"Press 'Ctrl-Shift-F' to show VBA input form and

clear this NOTE."

Date: October 2010

Job no: 60526

PLAN CHANGE 20 MASTERPLAN REVIEW SEPTEMBER 2010

Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. BLDG 3, LEVEL 4, 666 GREAT SOUTH ROAD, AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND. PO BOX 6752, WELLESLEY ST, AUCKLAND 1141, NEW ZEALAND. PHONE +64 9 571 2470 FAX +64 9 571 3405 WWW.WOODS.CO.NZ

WOODS

DOCUMENT CONTROL RECORD

Client MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL Project PLAN CHANGE 20 Document PLAN CHANGE 20 MASTERPLAN REVIEW SEPTEMBER

2010

ISSUE AND REVISION RECORD

Date of Issue 07/10/10 Originator

ANDREA PESSIONE

Checked/Approved CLAYTON MCKENZIE

Office of Origin Penrose Telephone (09) 571 2470 Facsimile (09) 571 3405 Email andrea.pessione@woods.co.nz Woods report.doc

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

1

WOODS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 2

1 INITIAL ENGAGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ 3

2 JULY / SEPTEMBER BRIEF FROM MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL ............................... 5

2.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 5

2.2 REVIEW REQUESTS ....................................................................................................... 5

2.3 REVIEW PROCESS .......................................................................................................... 5

2.4 REVIEW LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................. 6

3 AREAS OF NOTABLE CONFLICTS ..................................................................................... 7

3.1 ROADS & GREEN FINGERS ........................................................................................ 7

4 SPECIFIC REVIEWS ................................................................................................................... 9

4.1 SOUTH EASTERN CATCHMENT – RESIDENTIAL 4 ......................................... 9

5 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 9

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

2

WOODS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Since 2009 Woods Consultants Limited have been involved with providing engineering support to the Plan Change 20 process.

This included undertaking an initial investigations of the Plan Change 20 study area to determine maximum development extents in 2009 and a subsequent review of the first draft Master Plan in February of 2010; results of this are available in the report titled “Flatbush Master Plan Review” dated, February 2010, and were used by Manukau City Council to determine the final draft of what this report is reviewing.

After undertaking a review of the final draft Plan Change 20 Master Plan layout, Woods recommend, with some minor amendments as detailed within this report, the current layout should provide a viable solution for Plan Change 20.

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

3

WOODS

1 INITIAL ENGAGEMENTS

In June 2009, Woods Consultants Limited was engaged by Manukau City Council to undergo initial investigation into the Plan Change 20 area of Flatbush as per the plan below.

As part of the initial investigation, Woods were asked to review and provide the following:

� Desktop geotechnical assessment

� Preliminary assessment of critical flood plains & propose widths of the Stormwater Management Area.

� Confirm widths of the Green Fingers, and minimum spacing’s to ensure park edge roads will not negatively impact on the space having regard to the Stormwater Management Areas, and Public Open Space.

� Confirm size and location of stormwater treatment devices and pipe networks.

� Confirm wastewater serviceability.

� Undertake bulk earthworks and slope analysis.

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

4

WOODS

Subsequent to the initial investigations, Woods were engaged again in early 2010 to review the outputs of the design team, mainly consisting of Randles Straatveit Architects Ltd & DJ Scott Associates Ltd. Woods were asked to review and provide the following:

� Areas of Notable Conflict,

� Block Dimensions

� Road cross sections

� Key Specific investigation areas

Upon completion of the second review, a report was issued titled “Flatbush Master Plan Review” dated, February 2010, and used by the design team to produce the second draft of the Master plan.

This final review dated October 2010 has been engaged to look at the final layout to ensure the Master plan to be used for Plan Change 20 is viable.

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

5

WOODS

2 JULY / SEPTEMBER BRIEF FROM MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL

2.1 OVERVIEW

Manukau City Council has undergone extensive modifications to the overall Master Plan layout since the report issued in early 2010 and in both July and September 2010 provided the layout for further review.

The following information was provided to Woods for review:

� 14/07/10, Revised Structure Plan_July 2010_Draft1.dxf

� 21/07/10, RevisedStructurePan_14July2010-aerial.pdf

� 01/09/10, FB_Proposed_New_Zones annotated for Andrea Pessione 1 Sept.JPG

� 06/09/10, RevisedStructurePlan_Edit3_Aug2010.dxf

� 28/09/10, xxStructurePlan_scratchEditing2.pdf

2.2 REVIEW REQUESTS

Woods was asked by Manukau City Council to look at the proposed road alignments and ensure the layout can be achieved without significant adverse affects to the land form by major modifications. Similar to the last review, Woods have provided within this report

(a) Reality check for Master Plan including but not limited to ponds, road locations, and road alignments, including comparison of the land for to the latest Beca flood levels.

(b) Comment on points of conflict.

(c) Comment on feasibility of gradients, especially those needed for proposed gully crossings (We note, the Master Plan report and information provided for review did not include any contours or gradients, and therefore these have been assumed to still be the same as those from the initial Woods investigation)

2.2.1 Specific Reviews

(a) Look into feasibility of development of the south eastern area shown as residential 4 and provide workable options for the roading and development network in this area.

2.3 REVIEW PROCESS

Woods overlaid the updated Master Plan with the information provided by Manukau City Council with that issued to Manukau City Council in 2009. To confirm areas where the new layout went beyond that suggested.

Any areas where this was the case, Woods reviewed both the horizontal and vertical geometry to confirm if this could or could not be achieved.

Where this could not Woods have made recommendations as detailed below.

Woods also have reviewed the latest flood levels produced by BECA compared to proposed road levels to confirm that the land form proposed achieves freeboard to the streams. It has been confirmed that the land form can be designed in the masterplan layout to conform with the flood levels provided by Beca in the data sets called:

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

6

WOODS

• E-mail received 15 September 2010 � IW_Node_Links_100915.dwg � IW Results 2010-09-15.xls

• E-mail received 22 September 2010 � IW Model Data 2010-03-26.xls, � Proposed_Culverts_10-09-15.xls � Additional Culvert Locations.pdf

2.4 REVIEW LIMITATIONS

(a) Please note that the review of the Master Plan is limited to the extents included in the Woods original brief except where specifically requested by Manukau City Council and mentioned in this report.

This excludes the land already zoned for development and outside the Plan Change 20 stage 1boundaries.

(b) The limited timeframes available to undertake the Master Plan review has prevented a fully detailed assessment. Accordingly, the depth of the review has been limited to a desk top study with reference to the initial investigation only. Further modelling will be required at detailed design prior to construction, in particular the south-eastern quadrant where we suggest allowing some flexibility in layout to minimise impact on the landscape

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

7

WOODS

3 AREAS OF NOTABLE CONFLICTS

3.1 ROADS & GREEN FINGERS

Plan from Manukau City Council 28 September 20100

“xxStructurePlan_scratchEditing2” Overlaid with roads reviewed, and shading to show extent of review

3.1.1 Road conflicts with Green Finger/Ponds - locations 1-10

1. The road adjacent to FBCMIP pond C3B needs to allow for a more pronounced diversion. The alignment of the stream turns sharply here, and hence the road will require to allow for this.

We also see two alternatives also:

� The stream can be realigned within the stormwater reserve, however this is not recommended, and should be discussed at length with the ARC

� Not to form this link across the front of the pond.

2. The east west link in this location is too close to the stream. We recommend pulling this link south by approx. 30m.

This will also allow for the elimination of FBCMIP Stormwater Quality Pond B5B, by providing larger space for B7B where the catchment of B5B can be treated.

2 4

7 8

6

A

B

1

3

9

10

C

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

8

WOODS

3. This roading is too close to the stream and needs to be adjusted to ensure no negative impact on the environment.

4. Online pond B7A will require extended detention to be provided for off line. This requires the construction of a small (4,000m2) pond for the water quality treatment.

Given this we recommend relocating the road in this location 52m to the east to fit this pond in.

5. The area of land to the north of Flatbush School Road in this location is very steep we recommend not building a road in this location.

6. The radius on this bend must be increased to min 50m in order to eliminate the conflict with the gully.

We note the radius provided on most of the roads are extremely tight with regard to road geometry and should be assessed on individual basis during the detailed design of these roads to ensure minimum Engineering requirements are maintained.

7. Discussions with Manukau City Council have confirmed the desire to complete the Collector road loop in this location. To achieve this with minimal effect to the gully system, we have recommended that the road be realigned along the ridge to connect up to Flatbush School Road.

8. The loop road should follow the ridge; this means this will need to be pulled in by some 55m in places.

9. Offline pond B8B required more space to provide a more aesthetic outcome. We recommend this road be moved south 20m.

10. The stream crossing in this location has a 22m difference in height from north to south. If a road crossing is required in this location, we recommend this follows the contour to reduce the grade.

3.1.2 Comments and Recommendations - areas A-C

A. Due to the chosen location for pond B8A, a specific stormwater treatment device, like an up-flow filter, will be required to service this small extrusion.

B. Though this road can physically work if an engineered structure is installed to the south, both block shape and engineering would be improved if the

9

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL JOB NO. 60526

9

WOODS

road was built in form with the other roads. This will also enable the road to link through to Flatbush School Road as it would be further from the bridge, and safety would be much improved.

C. We recommend that traffic engineers be engaged to review the proposal of having so many properties accessing the arterial roads so close to the major intersection prior to this being agreed as an acceptable practice.

4 SPECIFIC REVIEWS

4.1 SOUTH EASTERN CATCHMENT – RESIDENTIAL 4

After discussions with Manukau City Council, Woods were asked to make comment of the specific area known as the McQuoids Road, South Eastern Catchment. This area is proposed to be included in the newly created residential 4 zoning, requiring minimum lot sizes of 1000m2 and encouraging average lots of 1200-1500m2. WOODS agree on this concept in the lower areas of the catchment where gradients are less severe, however recommend more flexibility towards the upper ridge line, including options for larger lots (to allow to include un-usable land) and larger quantities of rear lots to allow private ways where narrow ridgelines prevent the ability to construct full width roads (as can be seen in the already developed Regis area adjacent).

5 CONCLUSIONS

We recommend in general the layout form provided by Manukau City Council to be very good, and with the minor amendments as detailed above, should provide a viable solution for Plan Change 20.