potential habitat for lizards.

5.4 Half Moon Bay

This stretch of coast line forms a central part of the Kaikoura Coast ONL with distinctive rocky headlands and shore platforms at the base of the steep forested coastal slopes (now dominated by large slips).

The bay is characterised by an exposed steep and eroding rocky foreshore with small pockets of cobble beach environments in embayed locations that are sheltered by the reef environments and the various headlands along the coast.

The coast is exposed to relatively high wave energy, particularly during southerly storm conditions, but low tidal currents. Historically there has been limited sediment supply to the area. The wave energy was balanced with sediment supply to create an environment where finer sediment is transported both offshore and alongshore and the coastline is in a slight erosional state. The erosion rates are typically low due to the rocky nature of the shoreline.

The earthquake has resulted in an effective seaward translation of coastal processes due to the uplift experienced. This has resulted in less wave effects on the higher parts of the uplifted coastline. It has also generated significant sediment supply due to landslips both along the coast and within the catchments that discharge to the coast. This is likely to result in increased sediment supply over a period of decades since the earthquake compared to the previous period of time.

The naturally rugged landward edge of the coast has also been highly modified by already authorised construction activity, including a large linear seawall at the northern end and widened shore platform.

The major breeding colony of NZ fur seal is located at Ohau Point, immediately north of Half Moon Bay. Half Moon Bay includes seal haul out areas and sandy/gravel and rocky beach/shore habitat for coastal bird species including shags, herons, gulls, the At Risk variable oystercatcher and Threatened banded dotterel. The consented construction works already removes some of this habitat in Half Moon Bay (and further north and south).

The footprint below MHWS is largely associated with gravel / cobble substrate beach with some rocky areas. Marine uplift in the coastal and marine environments in Half Moon Bay, as a result of the 2016 earthquake, will have altered the tidal and subtidal zones. In the subsequent time pioneer species are likely to have colonised the new habitats, including potential colonising by paua larvae.

26


5.5 Okiwi Bay South

Okiwi Bay is a large sweeping bay north of Kaikōura which lies within an identified regional ONL. The landscape values that underpin the ONL include the sequence of highly natural bush-clad steep slopes on the landward side of SH1 and the MNL.

The southern end of Okiwi Bay (where the works subject to this application are located) provides rocky shore habitat for a range of marine and coastal species. This includes seal haul out habitat and bird feeding habitat for the variable oystercatcher, as well as roosting for shags, herons, gulls and terns.

Marine uplift in the coastal and marine environments in Okiwi Bay, as a result of the 2016 earthquake, will have altered the tidal zones. In the subsequent time, pioneer species are likely to have colonised the new habitats in the intertidal zone.

27


6 Desktop assessment of the potential effects of the activity

A high level desktop summary of the potential effects of the proposed activity is tabulated below. This section is intended to be a summary only and readers should refer to the full specialist assessments attached in Appendix D for more detailed information.

Effects Assessment summary

Positive effects

The proposed works will continue to facilitate the full, safe and resilient restoration of vehicle and rail access along the coastal route without undue delay. Reinstating safe and resilient vehicle access over the extent of SH1 and rail access along the MNL is essential to further enabling the recovery of the local economy, and the wider regional and national economies which rely on the transportation of goods along the coastal route.

The works will ensure that damaged structures and areas within the Coastal Route are restored with a level of resilience against future natural events including earthquakes. The safety and resilience improvements refined in this application will have positive amenity and recreation effects through the provision of a new shared path and improved facilities which did not exist prior to the earthquake sequence. Ultimately this will contribute to an enhanced coastal route where users enjoy safe, effective and desirable journeys between Christchurch and Picton.

General construction effects

The conditions in Schedule 1 of the OIC (which have applied to all consents to date) contain comprehensive measures to manage and minimise a number of effects associated with construction, including those associated with:

Earthworks;

Erosion and sediment control;

Dust management;

Contaminated land;

Works in watercourses;

Streamworks;

Stormwater discharges;

Coastal works;

Operation of construction machinery and maintenance;

Noise, vibration and lighting;

Ecology;

Reclamation;

Landscape design;

Cultural, heritage and archaeological sites; and

Stakeholder communications.

These conditions have resulted in the implementation of a comprehensive environmental management framework which continues to be applied across all restoration works. This framework has been extensively ‘road tested’ and refined during all works carried out to date, and this process will continue in relation to the works described in this application.

Effects on archaeology

Potential effects on archaeological values are described in the report in Appendix D. The

information below is a summary only. All works potentially impacting on archaeological sites will be managed through a separate authority from Heritage New Zealand.

The potential effects of the various activities proposed along the coastal route are described in the archaeology values assessment. The magnitude of effect depends on the activity being undertaken. There are a number of sites located directly adjacent or within the coastal route SH1 and MNL corridors, and the report makes the following comments in regards to these areas:

“Any ground clearance or widening along the existing formation has the potential to further disturb these sites or uncover further unrecorded buried archaeological remains.

As there is potential for controlled works on the archaeological sites, works in high risk areas or on recorded archaeological sites should be monitored by an archaeologist and any in situ archaeological remains should be investigated and recorded as they are uncovered. Works in other areas will be supervised by archaeologists on an “on call” basis, with regular site checks in medium risk areas.”

28



The recommended management strategy for archaeological sites affected by the project is to avoid those sites which are deemed to have significance, and mitigate the destruction of the remaining sites by way of archaeological investigation under an HNZPT Authority. However, the nature of the works is such that many of the activities are critical in order to preserve the existing alignments. As such, a programme of investigation through monitoring and on call supervision will be followed during the restoration works.

All works will be managed in accordance with the Emergency Archaeological Authority under the HNZPTA and Archaeological Management Plan (AMP) which specifies a process for managing all archaeological aspects during project activities. This has been developed in conjunction with HNZPT, NZ Transport Agency, KiwiRail and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu.

Effects on cultural values

Potential effects on cultural values are described in the CIAs in Appendix D. The

information below is a summary only.

Ongoing engagement with mana whenua will continue through the construction and restoration work. The works subject to this application are likely to impact on areas of cultural and archaeological significance.

Early engagement with mana whenua through the iwi advisor, cultural monitoring, and the compliance with the conditions of the archaeological authority (as approved by Heritage New Zealand) will assist with the management of these effects. Where practicable, works in the CMA will be minimised.

Effects on coastal processes

Potential effects on coastal processes are described in the report in Appendix D. The


The transportation corridor is bounded by the coast and the steep ranges. Both the proximity to the coast and the reasonably energetic wave environment present at this location means that the entire corridor is potentially susceptible to coastal process effects either now, or in the future as part of sea level rise.

Where the proposed works extend closer towards or seaward of the MHWS boundary they will be subject to increased wave energy and this wave energy is likely to increase over time as a result of sea level rise increasing the water depth in the nearshore that allows greater wave heights to reach the coastline.

The potential risks to the assets, including effects of sea level rise have been considered in the design of these assets over the expected design life of around 50 years. The other risks of increased erosion and downcutting of the natural system should be monitored and the effects reviewed at no less than 10 yearly increments.

Due to the existing elevations there is no likelihood of permanent inundation (i.e. the parts of the transport corridor becoming permanently situated under future MHWS) occurring along the transport corridor as a result of sea level rise over the expected life of the asset.

Wave run-up and overtopping during significant onshore storms are physical processes that are unlikely to be able to be totally avoided due to the coastal location of the transport corridor. As the works are largely located at existing ground levels, a similar overtopping environment will occur at the location of these works, requiring maintenance and clean up after significant events.

Long term effects on the coastal environment are generally limited due to the proposed design being set back (landward) of the present MHWS location and the use of a sloping relatively permeable rock armour or concrete armour unit fronted by a cobble remnant beach. The rock armour toe and remnant beach will perform very similarly to the previous coastal edge and no significant change to wave processes are expected. Wave reflection rates are likely to be in the order of 20 to 40% (CIRIA/CUR, 2007). These rates are similar to the reflection rates of mixed sand gravel beaches that tend to reflect more energy than both sand and shingle beaches (De San Román Blanco, 2003).

The proposed works around Mangamaunu Point and the surf break will extend onto the upper beach system, but will not extend seaward of MHWS. The rock revetment is likely to reflect slightly more energy than the existing cobble beach, but will not be exposed to wave energy apart from during significant onshore storm events when wave set-up and

29



run-up exceed around 3.5 m RL. This is likely to occur once or twice a year. During storm events the crest of gravel and cobble beaches tend to move landward.

The process of landward migration of gravels and cobbles during storms will assist in screening the rock revetments, further minimising the potential effect of wave reflection.

As a result any small increase in wave reflection that occurs during significant onshore wave events at high tide levels is not anticipated to result in adverse effects seaward of MHWS.

The majority of construction processes on the upper foreshore areas is related to excavation and movement of existing beach sediment and rock boulders that occupy some areas proposed to form the road and rail corridor and the foundations of the protection works. These works occur over a relatively short length of the route and will be carried out over short sections to manage the risk of storm damage and sediment discharge.

The beach sediments that originally were acted on by tidal and wave forces are expected to be largely free from fines and silts, although there may be a greater proportion of finer sediments in the upper part of the beach systems which may have been delivered to the area by landslides and from abrasion and wind-blown material from the intertidal beach/reef face. Based on visual observation during the site visit, the amount of fine sediments is still expected to be low in these area.

The result of moving the existing beach sediment to clear the construction area is likely to release some fines to the coastal marine area where the bund is within the swash zone of the beach/reef system and can be periodically be acted on by waves. This is likely to manifest as a zone of slightly higher turbidity in the wave breaking zone. However, during higher wave energy events there is also likely to be significantly greater turbidity in the nearshore surf zone with higher levels of suspended sediment concentrations resulting from natural wave breaking processes and abrasion.

Overall the construction effects on the coastal processes operating on this area are anticipated to be less than minor.

Effects on ecology and freshwater

The potential effects on ecology are discussed in the report in Appendix D. The


The activities covered in this application will have varying effects from moderate-high on ecological values present at each of the sites. These effects assessments are tabulated in the table contained in Section 4 of the ecology report.

The project works are underpinned by a suite of ecological principles. These principles aim to manage the ecological effects of the project works, by:

Minimising or where possible avoiding permanent habitat loss, loss of rare ecosystems, and habitat fragmentation.

Minimising effects on water, alteration to natural hydrology patterns, and the potential for the spread of pest plants.

The consideration of these principles against the proposed works are discussed in Section 5 of the ecology report.

Where realignments and improvements are proposed, these footprints should be minimised as much as possible. During construction, seals and coastal avifauna should be managed in accordance with the project procedures for wildlife. Seal fences should be established where necessary to prevent seal movement onto the restored road and rail corridor. The new shared path should be integrated with existing road and rail bridges where possible, and armouring and embankments along waterways should be minimised where possible. Wildlife monitoring (including in relation to the presence of fur seals) will be undertaken in consultation with the project ecologist as required under the OIC.

30



Effects on landscape and visual values

Potential effects on landscape and visual values are fully described in the report in Appendix D. The information below is a summary only.

At Mangamaunu, the proposed rock revetment will occupy more of the cobble beach area landward of MHWS than the consented sea wall. While the sloped and textured nature of a rock revetment structure may appear more ‘natural’ than a vertical concrete block seawall, its scale and extent will still be a dominant man made element of this particular coastline. The revetment structure together with the widened platform will impact on the sense of naturalness experienced by people visiting the coast.

The visual change of the proposed revetment will be apparent from many locations along the Mangaumanu coast, transport corridor, shared path and amenity area as well as from the surf reef off shore. The visual change resulting from the seaward shift of the footprint and revetment slope to replace the seawall will be noticeable from the sea. However, the textured and sloping rock revetment would appear slightly more ‘natural’ than a seawall. As described above the streamlined profile of this beach provides less capacity to visually absorb a structure of this scale (compared to a steep rocky shoreline).

At Half Moon Bay, the site lies within an identified regional ONL. The landscape values that underpin the ONL include the sequence of highly natural bush-clad steep slopes to the shoreline, including the state highway and railway. The proposed works will not impact on the ONL values when considered at this wider scale.

Replacement of the vertical sea wall at Half Moon Bay with a sloping textured revetment is a slightly better option in terms of landscape character. The sloping and highly textured nature of the revetment as it undulates along the coastline will result in a more ‘naturalised’ built element that contrasts less with the rocky coastal environment than a smooth and vertical seawall. In addition the sloping revetment face potentially enables access to the coast from the shared path. The visual effects of the proposed modifications would be relatively contained from distant views along the coast but easily viewed from the close proximity of the shared path, road and rail.

At Okiwi Bay South the site lies within an identified regional ONL. The landscape values that underpin the ONL include the sequence of highly natural bush-clad steep slopes on the landward side of the state highway and railway. The proposed works will not impact on the ONL values when considered at this wider scale.

While the proposed works will increase the bulk of the modified coastal edge the form and texture of the revetment will be similar to the consented design. Overall, the proposed works will not significantly change the landscape character of this part of the coast.

The revetment structures, and transport infrastructure in the widened coastal platform will be most visible from the shared path, SH1 and Okiwi Bay beach. While the seaward alignment of a section of the revetment will change, the appearance of the proposed structure will be very similar to the already consented one in terms of its scale, form, colour and texture. From more distant locations such as the middle or northern end of the beach the proposed structure would be visually similar to the consented one.

Cumulative landscape, natural character and visual effects will require ongoing consideration as part of the detailed design process across all three sites.

31


7 Conditions of consent

All resource consents granted for restoration work to date have included a modified form of the “Schedule 1” conditions under the OIC. These modifications are a consequence of the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail agreeing to various amendments recommended by the consent authorities in prior consenting processes under the OIC.

During the drafting of the OIC the Schedule 1 conditions had input by specialists as relevant to the topic in question; for example, Condition 16 - Ecology had detailed input from a qualified and experienced ecologist. Taken as a complete set, the Schedule 1 conditions form a comprehensive suite of measures to avoid, remedy and mitigate any adverse effects on the environment.

The modified Schedule 1 conditions are already being fully implemented and complied with through the existing resource consents, and these are regularly monitored by a dedicated monitoring officer acting on behalf of the regulatory authorities. Both the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail consider that these conditions form an appropriate foundation for the consents sought under these current applications because:

For restoration work to date, the existing conditions have proven to be very effective for managing environmental performance;

The applications seek only relatively minor amendments to an existing consented footprint (in other words, for the purposes of assessing environmental effects the existing environment already includes a large footprint within which a range of environmental effects are authorised; the proposal only seeks to amend this footprint in a minor way)

Maintaining consistency in the conditions of the various consent packages will assist in the continued effective and efficient implementation and monitoring of environmental performance across the entirety of the coastal route.

Both applicants are happy to consider any further changes that arise as a result of the written comments process and consideration by the consent authorities. As noted earlier in Section 2.5, any new conditions need to be within the scope of the consent authorities’ control. Consistent with standard resource management practice, any new conditions must also, among other things:

Be for a resource management purpose and relevant to the subject matter of the consent,

Not require approval or compliance by third parties; and

Not preclude or nullify the consent applied for.

Table 3 overleaf provides a summary of the Schedule 1 conditions along with a cross-reference to further discussion in this report. A full list of the modified OIC conditions, which the applicants are prepared to accept on the current applications, is contained in Appendix E.

32


Table 3: Proposed consent conditions

OIC condition Summary of purpose Discussed further in

1. Authorised activities

Limits the authorised activities to the restoration work identified in the application.

Section 3

2. Definitions Contains various definitions used for terms in other conditions.

Not discussed further in this application

3. Iwi Adviser Engagement of an iwi adviser and a team of cultural monitors to provide on-site guidance to enable effective management of cultural indicators (for example, mahinga kai).

Section 6 and Appendix D – Cultural Impact Assessment

4. Restoration Liaison Group

Formation and implementation of the restoration liaison group to inform design, management and monitoring of construction works.

Section 4

5. Construction environmental management plan

Comprehensive plan outlining roles and responsibilities, procedures, and processes for managing the construction effects of restoration work.

Appendix G – CEMP

6. Earthworks Undertake earthworks in accordance with the best methods available at the time of construction, including all reasonable steps in the circumstances to avoid adverse effects on freshwater and marine water environments beyond the project boundary.

Section 3.4 and Appendix G – CEMP

7. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) is required to ensure compliance with Condition 6.

Section 3.4.2

8. Dust management

Prevent, as far as practicable, dust that arises from construction activities from spreading beyond the boundary of the project area.

Section 3.4.1 and Appendix G – CEMP

9. Contaminated land

Any material removed from an identified contaminated site must be disposed of at an appropriate facility.


10. Stormwater discharge

Design requirements for the management and discharge of stormwater.

Section 3.4, Section 6 and Appendix G – CEMP

11. Coastal works All works in the coastal marine area to be undertaken in accordance with an ESCP (Condition 7) and to be designed by a suitably qualified engineer and ecologist, having regard to the ecological principles (Condition 16).

Section 3.4, Section 6, Appendix D – Coastal Assessment, and Appendix G – CEMP

12. Construction machinery and maintenance

All vehicles entering the coastal marine area to be in a good state of repair; requirements for refuelling and spill response.


13. Construction noise

Comply, as far as practicable, with NZS 6803:1999. Section 3.4.1 and Appendix G – CEMP

33


OIC condition Summary of purpose Discussed further in

14. Ecology Establishment of ecological principles to inform the design, management and monitoring of all construction works; ecological survey of construction areas required.

Section 6 and Appendix D – Ecology Assessment

15. Reclamation design

Requirement to supply the consent authority with design drawings of ay proposed reclamation in the coastal marine area.

Appendix B – Design drawings

16. Fill and spoil placement

All fill material used for reclamation must be cleanfill in accordance with the Ministry for the Environment definition.


17. Review of conditions

Provision for review of conditions in accordance with Section 128(1)(a) of the RMA.

Not discussed further in this application

34


8 Conclusion

These applications will enable amendments to the consent footprint at three sites – Mangamaunu, Half Moon Bay and Okiwi Bay South – which will contribute to the ongoing repair, rebuild and enhancement of the coastal route.

A broad description of the works and a desktop assessment of the potential effects of the works has been provided in this report in accordance with the OIC.

The works proposed as part of this application, along with the suite of works already authorised and underway, are anticipated to provide for the full, effective and safe restoration of SH1 and the MNL in line with the overarching purpose of the OIC.

Prepared by Bill Harrington and Daniel Murray

NCTIR Planner and NCTIR Environment Team Leader (Regulatory)

Reviewed and approved for release by

Manea Sweeney NCTIR Environmental Manager

Authorised for KiwiRail by

Rebecca Beals RMA Team Leader

Authorised for NZ Transport Agency by

Richard Shaw NZ Transport Agency Principal Planner – Consenting and Community

Appendix A: Consent application form

Appendix B: Design drawings

Appendix C: Existing OIC approvals summary

Appendix D: Technical reports

Ecology

Landscape

Coastal processes

Archaeology

Cultural Impact Assessment

Appendix E: Resource consent conditions

Appendix F: Coastal route access plans

Appendix G: Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

and Other Matters) Order 2016 Consent Footprint Amendments€¦ · 3.1 Overview of amendments 10...

Documents

Transcript of and Other Matters) Order 2016 Consent Footprint Amendments€¦ · 3.1 Overview of amendments 10...