1

PORTFUTURE STUDY

PORTFUTURE STUDYJuly 2016Recommendations report of the Consensus Working Group

2

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Table of Contents

3 Listoffigures3 Glossary5 Executivesummary7 Introduction9 Studyprocess9 Studydesign10 Memberselectionprocess10 ReferenceGroup10 ConsensusWorkingGroup11 Studyscope12 Methodology13 CWGinformationgathering

13 TestingofoutputswithReferenceGroup

13 Consultant’spaper

15 GrowthofAuckland’sport

18 Twooptionsforlocatinganewport

21 Expandormove?

22 Timingofamove

24 Conclusionsandrecommendations

26 ConsensusWorkingGroupmembers

3

PORTFUTURE STUDY

List of figures

figure two: Studytimelinefigure three: ConsensusWorkingGroupMethodologyfigure four: Waitematāshorelinesection-1840

Glossary

ADCAucklandDevelopmentCommittee(committeeofAucklandCouncil)ATAP AucklandTransportAlignmentProject

ATEED AucklandTourism,EventsandEconomicDevelopment

CostBenefitAnalysis-analysis that aims to assess the value of a project or competing projects on a quantitative basisCentralBusinessDistrict(incitycentre)

FergussonTerminalplusFreyberg,Jellicoe,Bledisloe,Marsden,CaptainCookWharves,includingwhatiscurrentlyconsentedasatJuly2016.

ConsensusWorkingGroupErnst&Young,tradingasEYGrossDomesticProduct

InvestmentLogicMap-output of workshops which bring together key stakeholders to ensure early agreement on problems, outcomes and benefits before any investment decisions are made or a specific solution is identifiedMulti Criteria Analysis -analysis which assesses potential options against a set of qualitative criteria to identify those which would give the better outcomes.

NewZealandTransportAgency

PortFutureStudy(TheStudy)WorldAssociationforWaterbourneTransportInfrastructurePortsofAucklandLimited

ProposedAucklandUnitaryPlanReferenceGroupShort:2015-2040,medium:2040-2065,long2065onwardsTwenty-footEquivalentUnit-thenominalstandardintermodalcontainer

NetPresentValue

figure five: Longlistoptionsfigure six: Shortlistoptions

figure one: WaitematāHarbourandtheport9

12161921

4

CBA

CBD

Currentfootprint

CWG EY

GDP

ILM

MCA

NPVNZTAPFS

PIANCPOAL

PAUPRG

TermTEU

4

PORTFUTURE STUDY

figure one:WaitematāHarbourandtheportsource: POAL port booklet 2014

5

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Executive summary

ThePortFutureStudy’sobjective is to recommenda longtermstrategyfortheprovisionoffacilitiestoaccommodatesea-based imports and exports and the cruise industryflowing to and from Auckland and its wider region in aneconomically, socially, culturally and environmentallyacceptable manner, taking into account competing usesforcitycentrewaterfrontspaceandthevariousimpactsofoptions.

The Study was designed by and conducted for AucklandCouncil. Thedesigncalled foran independentConsensusWorkingGroup(CWG)todeveloprecommendations. TheCWG provided information to a Representative Group(RG) comprising stakeholders and iwi representatives andreceived their guidance.Aconsulting study ledbyEYwasconductedto identifyandassess theoptions. This reportshouldbereadinconjunctionwiththeConsultant’sreport.

Three issues were agreed by the CWG as foundations for the Port Future Study:

1. Capacity will constrain the port’s ability to meetfuturefreightandcruisedemands,whichmaylimiteconomicgrowthinthelongterm

2. Tension between, and competition for, limitedresources for theCBDandPOALwill lead to sub-optimaloutcomesforoneorboth

3. Port activities create environmental, economic,social and cultural impacts which need to beunderstoodandaddressed

ThePortFutureStudyfoundthat:Inconsideringtheoptions;1)constraintheport,2)downsizetheport,3)relocatetradevolume,4)growtheport,5)buildanewport,theCWGkeyfindingsreachedbyconsensusare:

• BasedonEY’sfindings,theexistingPortwillnotbeabletoaccommodatethelongtermfreighttaskandcruiseonthecurrentfootprint.

• That no further reclamation beyond whatis already consented in the port precinct isrequired for freight purposes in the short tomediumterm.

• Thereisaneedtosecuresufficientberthlengthinthemulti-cargoareafortheshorttomediumterm.

• Short-term pathways need to be createdto enable the Port to continue to operateefficientlyprior to aplannednewPortbeingestablisheddue to thesubstantial leadtimesinvolved.Inthisregard,theCWGidentifiesthatadditionalberthlengthneedstobeprovidedto fulfil the shortandmediumtermcapacityrequirementsofthePortinresponsetocruiseandmulti-cargorequirements.

• Retaining thebulkofport functionsprovidesa more feasible and superior outcomefor Auckland, rather than shedding cargoelsewhere or downsizing Auckland’s freighttask,intheshorttomediumterm.Sheddingordownsizingfreightoperationsmayweakenthecaseformovingtheport.

• In the long term, other existingNorth IslandportswillbeunabletocopewiththetotalityoftheAucklandfreighttasktogetherwiththeirowncapacityrequirements

• CruiseindustryfacilitiesshouldberetainedandimprovedinAuckland’scitycentre

• Two possible new port locations - ManukauHarbour and Firth of Thames - have beenidentified as warranting more detailedinvestigation

• The triggers for a move would compriseeconomic, social, environmental and culturaltriggers that make a move beneficial ordemand/economictriggersthatmakeamovenecessarytoachieve longtermoutcomesforAuckland.

6

PORTFUTURE STUDY

The CWG’s recommendations to Auckland Councilarethefollowing:Note, the CWG’s recommendations are offered as anintegratedpackage.Adoptingsomerecommendationswhilenotimplementingotherscouldresultinadverseunintendedconsequences.

1. A port relocation option is established for freight, noting:

• Iftheportismoved,thencruiseshipsshouldcontinuetobeaccommodatedneartheCBD

2. Comprehensive investigation of the identified location area options - Manukau Harbour and the Firth of Thames - is undertaken to decide which specific option is chosen, noting:

• Investigationtoidentifythespecificrelocationoptionshouldincludeconsiderationofatleast:

– Thelongtermengineeringrequirements,navigability,safetyandavailabilityoftheManukauandFirthofThamesoptions

– The effect of a west coast versus eastcoast location on shipping and thecompetitiveness of the Auckland portandthenationalsupplychain

– Thewiderandlongtermimplicationsofwest coast versus east coast locationsincluding on Auckland’s long termtransportstrategy,landusedevelopment,land-sidefreightroutesandthepotentialforasuper-port

– Mana whenua values, views andopportunities for each of the potentialsitesidentified

– The environmental impacts of the newsiteandanalysisofconsentingpathways

– How andwhen any new port could befunded

3. Regular monitoring of relocation triggers is undertaken to identify the time at which the port relocation option should be exercised, noting:

• The port may move when the social,environmental, cultural, economic, urbandevelopmentorotherconditionsindicatethatmovingtheportisbeneficialforthecitycentre,orAucklandorNewZealand

• Theportmaymovewhenexpecteddemandgrowth, expected capacity growth and thetimerequiredtocompletethemove indicatethatmovingtheporthasbecomenecessary

• It is possible that Auckland’s future unfoldsin a way that neither of the triggers for thebeneficialornecessarycaseswillbe“pulled”,which would mean that the port wouldaccommodate long-term demand at thecurrentsite

4. Subject to confirmed and credible commitment to establishing a port relocation option and to establishing sufficient additional berth length to accommodate expected growth in large cruise and multi-cargo vessels, the port should not expand beyond its current footprint, noting:

• TheworkdonesofarfortheCentralWharvesStrategyimpliestheneedforadditionalcruiseberths and the Consultant’s report endorsesPOAL’s case that additional long berths arerequiredtoaccommodateexpectedshortandmedium-termgrowthincruiseandmulti-cargooperations

• TheConsultanthasrecommendedanortherneast-westberthatBledisloeWharfand theCWG is in agreement that a northern berthpresents a viable short-term option. Exactspecifications to meet future berth demandwillbeworkedthrough.

• The CWG recognises mana whenua andcommunityoppositiontoanyfurtherextensionofportoperationsintotheharbourandthatdecidingtheplantoprovidetherequiredberthcapacitywillrequirerigorousidentificationandevaluationofalternativeoptions

• ThePortFutureStudyisastudytoprovidealong-termstrategyforthelocationoftheportandthereareestablishedprocessesforshort-termberthprovisiondecisions

7

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Introduction

TradeiscriticaltoAuckland’sprosperity.NewZealandisasmall, isolatedtradingnationandmostinternationaltradeisbysea.TheAucklandporthasbeenandremainsaveryimportant contributor to the economic well-being andgrowthofAucklandandofNewZealand.

The first elements of Auckland’s port as we see it todaywereestablishedinthemid-to-late1800’s,howeverTāmakiharbourshadbeenpliedbywakaformanyyearsbeforethat.TheconfluenceofpeopleandtradeinthearealedtoitalsobeingknownasTāmakiHerengaWaka-Tāmakithegathererofmanycanoes.

ThecityofAucklandbegantogrowaroundtheearlyportwharves inCommercialBayand laterexpansionalongthewaterfrontonlandreclaimedfromtheWaitematā.Havingthe port adjacent to the city centrewas importantwhenthecitywassmallandfreightmobilitylimited.AsAucklandhasgrown,thesourceanddestinationoffreightshipmentshasspreadoutandisbecomingmoreconcentratedinthesouthernpartsofthecity.

InrecentdecadestheCBDhasbecomeacommercialandconsumptioncentre. TheCBD,waterfrontandWaitematāHarbour provide recreational opportunities for residentsandvisitorsandcontributetoliveabilty.TheCBDisexpectedtogrowinpopulationandtourismnumbersareprojectedtoincrease.

The growth of trade alongside growth of the inner citycommunitiesandincreasingrecreationaluseoftheharbourhas led to tensionbetween theport and the community.Thistension‘boiledover’withthe2015proposalbyPOALtoextendBledisloeWharf98metresoutintotheharbour.Expansionwas stoppedbyaHighCourtactionboughtbyUrbanAuckland.

ThattensionhascontributedtothePortFutureStudybeingcommissionedbyAucklandCouncilandtotheStudy’sscopeincludingthesocial,culturalandenvironmentalimpactsoflocationoptions.

With Auckland’s population projected to grow to around2.5mpeopleinthenext50years,thequestionofhowgrowthin trade will be accommodated is critical to Auckland’seconomicfuture.Aucklandscoresverywellonthenaturaland physical environment dimensions of liveability butlesswell on economic performance. Economic success isimportantforthewell-beingofthegrowingpopulationandfor affordability of the infrastructure that will be neededtokeepthecityoperatingeffectively. However,economicsuccess that diminishes liveability, is inconsistent withcultural and social values and harms the environment islikelytobeashort-livedsuccess.

AucklandCouncilhasseveralkeyresponsibilitiesrelevanttotheport’sfuture. It istheowneroftheportviaAucklandCouncil Investments Limited; an important regulator viathedistrictplanandgrantingofconsents;andtheshaperoftheurbanformviatheAucklandPlanandotherplanningprocesses.

AucklandCouncil is also thedelegatedagent for ensuringthat the Crown’s statutory obligations to Māori underthe Treaty of Waitangi are given effect to or taken intoaccount. Auckland Council is the steward for the cultural,environmental, social and economic sustainability ofAuckland,andtheStudy’srecommendationsrecogniseandhighlightportissueswhichimpacttherelationshipsamongcitizens, ratepayers, residents,manawhenua,visitors,andcustomersofAuckland.

8

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Aucklandmustdeveloplongterminvestmentstrategiesforcriticalinfrastructureincircumstanceswheretheinvestmentdecisions, once made, require large and irreversiblecapital commitments with important cultural, social andenvironmentalconsequences.Theprovisionoffutureportfacilitiesisoneexample.Aucklandmustdecidesoonhowtoprovideforthefuturegrowthofportcapacityandaboutthe implicationsof that long termstrategy for short termport development plans. The CWG’s recommended longtermport strategy is beingdeveloped in the context of agreatdealofuncertaintyaboutfuturefreightdemandandtechnology potential, alongside strong community groupadvocacy for constraining port expansion, relocating theportandusing thesitecurrentlyoccupiedby theport forotheruses.Modernportredevelopmentsusuallyintroduceamixofresidential,commercialandamenityuses.

ThechallengeforthePortFutureStudyistofindthebestportlocationsolutionthatbalanceslongtermeconomic,cultural,social and environmental outcomes. The economy andpeopleofAucklanddependontradebutmodernindustrialports have adverse cultural, social and environmentalimpacts.

ThreeissueswereagreedbytheConsensusWorkingGroupasfoundationsforthePortFutureStudy:

1. Capacity will constrain the port’s ability to meetfuturefreightandcruisedemands,whichmaylimiteconomicgrowthinthelongterm

2. Tension between, and competition for, limitedresources for theCBDandPOALwill lead to sub-optimaloutcomesforoneorboth

3. Port activities create environmental, economic,social and cultural impacts which need to beunderstoodandaddressed

In leading the Port Future Study, the ConsensusWorkingGrouphasbeenconsciousofitsaccountabilitytothepeopleofAuckland,andthat,whilenotingthescopewas limitedto accommodatingAuckland’s freight and cruise task, theStudy’s recommendationsmay have effects on thewiderregionandonNewZealandasawhole.

If theport locationdecisionwassimple,thenthesolutionwould have emerged already from the many studiesconducted previously. Many people we have spokenwithandheard fromduring thecourseof the studyhaveexpressedconfidencethattheyhavetheanswerandhaveofferedreasonsfortheirproposedsolutions.Thesolutionsproposedandreasonsofferedarediverseandthethingtheyhavemostincommonistheconfidencewithwhichtheyareexpressed.AstheCWGhasdevelopedsharedunderstandingoftheportlocationissueswehavefoundthattheissueiscomplex and multi-faceted, and that decisions must bemadesooninthecontextofuncertaintiesthatcannotyetberesolved.

Further, all of the feasible options identified in the Studywouldrequirematerialexpenditureandwouldhaveharmfulcultural,socialandenvironmentalimpacts.Thechallengeistofindthebestsolutionthatprotectsfuturetradeandcruisesecurity, best realises the aspirations of Aucklanders andcontributestothevisionofbeingtheWorld’smostliveablecity,withtheleastcostandharm.

9

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Study DesignTheAucklandCouncildesignedthePortFutureStudyasaMāoriandstakeholdercollaborativeprocesstodevelopandrecommend a strategy to accommodate Auckland’s long-termfuturefreightandcruiseneeds.

A ConsensusWorking Group (CWG) and larger ReferenceGroup (RG) have been the vehicles for this collaborativeprocess. Both groups have been led by an externalIndependent Chair and were without council officer orelectedrepresentativerepresentation.

The CWG was resourced to engage consultant expertiseto assist in evidence gathering and recommendationformulation.Inthisway,theStudywaseffectively‘handedover’tocommunity,advocacy,businessandiwiinterestsforthedevelopmentofrecommendationstoCouncil.

TheCWGisrequiredtoprovideitsrecommendationtotheAucklandDevelopmentCommitteeoftheAucklandCouncil.The CWG hasworked together to understand the issues,invitedpresentationsfromexternalorganisations,metwiththeRGandreviewedtheevidenceandconclusionsfromtheConsultant’sreportinordertodevelopits’ownconclusionsandrecommendations.

ThePortFutureStudyisastudyanditwasnotmandatedto conduct a consultation or take decisions but rather toproviderecommendationsonalongtermstrategytocouncilfor consideration. Further investigative, consultative andregulatoryworkwillberequiredbeforetherecommendedstrategytosecurethelongtermfutureforfreightandcruisecouldbeimplemented.

TheCWGisawarethatthereareseveral investigativeanddecisionprocessesinprogressthatareconsideringmattersthat could interact with or affect the Port Future Study’sconclusions.AucklandTransportAlignmentProject(ATAP),the CentralWharves Strategy, ProposedAucklandUnitaryPlan(PUAP)andSeaChange–TaiTimuTaiPariareexamininginfrastructure issueswhichconnectwith thoseconsideredwithinthePortFutureStudyFiguretwopresentsthePortFutureStudytimeline

Study process

figure two:Studytimeline

July2015

August2015

September2015

October2015

November2015

December2015

January2016

February2016

March2016

April2016

May2016

June2016

July2016

SelectionofCWGandRGmembers

FirstmeetingoftheCWG

Scopefinalised

AppointmentofIndependentChair

Opentender

AppointmentofConsultants

CWGfinalrecommendationstoAucklandCouncil

RGmeeting:draftrecommendations

RGmeeting:shortlist

RGmeeting:longlist

RGmeeting:Studyscope

June2015

August2016

10

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Reference Group Member SelectionThe purpose of the RG was to represent and report tostakeholdersandiwiduringthestudy,receiveupdatesfromtheCWGandundertakeworkifrequiredbytheCWG.

ThePFSwasestablished in thecontextof thepartnershipbetweenAucklandCouncilandIwiwithintheframeworkoftheTreatyofWaitangiwhichincludesactivemanawhenuainvolvementinco-governanceofwahapū(harbours)andinguardianship(Kaitiakitanga)oflandandmarineresourcesaswellasrecognisingtheinterestsofMāoriineconomicandsocialdevelopment.

Twoseparateselectionprocessesraninparallelattheoutsetof the study that reflected both stakeholder and manawhenua interests intheproject.StakeholderorganisationswereidentifiedbycouncilprojectstaffandinitiallypresentedtotheADCon14May2015,leadingtotheselectionbythoseorganisationsof64individualsrepresenting46organisationsfromenvironmentaladvocacy,businessesthattradedirectlyandindirectlywiththeport,communitygroups,recreationalmarinegroups,specialinterestgroups,commercialinterestgroupsandPOAL.ManawhenuaiwichairsmetwithMayorLen Brown 14 July 2015 to determine mana whenuaparticipationinthestudy.Atthemeeting,iwichairsofferedrepresentatives of the 13 iwi of the Tāmaki Collective aswell as Waikato-Tainui as the vehicle for mana whenuamembership of the RG, which resulted in 15 individualsjoiningtheRGleadingtoatotalof79RGmembers.

Officers and elected representatives were not invited toparticipate asmembers of the RG as itwas decided thatgovernance functions and responsibilities would playout after the study, following the receptionof the CWG’srecommendationstocouncil.

TheCWGdistributedinformationtoandmetwiththeRGtoreceivefeedbackontheprocessandemergingconclusions.The RG met with the CWG on 30 September 2015, 19February2016,13April2016and15June2016.Attendancesatmeetingsreflectedturnoutof30-40%.

Consensus Working Group Member SelectionThe CWG was tasked with steering the Study, engagingand directing consultants and testing outputs with theRG. The CWG’s ultimate purpose was to further theircollective understanding of the issues and formulaterecommendations,byconsensus,foralongtermstrategytoaccommodateAuckland’stradeandcruisetask.

Collaborative process theory suggested groups of around12-16memberswereoptimal.Inordertobemosteffective,CWG membership was to be representative of diverseperspectives. Four CWG seats were reserved for manawhenuarepresentatives.OneseatwasreservedfortheCEOofPOAL.Elevenseatsweremadeavailableforrepresentativesfrom stakeholder organisations. Members were expectedtoactas representatives for theirorganisationsaswellasfor other RG members who were not selected for CWGmembership.

At their meeting with theMayor on 14 July 2015,manawhenuaoffered the three iwi groupingsof the13TāmakiCollectiveasthemechanismtoselectCWGmanawhenuarepresentatives. A representative from Waikato-Tainuiwas included to reflect the boundaries of the iwi’s rohe.This method produced 4 mana whenua CWG membersappointed by Ngāti Whātua, Marutūahu, Waikato-Tainui,andtheWaiohua-Tāmakialliance.

Theremaining11membersoftheCWGwereselectedatthestakeholderplenary9July2015byRGmembersthroughafacilitatedsession.AlistofCWGmembersisincludedintheappendix.

MembershipoftheCWGplacedconsiderabledemandsonthe individuals involvedandontheorganisationstheyarefrom.Themeetingschedulewasdemandingandtherewasoftenagreatdealofpreparationrequired.Meetingswereoften contentious but always constructive and there wasa strong value thatmemberswere there to find the bestpossiblelongtermsolutionforAuckland.

Individual members had to navigate their obligationsas members of a group tasked with developing sharedunderstandingandworking towardsaconsensussolution,while at the same time representing constituencies withdistinctandsometimesconflictinginterests.

11

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Studyscope

ThedesignofthestudywasdevelopedbyAucklandCounciland includedadraft scopeof the studywhicharticulatedthe options for analysis and provided a table of social,environmental, culturalandeconomicconsiderations.ThisdraftscopewaspresentedtotheCWGat itsfirstmeetingandwasadaptedbytheCWGtoformafinalscope.

TheStudy’sscoperequiredconsiderationoffiveoptions:

1. ConstrainingAuckland’sporttoitscurrentfootprint

2. DownsizeAuckland’sportbyshiftingsomeof theoperationstoanotherlocation

3. Relocating some or all volume or activity ofAuckland’sport

4. Enabling growth of Auckland’s port in its currentlocation

5. Buildinganewportelsewhere

TheStudyisrequiredtoconsiderafutureperiodofatleast50yearsforthepurposesoffuturelocationoptions,andforfreightestimationsnotlessthan30years.

The study design specified that the CWG would appointconsultantstoconducttheinvestigation.

The study design further specifies that the consultants’methodology would identify a long-list of options beforeidentifying a short-list for more in-depth analysis. Theconsultants were tasked with the development of arecommendedlongtermstrategy,supportedbycompellingevidencethattherecommendedsolutionisbetterthanthealternative.

TheCWGprovidedthefinalscopeforthePortFutureStudyto the Auckland Development Committee on 15 October2015togetherwiththestudyobjective:

“The Port Future Study will recommend a long term strategy for the provision of facilities to accommodate sea-based imports and exports and the cruise industry flowing to and from Auckland and its wider region in an economically, socially, culturally and environmentally acceptable manner, taking into account competing uses for city centre waterfront space and the various impacts of options.”

12

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Methodology

The methodology of the Port Future Study had severalcomponents. In preparation of its recommendations, theCWG worked to develop three inputs: CWG informationgathering(includingCWGandinvitedexternalpresentations);input from the study’s RGon studyoutputs including thedraft recommendations and a technical paper preparedbyconsultants.Thesecomponentsarepresented infigurethreebelow.

figure three:ConsensusWorkingGroupMethodology

CWGmethodology

1. EstablishPFSobjective

2. DetermineStudyscope

3. AppointConsultants

4. WorkwithConsultants

5. Developunderstandingofissues

6. ReceiveConsultants’report

7. Formulaterecommendations

8. DeliverrecommendationstoAucklandCOuncil

Consultantmethodology

1. Determinestrategiccontext

2. Developlonglistofviableareasandcriteria

3. Assesslonglistbasedonthemesofcontain,movepartsoftheoperations,shrink,grow,ordevelopnewport

4. Developshortlistviamulticriteriaanalysis(MCA)andpeerreviewedcostbenefitanalysis(CBA)

5. Developrecommendations

6. Writereport

13

PORTFUTURE STUDY

CWG information gatheringTheCWGmet22timesduringthecourseoftheprojectforatleastfourtofivehoursoneachoccasion.CWGmembersusedthistime toprepare the study scope,makepresentationsto one another on the issues and perspectives in play,work with the consultants, review invited presentationsfromexternalpresenters1 anddiscuss implicationsof theevidencepresented.

Testing of outputs with RGTheCWGdistributedinformationtoandmetwiththeRGtoreceivefeedbackontheprocessandemergingconclusions.The RG met with the CWG on 30 September 2015, 19February2016,13April2016and15June2016.MeetingsweretwotothreehoursindurationfollowedbyadebriefsessionforCWGmembers.AteachstageofthestudytheCWG took the feedback of the RG into account beforeproceeding.

Consultant’s reportFollowing an open tender2, in November 2015 the CWG,supported by Auckland Council’s procurement team,appointedaconsortiumledbyEYfordeliveryoftheconsultingservices.TheconsortiumcomprisedEY(economic,financialand consortium lead, with EY Tahi as cultural andMāorioutcomelead),BlackQuay(strategicportplanning),Jasmax(urban planning), GHD (landside engineering support),Aurecon (landside transport planning), eCoast (naturalenvironment),JLL(propertyandlandholding)

TheConsultantdelivereditsdraftreporttotheCWGonApril302016anditsfinalreporttotheCWGon22June2016.

Having chosen theappointedConsultant fromamong thebidders,theCWGreliedupontheConsultanttoimplementthemethodology. TheCWGwasengagedthroughouttheconsultingstage,reviewingprogressandprovidingguidanceandinputtotheconsultants.TheCWGhadtheopportunitytoreviewandrespondtoemergingconclusionsanddraftsoftheConsultant’sreport.

The Consultant’s methodology is covered in detail in itsreportappended.EarlyintheprocesstheconsultantsledtheCWGthroughanInvestmentLogicMappingprocesswhichdevelopedagreementabouttheissuesbeingaddressedinthestudyandproducedtheissuesstatementpresentedattheendoftheIntroductionabove.

The consultants conducted analysis to estimate the longtermfuturedemandforfreightandcruiseservicesandthepotentialcapacityoftheport.POALprovidedvaluableinputto that analysis and the consultants developed their ownindependentconclusionsaboutfuturedemandandcapacity.

Both Northport and Port of Tauranga were consideredas alternatives to provide Auckland with necessary portcapacityinplaceoftheexistingport,and/oranewport.NotwithstandingconsiderablepublicdiscussionandadvocacyoftheseportstoprovideforAuckland’sneeds,thefindingswerethatneitheroftheseportshassufficientcapacityinthelongtermtoaccommodateboththeirowngrowthandcargoforAuckland. Therefore,theywerediscountedasfeasiblelong-term options. Any temporary measures involvingthese ports would result in dislocation of existing supplychain infrastructure, operations and employment, requirefurther investments, result in substantial environmentaland amenity impacts and increase in freight costs. Anytemporarymeasurewouldalsospreadthefreightvolumesthatwouldberequiredtojustifyaportrelocation.

Along-listof27potentialnewportlocationswasdevelopedbased on locations identified in previous studies3 and asystematic examination of the physical characteristics ofcoastalareasnearAuckland.Thisnewforeshorescanandthepreviousstudiesassessed–atahigh level - locationsbased on coastal geography, surround ecology, hydrologyandenvironmentalimpacts

Thelong-listwasreducedtoashorterlistof14sites(includingthecurrentlocation)throughamoredetailedevaluationofthelocationsbasedontheirphysicalsuitability,eliminatinglocationsbasedontheirperformanceonsevencriteria:

• Shippingnavigation(potential,basedonhorizontalaccessandnaturalobstructions)

• Natural water depth (chart overlays, potentialchannelalignments)

• Naturallandtopography(presenceofcliffsorothersignificantelevationatforeshore)

• Distancefromidentifiedindustrialconcentration

• Distancefromexistingprimarylandtransport

• Feasibility of land for port footprint capacity andtransportaccess

• Coastalprocesses (sediment transport,wave-andcurrent-patterns)

1: Auckland Design Office, Auckland Transport, ATEED, City Centre Integration Group, KiwiRail, NZTA, Panuku Development Auckland, Martyn Evans Architects2: The initial project design indicated a closed tender process, however in its work to define the project scope the CWG moved to an open tender approach. This was done to ensure RG and CWG member expectations of transparency were met.3: Development Plan for Auckland Report, POAL, 1989, Port Development options for the Auckland Region, POAL 1999, Statement of evidence of Stephen John Priestly for POAL, hearing on the proposed Unitary Plan, 2014

14

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Theshorterlistof14siteswasreducedtotheshort-listusingamulti-criteria analysis (MCA) led by the consultants butwithdetailedinputfromtheCWG.InscopingthestudytheCWGincludedalistof90physical,economic,cultural,socialandenvironmentalcriteriathatwereassessedaspotentiallyrelevant for the port location strategy. The consultantsfacilitatedacollaborativeprocesswheretheCWGreviewedthelistofcriteria,addingsome,removingsomeandformingcombinationstoagreethefinallistof36criteriatobeusedfor selecting the short-list ports. Percentage weightingswereassignedtothecriteriareflectingtheCWG’sconsensusjudgementsabouttheirrelativeimportancetoalongtermstrategy. Whenshorteningthecriteria listtheconsultantsaimedtoretainthemostimportantcriteria,whileremovingthosewhichwouldbe the same for all of the short-listedoptions.

TheMCAscoredeachpotentiallocationagainsteachofthecriteria using a five-point scale. Each of the 14 potentialshort-listedlocationswasgivenasummaryscorebasedontheConsultant’s assessmentof the scoresoneachof the36criteriaandtheimportanceweightingsgavethecriteriajudged to be more important a larger influence in theanalysis.

A test of the robustness of the MCA analysis was madeby ranking the shorter-list locations based on weightedand unweighted criteria and by eliminating the physicaland economic criteria so that only cultural, social andenvironmentalcriteriawereusedindevelopingtheranking.Therankingamongthelocationswasverysimilarregardlessofwhichmethodwasused,supportingtheconclusionthatthe short-listedoptionswere thebest locationoptions toconsiderinmoredetail.

ACost-Benefitanalysis(CBA)wasusedtocomparetheshort-listedoptions.CBAisbasedonestimatesofthemonetisablefuture values and costs that will result from choosing anoption. Discountratesareusedtotranslate futurevaluesand costs into their equivalents in today’s dollars. Theestimated future values and costs that were included intheCBAwereportrevenuesandoperatingcosts(includingcapital and maintenance dredging), port constructioninvestments,portmaintenancecosts,costoflandtransportinfrastructure,freightoperatingcosts,andlandvaluefromsaleofthecurrentsite.

The short-listed locations included three sites within theManukauHarbour,twointheFirthofThamesandtwooffthecoastatMuriwai. ForboththeMCAanalysisandtheCBAanalysistheManukauoptionswerebest, followedbytheFirthofThamesoptionsandthentheMuriwaioptions.

In the course of their analysis, the consultants met withexpertsonthevariousmattersbeingassessed.Thisincludedinterviews with North Island port operators and otherexperts including theAucklandHarbourMaster.Theyalsomet with mana whenua identified by the mana whenuaCWGrepresentativestoidentifyviewsheldaboutthespecificlocationoptionsandtheconclusionsfromthatdialoguearesummarisedintheConsultant’sreport.

The CWG reviewed initial drafts of the Consultant’sreport and provided detailed comments to EY. The CWGcommissionedpeerreviewsonthefuturetradedemandandportcapacity,ontheCBAmethodologyanditsapplication,andonthenavigabilityanddredgingrequirementsfortheManukau Harbour. Feedback from peer reviewers andCWGmembers has been used to inform EY and improvethe quality of their report, and used to inform the CWGas ithasdeveloped itsrecommendations. NotallmattersraisedhavebeenresolvedbuttheCWGhasconcludedthatremainingdifferencesarenotsufficientlymaterialtoalteritsconclusionsandrecommendations.

Additionaleffort fromtheConsultantswasalsorequestedto conduct initial “fact-finding” conversations with manawhenua in the short-listed areas. This input providedsome potentially indicative views on implications of newport locations, butwas not intended or considered to becomprehensiveordefinitive,anddoesnothavethestandingofaCulturalImpactAssessmentorotherformalconsultationprocess.

During the consulting process the CWG reviewed anddebatedevidenceassembledbytheconsultantsaswellasinputfromthirdparties.ThedataandpresentationsallowedtheCWGtodevelopsharedunderstandingoftheissuesandevidenceasafoundationfordevelopingtheirconsensusonconclusionsandrecommendations.

15

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Growth of Auckland’s port

Auckland’s port and harbour accommodate freight trade,cruiseships, ferries,thefishing industry,privateboatsandtourismoperators.

Moreandlargerfreightandcruiseshipsareanticipated,andgrowthofferryservicesisplanned.RecentportexpansionsandPOAL’sexpansionplanshavecreatedpublicconcerninthemselves and that concern is heightened when peopleconsidertheexpansionsthatmightbeimpliedastheportgrowstomeetthefreightandcruiseneedsofamuchlargerAuckland.

POAL has consents for port expansion work nearingcompletion at Fergusson Wharf. POAL sought approvalsto create more berth length and cargo handling area atBledisloe,whichwereoverturned in theHighCourt. Localcommunitiesareconcernedaboutthenoise,airpollution,visualandcongestion impactsofport throughputgrowth,and there has been strong opposition to having the portexpandfurtherintotheWaitematā.

Port infrastructure location decisions establish facilitiesthathavelonglifetimesandhighcosts.Partsofthefreightportarearound100yearsold,butthevastmajorityofthemodern freightporthasbeenconstructedpost1950,andpartssuchasFergussonarestillunderconstruction.Partsofthecruiseinfrastructurearecloserto100yearsold.Anynewportconsideredshouldhaveanexpectedlifeofmorethan100years,andperhapsmuchlonger,andwouldcostanestimated$4billionto$5.5billiondollars,dependingonthelocationchosen.

Figure four shows the Waitematā shoreline in 1840, prereclamation.

figure four:Waitematāshorelinesection-1840present-day footprint shown in dotted line

16

PORTFUTURE STUDY

For the purposes of this report, short-term is defined asfromnow to2040,mediumas2040-2065, and long-termasbeyond2065.Oversuchlongtimeperiodsthereisgreatuncertaintyaboutthedemandforfreightandcruiseservicesandtheconsultantshavecommittedconsiderableefforttodevelopestimatesofexpecteddemand.Estimatingfuturedemandrequirestakingaviewoffuturepopulationgrowthor GDP and the volume of trade per capita or trade perbilliondollarsofGDP.TheConsultant’sreportdescribestheprocessandconclusionsofthateffortindetail.

In 2014/15, Auckland port’s container throughput wasaround 970,000 twenty-foot container equivalent units(TEUs)peryear,withover3millionbulk tonnesof freightandcloseto250,000cars.Asashort-handwefollowtheConsultant’sleadandrefertothebasicgrowthoftheportby referencing the container volumeshandled, inmillionsofTEUsperyear. Itmustbeacknowledged that theportincludesotherimportanttrades;specifically,bulkandmulti-cargo4,includingvehicles,andcruise.Thereareestimatedgrowth rates for these other trades in the Consultant’sreport. Whenthisreportreferstoportgrowthinmillionsof TEUs that is a short-hand for growth of the port,withcontainergrowthinmillionsofTEUsandwithaccompanyinggrowthoftheothertypesoftrade.

The long term future is uncertain and there has beenconsiderable debate within the CWG about what futuretrade growth should be expected. However, the CWG isagreedthatitispossible,andsomewouldsaylikely,thatthetradetaskwillgrowfromaround970,000today,toatleast3millionTEUperannumoverthe50yearsplustimehorizonof the Study. Further, we should consider the possibilitythat demand could grow considerably beyond 3 millionTEUoverthemuchlongerperiodduringwhichweshouldexpectAuckland’sporttobeused.EY’smid-pointdemandestimateshavetheportreachingthreemillionTEUinabout40years5.

Auckland is unusual, in being a fast-growing city in adevelopedcountry. Mostdevelopedcountrypopulationsareprojected togrowonly slowly if atallduring thenextfewdecades. Auckland’sgrowth isprojectedtocontinueandmay be sustained or even accelerated because NewZealand appears to be becoming increasingly attractiveasa safehaven inatimeof growingglobaluncertainties.New Zealand’s resource endowments could become afoundationforgrowthofvalue-addedexportstopopulousandresource-constrainedAsiancountriesthatwouldimplylong term export growth and many affluent consumersdemandingimports.WearealsoawarethatoverthelongtimehorizonofthePortFutureStudytherecouldbemajorchangesreducingfreightdemandgrowthorincreasingportproductivity; for example, an aggressive dematerializationand localisation of economies, disruption of the globalgrowth path, or dramatic transformations of shipping orport technologies. These fundamental uncertaintiesmaybe much larger than the estimation uncertainties in theConsultant’sdemandandcapacityforecasts.

There are three important operational constraints on theport’svolumegrowth.Thefirstisthefootprintrequiredtooperatetheportandtoaccommodateshorttermstorageoffreight.Thatisimportantbecauseitisconstrainedbytheboundariesofthecurrentportprecinctandpublicoppositionto further expansion into the harbour via reclamation orwharfextensions.

TheporthasfirmplanstoincreasethroughputtojustovertwomillionTEUsperyearandlessfirmplansandestimatesthatmightallowtheporttohandleuptothreemillionTEUsper year on approximately the current footprint. Thoseplansrequirecapital investment inautomationequipmentthat has not yet been committed and that automationinvestmentcould reducethenoise,emissionsand lightingimpact that the port has on surrounding communities.Volume growth would offset this potential for reducedenvironmentalimpacts.

Thesecondconstraintistheberthlengthstoaccommodatemorefrequentvisitsoflargercruiseandcargoships.CruiseberthcapacityisalreadyconstrainedattheportwithberthlengthlimitationspreventingaccommodationofthelargershipsthatarenowbeingaddedtotheglobalcruisefleetandstartingtovisitAuckland.Cruisevisitsareincreasingastheglobal industryexpandsandAucklandisbecomingamorepopulardestination.

The largestcruiseshipscouldbeanchored in theharbourandlighterscouldbeusedtoferrypassengerstoandfromtheshorebutthatwouldprovidealowerqualityexperienceforcruisepassengers,reducetheattractivenessofAucklandas a cruise destination and reduce the economic benefitfromcruiseshipvisits.Thereisastrongincentivetoincreasethenumberofberthsavailableforcruise6.

4 Multi cargo refers to break-bulk (timber, steel, ‘high and heavy’ machinery/trucks etc), bulk (gypsum, cement, sand and aggregates, wheat, iron sand etc), vehicles (new and used cars)5 Previous reports (NZIER 2015, PWC 2012, ARH 2009) considering POAL capacity have indicated capacity may be reached between 2035-2045, depending on growth rates and other assumptions made. These dates are broadly in line with EY’s findings.6 Reprovisioning ships with food and supplies generates almost as much economic benefit as is generated from tourism spend. In 2014/15 there were 115 voyage calls and 188,500 unique passenger visits to Auckland, which generated $190.7m (Economic impact of the 2014–2015 cruise sector in New Zealand and forecasts to 2017, Cruise NZ)

17

PORTFUTURE STUDY

The Central Wharves Strategy is being developed toaccommodate expected cruise ship growth, includingprovisionofberthsforlargercruiseships,toexpandpublicuse of thewaterfront and to provide for growth of ferryservices.ThepreferredoptionsbeingconsideredwithintheCentralWharvesStrategyimplyaneedforadditionalberthprovisions for vehicle and other multi-cargo operations.Allrecentstudies,includingtheConsultant’sreportforthePortFutureStudyagreethatberthcapacityconstraintsareevidentnow,andifcapacityistomatchdemand,someberthdevelopmentwillberequiredintheshortterm.

Berth development options have been proposed by theConsultantandPOAL.Weexpecttheseandotherpotentialsolutionswillbeevaluatedanddecideduponusingshort-termplanningprocesses.

The third physical constraint is the land-side transportconnections via road and rail to move freight from theport for imports and onto the port for exports. POALplanstomateriallyincreaserailuseforland-sidetransportusing existing rail lines. Major expansionof land-side railconnectionsisconstrainedbytheneedforfreighttosharetheraillineswithpassengertrains.Longerterm,thereareoptionstoaddoneortwomorerailtrackstoreleasethatconstraint. Increasingrail trafficwould increasenoiseandemissionseffectsonresidentsalongtherailcorridors.

Expandingfreightvolumesattheexistingportwouldincreasethe contribution of trucks to congestion near the port,throughGraftonGully andalong the SouthernMotorway.Thereispotentialtospreadthetimingoftruckmovementsto reduce congestion impacts that would alleviate someconsequencesofshorttermgrowth.

Accommodating the planned growth at the port to twoor threetimes current volumesmight imply the need forlargeinvestmentsinfly-oversortrenchingbecauseofspaceconstraints,andtolimitadverseconsequencesofincreasingtrafficintensityforlocalland-ownersandcommunities.TheConsultants’reportanticipatesthatlargeroadinginvestmentisonlyanticipatedoncetheportreachesaround3mTEUs,implyingthatportgrowthwould increase localcongestionduring the short and medium term. There are existingpressuresonlandsidetransportlinksintheareafromnon-portsourcesanditseemslikelythataland-sideroadsolutionwillberequired.

The potential for trade growth, uncertain productivityimprovementpotentialand limits toexpansionmeanthattheCWGcannotbeconfidentthattheportwillbeabletoaccommodate long term demand growth on its currentfootprint.

ThatconclusiondependsontheStudy’stimehorizon.Withatime-horizongreaterthan50years,say80or100years,asspecifiedinthePortFutureStudyScope,thenanoptionforanewportorforamateriallyexpandedportfootprintshouldbecreated.

Longtermdemandgrowthislikelytoexceedtheexpectedcapacity growth available at the Port of Tauranga and atNorthport. Further, having Auckland’s freight deliveredfrom these more distant ports would imply large capitalinvestments in port expansions and transport links alongwithlongfreightdistancesandcorrespondinglyhighfreightcosts.

Inconclusion,thereissufficientprobabilitythatcapacityonthecurrentportfootprintwillbeexceededinthelongtermthataneworexpandedportoptionshouldbecreated.TheEY report states that there is a scenariowhere containercapacitymightbeexceededasearlyas2039.Itisalsopossiblethat future demand growth might be accommodated onthe current site within the current footprint but there issufficientuncertaintythatitwouldnotbeprudenttorelyonthatpossibility.

18

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Two options for locating a new port

ThePortFutureStudymethodologyrequiredidentificationofalong-listofoptions,reductionofthatlong-listtoashort-list,andthenmoredetailedassessmenttoselectpreferredoption(s)fromtheshort-list.

The long-list was identified by referencing locationsconsideredinpreviousstudiesandascanoftheupperNorthIslandcoast-line.Locationswereincludedforconsiderationif they appeared tomeet the physical requirements for aportlocation.

The long-list was reduced to a short list using the MCAanalysis.Theoptionsselectedfortheshort-listincludedanexpanded port on the current site, three locations in theManukau Harbour, two locations in the Firth of Thamesand two locations nearMuriwai. TheManukau optionswererankedmorehighlythantheFirthofThamesoptions,followedbytheMuriwaioptions.

Tapora

ShellyBeachMuriwai[offshore]Muriwai

UpperHarbour[islandport]

CentralManukauHarbourPuhinui

ManukauoffClarksBeach[islandport]

PortWaikatoKāwhiaHarbour

NorthportBreamBayarea

TeHaupaIsland KarepiroBay

Hikihiki

South-westernCoast

LongBayUpperWaitematāHarbourPortofAucklandWairoaBayPonui[islandport]KawakawaBay[inc.offshore]WaimangoPt.Kaiaua[landport]TaurangaPortofTauranga

Whakatane

MahurangiWest

figure five:LonglistoptionsIndicative only. See Consultant’s report for more detail

19

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Alloftheoptionsontheshort-listcouldhaveaportcapacityof approximately 10m TEUs and so would provide forcapacityexpansionforthelongterm.

The sites identified on the map should be regarded asindicative.Physicalpotentialforaportatthesiteisconfirmedbutmoredetailedanalysiswouldberequiredtodeterminethebestspecificpositioningateachsite.

TheManukauoptionsarehighestrankedintheConsultant’sreport on both the MCA analysis and the CBA analysis.Manukau istheclosest locationoptiontothecurrentandexpectedfuturelocationoffreightdestinationsandsources.Among theManukau sites, thePuhinui site is thehighestrankedoptionintheCBA,withthehighestNPVadvantageoverexpandingatthecurrentsite.Forthelongtimehorizonsconsidered for the Study, the land transport freight costadvantagemorethanoffsetsthecostofportconstructionandrelocation.Lowerfreightcostswouldreducethecostsofimportsforconsumersandindustryandwouldincreasethecompetitivenessofexports.

TheprospectofestablishingandoperatingamajorfreightportintheManukauorindeedinanylocationraisesmanyimportantquestions.Transferringaport’simpactsfromonecommunitytoanotherrequirescarefulconsiderationofthesocialandculturalconsequences.Itisnotconsideredlikelythataportrelocationwouldbewelcomedbycommunitiesormanawhenuainornearthenewlocation.Further,therearealreadyconcernsaboutenvironmental impactsofpastinfrastructuredevelopmentsontheManukauandahistoryof contention about environmental care and remediationmaymakeitdifficulttoestablishagreements.

WhiletheManukauhashadanoperationalportformanyyears, the potential environmental impacts would callfor excellent harbour and port management practiceand rigorous monitoring7. This expectation for excellentenvironmentaloutcomesisheightenedbytherecentstridesmadeinremediationoftheManukauharbourandforeshore,andthestrongsenseofKaitiakitangafeltbylocalIwi,hapuandbyAucklandersmoregenerally.

Anydiscussionofshippingmatters involvingtheManukauharbourwill triggerconcernsabout theManukaubarandchannel.Weather and sea conditions experienced on theWestCoastofNewZealandarechallenging.ThewreckoftheOrpheusin1863andthechallengesoftheManukaubarhavecreatedawidespreadpre-conceptionthatamajorportontheManukauwouldcreateunacceptablesafetyissues.

The Consultant’s report is informed by analysis done byeCoast,whichindicatesthatamajorportontheManukauisafeasibleoption,requiringinitialdredgingofthechannelandon-goingcostsforchannelmaintenance.Consciousofthe challenges of theManukau and expecting a scepticalresponse to presentationof aManukauoption, the CWGcommissionedapeerreviewoftheeCoastwork.Thepeerreviewer’sconclusionswereprovidedtoeCoast leadingtoanupdated,moreconservativedesignwhichincreasedtheestimatedcosts forestablishingandoperatingaManukauportbutnotbyenoughtoaltertheStudy’sconclusions.

Safetyandnavigability issueswereassessedbytestingthepreliminarydesignandtheresultingportfunctionalityandsafetyusing thePIANCguidelines,whichare thestandardforportlocationevaluation.TheassessmentindicatesthataportattheManukauwouldbefeasibleandsafe.WeatherconditionsontheWestCoastcouldleadtotheportbeingclosedoccasionally,andthiscouldbecomeamoreimportantconcernovertimebecauseclimatechange isprojectedtoincrease the frequency and intensity of adverse weather.However,theport,onceconstructed,wouldnotbeunusualamongexistingports,world-wide.

AsaferandmorereliablechannelontheManukauharbourwould potentially increase utilisation by recreational,tourismandfishingboats.ThiscouldtakepressureofftheWaitematāharbourwhichisalreadyhighlyutilisedandwithlikelypopulationandtourismincreaseswillseeitsutilisationgrowfurther.

TheConsultantandthepeerreviewerboth indicatedthatthedesignworkcompletedforthePortFutureStudymustberegardedaspreliminaryandthatmoredetailedengineeringassessmentscoveringgeology,hydrodynamicsandreliabilitywouldberequiredbeforethefeasibilityofaManukauportcould be definitively confirmed. Therefore, pending theresultsofthosestudies,thePortFutureStudycannotfirmlyrecommendaManukauportlocation.

A second possible knock-out for a Manukau location,identifiedbyCWGmembersandothers,wasthataManukaulocationwouldimplyamajorshiftofshippingpatterns.Apreliminarystudyofadditionalshippingcostsfromthewestcoast locationwas completed by the consultants and thecostsdidnotaltertheconclusionsoftheCBA.

The physical characteristics of theManukau Harbour, thewestcoastlocationandthepotentialdifficultieswithgainingthenecessaryland,agreementsandconsentsimplythatanalternative location should be examined in parallel at thenextstageofportrelocationplanning.

A port relocation to the Firth of Thames might berequiredifmoredetailedanalysisoftheManukauoptionsdemonstratesthatitisnotfeasible,andwouldreduceanynavigability, safety and shipping issues thatmight remainwitha feasibleWestcoastoption. However,a locationattheFirthofThameswouldimplyhighercostsforland-sidetransportinfrastructureandfreight.TheMCAandCBAbothindicatethataKawakawaBaylocationwouldbepreferredrelativetoalocationnearertoWaimangoPoint.

Both of the identified Firth of Thames locations wouldraise important cultural, social and environmental issues,describedintheConsultant’sreport,thatwouldneedtobenavigatedbeforeanoptioncouldbeestablished.Further,thepreferredtransportroutetothecoastwouldpassthrougharuralenvironmentthatwouldbesubstantiallyalteredbyconstructionoflargescaleroadandraillinks.

7 This applies to any other new location that might be decided upon, and relates to expectations for improvement at the current location.

20

PORTFUTURE STUDY

While a Manukau location might ensure freight is closeto the industrial centres and would strengthen transportlinksdownthewesternedgeofthecity,aFirthofThameslocationmight have different future land use benefits. AFirthofThames locationwouldcreate transport links thatcouldopenup landthat is relativelyclosetoAucklandfordevelopment. GrowthofAucklandover the long term toaccommodate the projected 2.5m plus population mightrequireadditionallandsothatlanddevelopmentpotentialintheeastmightbecomerelevanttothefinalportlocationdecision.

Another larger scale consideration follows from the largerpotentialscaleofarelocatedPort.PortofTauranga’sgrowthappearstobeconstrainedlongtermsoafutureportattheFirthof Thamesmightbecomea “super-port” thatwouldservetheupperNorthIsland.Whileasuper-portseemsamoreobviousoption in theFirthofThames,a super-portmightalsobelocatedintheManukauHarbour.

Thesewidertransport,landuseandupperNorthIslandportstrategy implications should be examined when decidingwhichoftheportlocationoptionstodevelop.

Whichever option is chosen there will be importantchallenges and high capital costs and these should beconsidered in thecontextof theneedtoensureprovisionofcost-effectivefacilitiesforfreightservicessoNewZealandcansustaintradeandeconomicwell-being.

Therewouldbeimplicationsforownersandotheraffectedparties from changing the expected land use activities bydesignatingcorridorsandrezoningforportprecincts.

TheMCAanalysistogetherwithadvicereceivedfrommanawhenua representatives and from others make it clearthatgainingtheagreementsandconsentstoestablishanynew port would present a significant challenge. Similarchallengeswouldbefacedforaproposaltoexpandtheportfurther into theWaitematā Harbour. Mitigations, offsetsorotherarrangementsmighthelpovercomeobstaclesbutthe specificsof thesearebeyond the scopeof this study.Changestolegislationand/orregulationmaymakeconsentachievable.

TheCWGrecognisestheresurgenceoftheMāorieconomyinvolvingnewstrategicpartnershipsbetweenMāori,privatesectors and local government. Noting that settlementprocesses continue, the CWG recognises trends towardsengagement, confidence, realising and attaining potential,and of interdependence and partnership. We alsounderstand,fromthenecessarilylimiteddialoguewithmanawhenua interests conducted during the study, that therehavebeensomeinstanceswherepromisesofenvironmentalprotectionalongsideinfrastructuredevelopmentinAucklandhavenotbeenfulfilled.

Therewouldbehighcapitalcostsforinvestmentinrelocationof the port and funding for infrastructure investment isconstrained. Sale of land at the current port locationwould provide a partial offset. Capital markets mightfund the construction provided there is a debt-servicingmodel. Internationallytherearemanyfunding/ownershipmodelsaroundmajor infrastructureinvestmentssuchasaportwhichvaryfromfullCouncilownershiptofullprivatesectorownership. AtbothAucklandAirportandPortofTauranga,Councilshaveminorityshareholdings inpubliclylistedcompanies.Considerationcouldbegiventofundingthe land componentof thenewport separately from theoperatingcompany,whichmightenableequityparticipationinthe“landco”byCouncilandIwi.

Establishinganalternativeportlocationoptionnowwouldbedifficultandrequirematerialeffortandexpense.However,ifanexpandedportisrequiredinthelongtermandanoptionhas not been created the location options may becomemuch more difficult because of other development andregulatorydecisions.Auckland’speoplemightthenbefacedwitha choicebetweenamuchhigher cost,moredifficultport move or the ongoing high costs of longer distancefreightwithinNewZealand. Thecostsofestablishinganoptionwould bemuch lower than the likely future costsresulting fromneedinga relocationoptionbutnothavingoneavailable.

Muriwai[offshoreport]MuriwaiCentralManukauHarbour

Puhinui

PortsofAuckland

Hikihiki

KawakawaBay

WaimangoPt.

figure six:ShortlistoptionsIndicative only. See Consultant’s report for more detail

21

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Expand or move?

Thealternativetomovingtheportistoexpandatthecurrentlocation,reclaiminglandasrequiredtomeetfuturedemand.That isoneoftheoptionstheCWGwasspecificallyaskedtoconsiderandcouldbecomeadefaultfutureoutcomeifaport relocationoption isnotcreated,because therearelongtermcapacityconstraintsatbothPortofTaurangaandNorthPort.

There are several reasonswhy expanding the port at thecurrentlocationcouldbeanunattractivelongtermoptionrelativetoarelocation.

First,inthelongterm,thecurrentfootprintattheportmightbeexpandedmateriallybutthereisnocertaintythatsuchanexpansionwouldbesufficienttoaccommodatethelongtermportgrowth.Expansionwithhighproductivitymightallow theport togrow toa container sizeofperhaps4mTEUsorevenmore,withaccompanyingmulti-cargoandbulktrades.However,ariskwouldremainthatlongtermdemandcould exceed the feasible expansion. Recent growth hasbeendrivenpartlybytrendstocontainerisationandtransferofdomesticmanufacturingcapacity toChinabut50yearsis a long time and the future is uncertain. A quadruplingofdemand in the long termmight seemunlikely, but thepossibility should be considered in the context of portvolumes in 2006 of approximately 700,000 TEUs, in 1996of approximately400,000TEUsand in theearly1980’sofapproximately100,000TEUs.

Second, there is already considerable social pressure formoving the port or restricting its growth. A port withvolumesmuchlargerthanthecurrentvolumewouldhaveamateriallygreaterimpactonthecentreofAucklandcity,onharbourusersandonthecommunitieslivingclosetotheportlocation.Thecity,harbouruseandlocalcommunitiesareallexpectedtogrowtoo,creatinggreaterexposuretotheenvironmentaleffectsoftheport,andincreasedcontention.Socialoppositiontoindustrialportshasbeenanimportantdriverofrecentportrelocationdecisionsinternationally.

Overthelongtimehorizonsbeingconsidereditisreasonableto expect that a growing port on the current site andassociatedlandsidetransportwouldusenewtechnologies,especially substitution of electricity for fossil fuels andautomationofconveyanceoffreight(bothattheportandalong land-side corridors), which would work to reduceair pollution, carbon emissions, light pollution and noise.Investment in best practice environmental technologieswould alleviate the externalities created but despite suchinvestmentsthescaleofpotentialgrowthcouldcreatelargeadverseeffects.

Third, if Auckland city and the CBD grow as expected,there will be demand for more land for commercial,residentialandamenityuses.AnticipationofthelongtermdevelopmentofAucklandasaliveablecityindicatesthatthevalueoftheport’slandasacomponentofurbanexpansionmay increase relative to the situation today. It is possiblethat redevelopment of the port landwould contribute tocontinuedimprovementoftheCBDandsurrounds,astheWynyardQuarterdevelopmentsappeartobedoing.ThesepotentialbenefitshavenotbeenquantifiedwithintheCBA.

Fourth, the CBA completed by the Consultant indicatesthatmoving theport toManukauwouldprovideabettereconomicoutcomethanexpandingatthecurrentlocation.Theeconomicadvantage is largelydrivenby lower freightcostsduetolocatingtheportclosertofreightdestinations.The economic advantage is estimated taking into accountthe estimated capital costs for establishing the new portandcreditingtheestimatedvalueofthecurrentport landreleased for redevelopment. The options to locate theport intheFirthofThamesarenotcurrentlyshowntobemoreeconomicallyattractivethanexpandingatthecurrentlocationbutwouldreleasethecapacityconstraint.

22

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Timing of a move

Thereisastronglogictocreateanalternativeportlocationoption based on the long term risks from not having anoption relative to the certain, near-term and smaller butimportantcostsanddifficultyofcreatinganoption.Itwouldbelikecreatinganinfrastructurecorridorwherethecorridormight not be required but the costs of the infrastructurewouldbemateriallyhigherifplansandoptionsarenotputinplaceinadvance.

Implicit in that analysis is that the port would bemovedbecause expected demand is going to exceed expectedcapacity.Insuchananalysistheportwouldbemovedaslateaspossibletodefercosts,allowscarcecapitaltobeputtobetteruseandtoaccommodatethepossibilitythatdemandgrowth slowsor technology changesemergewhichmightmakethemoveunnecessary.

AsecondreasontomovewouldbebecausethepeopleofAucklandandtheAucklandCouncilontheirbehalfdecidethat regardless of the freight demand growth, amove tothepreferredalternativelocationwouldleadtoeconomic,social,culturalandenvironmentaloutcomesthatarebetterthantheoutcomesfromremainingontheexistingsite. Ifmovingtheportcouldprovidebetteroutcomesthanleavingitwhere it is thenthetimingofaportmovebecomesanimportantconsideration.

Inprinciple,therearethreekindsoftimingoption.Thefirstkindofoption is tomovetheportwhenthecombinationof port volumes, expected growth and forecast capacityexpansionsignalthatportrelocationisrequired.Themid-point of the Consultant’s analysis indicates amove beingrequiredin2055thoughthereisagreatdealofuncertainty.Thatwould leave open the possibility that amovemightnevertakeplaceandsotherelocationoptionwouldremainunexercised.Itwouldalsoleaveopentheoptionforalaterdecisiontomovetheportforotherreasons.

Thesecondkindofoption is tomovetheportassoonaspossible to realise the benefits from relocation, includingsocialandpoliticalpressuresinfavourofrelocation.Allowing10 years for making a decision and completing planning,and then five years for development, the port might beabletorelocateduringthe2030s.Thosetimesmayproveoptimisticgiventhedifficultieslikelytobeencounteredbuttheyillustratewhatanearlyoptionmightlooklike.

Thethirdkindofoptionistoseeka“sweetspot”fortimingofaportmovethatisneitheraslateaspossiblenorassoonaspossible.Findingsuchasweetspotcouldallowforreduceduncertainty as evidence on future demand and capacitygrowthaccrues.Itmightproveoptimaltomatchrelocationtimingtothetimewhenthecityisreadytoredeveloptheportsiteforalternativeuses.Thatmightimplyarelocationduringthe2040s.

In any plan to preserve an option tomove the port, theissue of immediate constraints on multi-cargo and cruisecapacity remains tobeaddressed. Options forbothhavebeen investigated by EY and POAL, and reviewed by theCWG. A long-term option needs to be implemented forcruise,andashort–mediumtermoptionformulti-cargo.Therequirementisforberthcapacity–tocaterforlargershipsandmoreshipsassociatedwiththepredictedgrowthincruiseandfreight.

Creatingaportrelocationoptionispreferabletoanyshort-termrelocationofmulti-cargovolumetoNorthportorPortofTaurangabecause:

• Neither of those ports offers a long-termfeasible alternative to Auckland because oftheir own capacity constraints, and so such amovewouldbetemporaryanyway.

• Relocation of volumes would result insplit supply chains, additional freight costsand environmental impacts to transportcargo, redundancy of existing supply chaininfrastructure and of associated employmentandinvestment

• Volume expansion at the existing site retainseconomiesofscaleinoperations,makesuseofexistingsupplychaininfrastructureandallowsformorebalancedgrowthoftheportuptothecapacityconstraint

• Retaining concentration of volumes at theexistingportprotectstherevenuesandfreightsavingsrequiredtojustifyfutureinvestmentinanewport

Port landside demandwould be catered for with verticalinfrastructure,suchasacarparkbuilding.

23

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Monitoring and reporting on triggers is important tounderstandthetimingandvaluepropositionofanymove.

Regular,periodicmonitoringandforecastingwillbeessentialgiventhereisaconsiderableandpredictabledelaybetweenthepointatwhichatriggerortriggersare‘pulled’andthepoint atwhich a new port location becomes operational.Consideration should be given to matters raised in theConsultant’sreport,forexamplebutnotlimitedto:

• Physical capacity constraints of port footprintandconfigurationagainstforecastdemandforfreightbytradetype.Monitoringandreportingwould likely include yard capacity, portproductivity/efficiency, customer populationgrowthandTEUpercapitaforecasts

• The port’s physical externalities. Monitoringand reporting would likely include impactsonportenvironssuchas light,noiseanddustexternalities, vehicle movements by vehicletypeandcongestionimpacts

• Economic incentivesfor investmentatcurrentornewportlocation.Monitoringandreportingwould likely include net present value ofinvestmentandassociatedbenefitatcurrentoralternate locations, and construction deliveryestimations

• Social and cultural impacts and communityfeedback. Monitoring likely to include publicexpression of vision for Auckland, potentiallyexpressed via elected officials, through LongTermPlanprocessesordirectengagement

• Environmental impacts. Monitoring andreporting likely to include research orinformation on impact of footprint andoperationsatcurrentoralternativelocations

24

PORTFUTURE STUDY

ThePortFutureStudyhasconsideredthelongtermfutureofAuckland’sfreightandcruiseactivities.

It has developed a strategy that is robust in the face ofthe uncertainties which emerge when considering largeinfrastructure investments over 50-100 years, and takesinto consideration the social, cultural, economic andenvironmentalcontextwithinwhichthePortoperates.

The principles of partnershipwithin the Treaty drive therelationshipbetweenCrown,manawhenua,andAucklandCouncil and underpin the Study’s recommendations,and the CWG recognises mana whenua as kaitiaki, andhighlightstheimportanceofcultureandtraditionsrelatedtoancestrallands,water,sites,wahitapuandothertaonga.Thesearemeaningfulandrelevantgiventhesubjectmatterandtherecommendationspresentedhere,andtheCWGcallsforreadersanddecisionmakerstoholdrespectforthemanaofmanawhenua,mātawaka,andthewiderpublic.

TheCWG’srecommendationsareofferedasanintegratedpackage. Adopting some recommendations while notimplementingothersislikelytoleadtoadverseunintendedconsequences.

ThreeissueswereagreedbytheCWGasfoundationsforthePortFutureStudy:

• Capacity will constrain the port’s ability tomeetfuturefreightandcruisedemands,whichmaylimiteconomicgrowthinthelongterm

• Tensionbetween,andcompetitionfor,limitedresources for theCBDandPOALwill lead tosub-optimaloutcomesforoneorboth

• Portactivitiescreateenvironmental,economic,socialandcultural impactswhichneedtobeunderstoodandaddressed

Inconsideringtheoptions;1)constraintheport,2)downsizetheport,3)relocatetradevolume,4)growtheport,5)buildanewport,theCWGkeyfindingsreachedbyconsensusare:

• BasedonEY’sfindings,theexistingPortwillnotbeabletoaccommodatethelongtermfreighttaskandcruiseonthecurrentfootprint.

• That no further reclamation beyond whatis already consented in the port precinct isrequired for freight purposes in the short tomediumterm.

• Thereisaneedtosecuresufficientberthlengthinthemulti-cargoareafortheshorttomediumterm.

• Short term pathways need to be createdto enable the Port to continue to operateefficientlyprior to aplannednewPortbeingestablisheddue to thesubstantial leadtimesinvolved.Inthisregard,theCWGidentifiesthatadditionalberthlengthneedstobeprovidedto fulfil the shortandmediumtermcapacityrequirementsofthePortinresponsetocruiseandmulti-cargorequirements.

• Retaining thebulkofport functionsprovidesa more feasible and superior outcomefor Auckland, rather than shedding cargoelsewhere or downsizing Auckland’s freighttask,intheshorttomediumterm.Sheddingordownsizingfreightoperationsmayweakenthecaseformovingtheport.

• In the long term, other existingNorth IslandportswillbeunabletocopewiththetotalityoftheAucklandfreighttasktogetherwiththeirowncapacityrequirements

• CruiseindustryfacilitiesshouldberetainedandimprovedinAuckland’scitycentre

• Two possible new port locations - ManukauHarbour and Firth of Thames - have beenidentified as warranting more detailedinvestigation

• The triggers for a move would compriseeconomic, social, environmental and culturaltriggers that make a move beneficial ordemand/economictriggersthatmakeamovenecessarytoachieve longtermoutcomesforAuckland.

Conclusions and recommendations

25

PORTFUTURE STUDY

CWG’s recommendations are offered as an integratedpackage. Adopting some recommendations while notimplementing others could result in adverse unintendedconsequences.

1. A port relocation option is established for freight, noting:

• Iftheportismoved,thencruiseshipsshouldcontinuetobeaccommodatedneartheCBD

2. Comprehensive investigation of the identified location area options - Manukau Harbour and the Firth of Thames - is undertaken to decide which specific option is chosen, noting:

• Investigationtoidentifythespecificrelocationoptionshouldincludeconsiderationofatleast:

– Thelongtermengineeringrequirements,navigability,safetyandavailabilityoftheManukauandFirthofThamesoptions

– The effect of a west coast versus eastcoast location on shipping and thecompetitiveness of the Auckland portandthenationalsupplychain

– Thewiderandlongtermimplicationsofwest coast versus east coast locationsincluding on Auckland’s long termtransportstrategy,landusedevelopment,land-sidefreightroutesandthepotentialforasuper-port

– Mana whenua values, views andopportunities for each of the potentialsitesidentified

– The environmental impacts of the newsiteandanalysisofconsentingpathways

– How andwhen any new port could befunded

3. Regular monitoring of relocation triggers is undertaken to identify the time at which the port relocation option should be exercised, noting:

• The port may move when the social,environmental, cultural, economic, urbandevelopmentorotherconditionsindicatethatmovingtheportisbeneficialforthecitycentre,orAucklandorNewZealand

• Theportmaymovewhenexpecteddemandgrowth, expected capacity growth and thetimerequiredtocompletethemove indicatethatmovingtheporthasbecomenecessary

• It is possible that Auckland’s future unfoldsin a way that neither of the triggers for thebeneficialornecessarycaseswillbe“pulled”,which would mean that the port wouldaccommodate long-term demand at thecurrentsite

The Consensus Working Group thanks the many individuals and organisations who have contributed their time and information to support the Port Future Study. Reference Group members provided valuable guidance of our work. We also thank the Auckland Council which commissioned the study and has provided funding, logistical support, procurement and other advice to the Study, while operating in ways that have preserved the Study’s independence. Our work could not have been completed without the contributions of our consultants led by EY and including Black Quay, eCoast, Aurecon, Jasmax and JLL. We thank the EY team and the other consultants for their effective engagement with us, and for the efforts they have made to produce the comprehensive technical report that supports our conclusions and recommendations.

4. Subject to confirmed and credible commitment to establishing a port relocation option and to establishing sufficient additional berth length to accommodate expected growth in large cruise and multi-cargo vessels, the port should not expand beyond its current footprint, noting:

• TheworkdonesofarfortheCentralWharvesStrategyimpliestheneedforadditionalcruiseberths and the Consultant’s report endorsesPOAL’s case that additional long berths arerequiredtoaccommodateexpectedshortandmedium-termgrowthincruiseandmulti-cargooperations

• TheConsultanthasrecommendedanortherneast-westberthatBledisloeWharfand theCWG is in agreement that a northern berthpresents a viable short-term option. Exactspecifications to meet future berth demandwillbeworkedthrough.

• The CWG recognises mana whenua andcommunityoppositiontoanyfurtherextensionofportoperationsintotheharbourandthatdecidingtheplantoprovidetherequiredberthcapacitywillrequirerigorousidentificationandevaluationofalternativeoptions

• ThePortFutureStudyisastudytoprovidealong-termstrategyforthelocationoftheportandthereareestablishedprocessesforshort-termberthprovisiondecisions

26

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Consensus Working

Group Members

Michael BarnettMichaelBarnettisChiefExecutiveoftheAucklandRegionalChamberofCommerceandIndustry,andaDirectorofboththe Auckland Chamber and New Zealand Chambers ofCommerceand Industry.He isalsoChairmanof theEqualEmploymentOpportunitiesTrust.

MichaelwasrecognisedbytheQueeninthe2011NewYear’sHonourswithaNewZealandOrderofMeritforservicestobusiness.

Ngarimu BlairNgarimuBlairistheDeputyChairoftheNgātiWhātuaŌrākeiTrustandhashada long involvement inTreatyandMāoriHeritagemanagementissuesinTamakiMakaurau.

Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei are the resident iwi of the innerWaitematāandtheportstudyareaandmaintainamaraeandvillagethathasover500tribalresidentsinŌrākei.NgātiWhātuaŌrākeiregardstheWaitematāasataongaandhasnumerous ecological and heritage interpretation projectsthat actively seeks to restore themana andmauri of theharbour.

KoTuperiri te tangata, koMaungakiekie temaunga, ko teWaitematāteawa,koŌrākeitemarae!

Rick Boven - Independent chairDrRickBovenisChairofboththereferencegroupandtheconsensus working group. He has significant commercialexperience, including leading many strategy projects fortransport and infrastructure companies in New Zealandand internationally. He has experience working withAustralianandNewZealandcentralandlocalgovernments,on economic and commercial strategies, infrastructure,regulationandorganisationtopics.

Rick’s boardroom experience includes being a director ofASBBank,SovereignInsuranceandofseveralinternationaltechnology companies, and he is a Chartered Fellowof the Institute of Directors. Rick has experience ofcollaborativemulti-stakeholder processes via participationin an investigation of greenhouse gas emission reductiontechnologiesandpolicies,andfrombeingamemberoftheIndependent Review Panel for the Tai Timu Tai Pari - SeaChangeproject.

HisqualificationsincludeanMAinpsychology,anMBAandaPhDinenvironmentmanagement.

Luke ChristensenLuke has been the Auckland Policy Director of youth ledorganisationGenerationZerosince2013.

GenerationZeroisfocusedonensuringyoungpeoplehaveasayinthebigdecisionsaboutthefutureofNewZealand,suchasclimatechange,transportandplanning.

Luke has led the policy work during Generation Zero’scampaigns on the Unitary Plan, Safe Cycling, CongestionFreeNetwork and Special Housing Areas and has been acontributor to transportblog.co.nz, writing about a widevarietyofAucklandtransportandplanningissues.

In2014,hecompletedhisMastersofUrbanPlanningatTheUniversityofAuckland,andworksforatransportplanningconsultancybased inAuckland.PriortohisMastersstudy,Lukegainedfouryears’experienceasalandsurveyor.

Noel CoomNoelistheGeneralManager,NewZealandofANLContainerLineandisbasedinAuckland.

During his 44 years working within the transportationindustry he has focused primarily on shipping but alsocompletedaperiodasGroupGeneralManagerforTranzRail.Noel has been posted overseas in both Los Angeles andSydneyandiscurrentlyChairofNewZealand’sInternationalContainerLinesCommittee(ICLC).

27

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Richard DidsburyRichard Didsbury graduated in Engineering at AucklandUniversityandhashadadiversecareerinproperty.

He founded and continues as a Director of Kiwi PropertywhichisNewZealand’slargestlistedpropertycompanyandledthedevelopmentofAuckland’sbiggestshoppingcentreSylviaParkandAuckland’spremiumofficebuilding,theVeroCentre.HeiscurrentlyaDirectorofAucklandAirport,Skycity,andHobsonvilleLandCompany.

PriortotheformationofAucklandCouncil,hewasadirectorof InfrastructureAuckland,TourismAuckland,andchairofAucklandWaterfrontAdvisoryGroup.

HispassionforexcellencehasresultedinprojectswhichhaveredefinedcommunitiessuchasthatatMatakanaVillage,andhissupportforartistsandarchitectureishighlightedatBrickBayWinesandSculptureTrail.Healsoledtheformationof,andnowchairs,theCommitteeforAuckland.

Tony GibsonTony joined Ports of Auckland as Chief Executive Officerin early 2011. He joined the Company with 30 years ofexperienceinshippingandlogistics,firstwithSeabridgeinWellington,andthenwithNedlloydandP&ONedlloyd.

HehasworkedinvariousSeniorManagementrolesinAfrica,AsiaandEurope,includingasEuropeanDirectorofCustomerOperationsinRotterdam,beforebeingappointedManagingDirector-NewZealandandPacificIslandsin2002.

Followingatake-overbyMaersk,TonyservedasManagingDirectorofMaersk-NewZealandforthreeyears.

Tonypursueshisownbusiness interestsasadirectorandshareholderofERoad,aroad-userchargesolutionprovider,andisChairmanofNorthTugzLimited.

Jenni GouldingJenniisanindependentResourceManagementconsultantandhasherownpracticecurrentlyundertakingdevelopmentfeasibilityandprojectmanagement.

Withover30yearsofexperience,fromlocalauthority(cityplanner) toprojectmanager for a large scale consultancy,Jenni isnowasolepractitionerskilledatconsideringbothbusinessandenvironmentalimperatives.

She has extensive experience in regional infrastructureplanning from both community and developer/providerperspectives,particularly in relation to futureplanning forairports, and all New Zealand Airforce Bases, taking intoaccount conflicting demands of other neighbouring landuses.

Jenni is a voluntary planning adviser to the Parnellcommunity.ShewontheWaitematāLocalBoardawardforoutstandingcontributiontocommunityin2013withapilotcommunitystructureplan‘TomorrowParnell’.

Jenni isamemberof theNewZealandPlanning Institute,BTPMNZPI

Rangimarie HuniaRangimarieHuniaiswithNgātiWhātuaŌrākeiWhaiRawa,who have interests across the Tamaki Isthmus and landowners of Quay Park which sits adjacent to the Ports ofAuckland.

Nathan KennedyNathan Kennedy is a long-time environmental andMāorirights advocate. He has been the environment officer forNgāti Whanaunga for 15 years, where he has engagedin plan writing, resource consents, and appeals. Hehas authored Māori values assessments, including forinfrastructure projects and proposed activities within thecoastalmarinearea,andresearchedandwrittenwidelyonMāoriparticipationinenvironmentalplanningandonMāorienvironmentalindicators.

NathanisalsoaTreatyclaimsnegotiatorforhis iwi,andamemberoftheAucklandConservationBoard.Hehasappliedhisbackgroundasahistoricgeographerinhisplanningwork,andasageo-spatialanalyst. In the latterrole,hewastheGISAdministratorforThamesCoromandelDistrictCouncil,undertook claims-related mapping for Te Rarawa in thenorth, and sites of significance mapping for Hauraki iwi.Recently,hehascompletedmappingofAucklandiwitribalrohefortheAucklandCouncil.

HehasaBSc(Hons)fromtheUniversityofWaikatoandiscurrently completing a PhD evaluating the treatment ofMāoriprovisionsintheRMA,andoutcomesforMāori.

28

PORTFUTURE STUDY

Alan McDonaldAlanMcDonaldisthePolicyDirectoroftheEmployersandManufacturersAssociation(EMA).

The EMA represents the interests of more than 4,000businesses in the area from Taupō northwards, with themajorityof thosemembersbased in theAucklandregion.EMAmembershipcoversabout40percentofemployeesinNewZealand.

Greg McKeownGregisapreviouschairoftheformerAucklandCityCouncil’stransport committeewith a broad knowledge and stronginterestintransport,portandcitycentreissues.

He has submitted to the Proposed Auckland UnitaryPanel Hearing process at both Regional Policy Statementand more detailed Port Precinct levels, advocating for acomprehensive, broad and independent analysis of long-termportdevelopmentoptions.

Maxine Moana-TuwhangaiMaxine has extensive management and accountingexperience in previous roles at Tainui Group Holdings,EnvironmentWaikatoandTeWanangaoAotearoa.

She is Chairman of Waikato Tainui’s iwi authority, TeWhakakitenga o Waikato Inc (previously known as TeKauhanganui).

MaxineisanAccreditedEnvironmentCommissionerandhasstrongiwilinksintheWaikatoandKingCountryregions.

Julie StoutJulieStoutisaleadingAucklandarchitectandChairofUrbanAuckland (Society for theProtectionofAucklandCity andWaterfront).

She is representing groups associated with the built-environment professions of Auckland, plus recreationalharbourusers.

Annabel YoungAnnabelYoungistheExecutiveDirectoratTheNewZealandShipping Federation, which represents the coastal shipoperatorsworkingaroundNewZealand.

Annabel originally qualified as a lawyer and CharteredAccountant specialising in tax for 15 years. She is theauthorof“TheGoodLobbyist’sGuide”which isbasedonherexperienceasaMemberofParliament for two terms(NationalPartylistMP).

AftersheleftParliament,AnnabelranthetaxlobbyingteamattheNewZealandInstituteofCharteredAccountants,wastheChiefExecutiveofFederatedFarmersandwastheChiefExecutiveofthePharmacyGuild.

Shane VuletichShaneVuletichisManagingDirectorofTheFreshInformationCompany which specialises in strategy, measurement,evaluationandforecasting.

He has completed many notable projects in Aucklandduringhis17yearsasaconsultant includingdevelopmentof Auckland’s tourism, major event and business eventstrategies, provision of advice on cruise tourism andinfrastructure,andmanagementofduediligenceprocessesformajoreventsincludingRugbyWorldCup,CricketWorldCup,FIFAU20WorldCupandtheNRLAucklandNines.

ShanehasafirstclasshonoursdegreeineconomicsfromtheUniversityofAuckland.

Karen Wilson KarenWilson is of Te ĀkitaiWaiohua,Ngāti Te Ata, NgātiPikiaoandNgātiHaudescentandisarepresentativeoftheManaWhenuagroup-Waiohua-TāmakiAlliance.

ShehasspentmanyyearswithintheNewZealandPoliceasaseniormanagerandrecently leftpolicingtoconcentratefullyontheTeĀkitaiWaiohuaTreatyNegotiationsinTāmakiMakaurau.

KarenisthemandatedLeadNegotiatorforTeĀkitaiWaiohua,ChairoftheTeĀkitaiWaiohuaIwiAuthority,andthePukakiMāoriMaraeCommittee.ShealsoholdsChair/CoChair/DirectorrolesonothercommunityentitieswithinTāmaki.

Karen is a member of the Independent Māori StatutoryBoard and allocated to the following Auckland Councilcommitteesandgroups:

Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage,Parks, Recreation and Sports, Civil Defence EmergencyManagementGroup,AucklandEnergyResilience and LowCarbonActionPlanSteeringGroup,AucklandDomainMasterPlan, Arts, Culture and Events, Regulatory and By Laws,FukuokaFriendshipGarden,SeniorsAdvisoryAppointmentsPanel,RegionalStrategy&PolicyCorrectionsFacilityatWiri(Kohuora), Empowered Communities Political AdvisoryGroupandtheHunuaProjectPoliticalAdvisoryGroup.