DOCSLIB.ORG

Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment Prepared for Panuku Development Auckland Prepared by Beca Limited 12 June 2019 Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | 3911594 | NZ1-16166731-13 0.13 | 12 June 2019 | Rev C Creative people together transforming our world | Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................ 1 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 2 Wynyard Crossing Bridges ............................................................................... 2 2.1 Existing Wynyard Crossing Bridge .................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Proposed Wynyard Crossing Bridge ............................................................................................... 3 2.3 Temporary Access ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Spatial Extent of Works ................................................................................................................... 3 3 Existing Environment ........................................................................................ 4 3.1 Harbour Setting ................................................................................................................................ 4 3.2 Tides, Currents and Flushing........................................................................................................... 4 3.3 Wind ................................................................................................................................................. 7 3.4 Waves and Wakes ........................................................................................................................... 8 3.5 Sediment Processes and Sedimentation ......................................................................................... 9 3.6 Coastal Hazards and Climate Change .......................................................................................... 10 4 Effects of Construction ................................................................................... 12 4.1 Methodology for Marine Based Works .......................................................................................... 12 4.2 Water and Sediment Quality .......................................................................................................... 12 5 Effects on Coastal Processes ........................................................................ 13 5.1 Approach for the Assessment of Coastal Processes .................................................................... 13 5.2 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................................... 13 5.3 Tidal Flows, Current and Flushing ................................................................................................. 14 5.4 Waves and Wakes ......................................................................................................................... 14 5.5 Sediment Processes, Sedimentation and Erosion ........................................................................ 14 5.6 Coastal Hazards and Climate Change Adaptation ........................................................................ 15 6 Mitigation and Monitoring ............................................................................... 16 7 Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 16 8 References ....................................................................................................... 17 Appendices Appendix A – Tidal Modal Study Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | 3911594 | NZ1-16166731-13 0.13 | 12 June 2019 | i | Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | Revision History Revision Nº Prepared By Description Date A Stephen Priestley Draft report for client comment 14/05/19 B Stephen Priestley Final Draft 31/05/19 C Stephen Priestley Resource Consent Application 12/06/19 Document Acceptance Action Name Signed Date Prepared by Stephen Priestley 12/06/19 Reviewed by Niksa Sardelic 12/06/19 Approved by Stephen Priestley 12/06/19 on behalf of Beca Limited © Beca 2019 (unless Beca has expressly agreed otherwise with the Client in writing). This report has been prepared by Beca on the specific instructions of our Client. It is solely for our Client’s use for the purpose for which it is intended in accordance with the agreed scope of work. Any use or reliance by any person contrary to the above, to which Beca has not given its prior written consent, is at that person's own risk. Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | 3911594 | NZ1-16166731-13 0.13 | 12 June 2019 | Rev C | Executive Summary | Executive Summary Overview 1. This resource consent application involves the removal of the existing Wynyard Crossing bridge which has reached the end of its design life. The existing bridge was designed and consented as a temporary bridge. The existing bridge will be replaced by the proposed Wynyard Crossing bridge, which is to be a double-leaf bascule bridge along the same alignment as the existing bridge. 2. Bridge approaches will connect the proposed bridge (the Proposal ) to land (Te Wero Island and Wynyard Precinct), either side of the double leaf bascule. It is expected that the construction will take approximately 9 months. During this period a temporary crossing will be established to the south of the existing bridge 3. Piles associated will the Proposal will occupy approximately 29m2 of seabed. The elevated footprint of the bridge is about 954 m 2. Piles will be bored and installed within steel casings. 4. Pontoons associated with the temporary crossing have a footprint of 480m2 and the associated temporary piles will occupy less than 5m2 of the seabed. 5. No reclamation or dredging of the Project Area is proposed . Assessment Methodology 6. The proposal does not involve breakwaters (e.g. wave panels) or other structures which could have a large scale influence on the flow or velocity of water movement. Structures which are to be located below mean sea level are limited to piles and bulkhead structures which occupy a limited area of the Coastal Marine Area (CMA) within the Viaduct Harbour. As a result only numerical modelling of the tidal currents and basin flushing is considered appropriate to determine the actual and potential effects of the proposal on coastal processes. That modelling report is contained in Appendix A. 7. Unless otherwise stated, all other assessments in this report are based on the author’s experience with coastal structures in the Waitemata Harbour waterfront. 8. The existing environment is undergoing change. The infrastructure associated with Americas Cup 36 will alter the tidal and wave conditions within the Project Area. Relative effects on the environment are therefore described in this context, with references to Pre-Americas Cup and to Post-Americas Cup. Existing Environment 9. Referred to as the Project Area, the affected CMA is in the lower Waitematā Harbour and within a narrow corridor (about a 10m width) between Karanga Plaza and Te Wero Island. 10. Tidal velocities within the Project Area are low and less than 0.1 m/s. 11. The natural, relatively high tidal range of 2.5m (median) results in good to fair flushing of Viaduct Harbour, including the post Americas Cup project. 12. The Project Area is sheltered from wind waves and external wakes, with the annual significant wave height less than 100mm. Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | 3911594 | NZ1-16166731-13 0.13 | 12 June 2019 | Rev C | Executive Summary | 13. Relevant coastal hazards include storm surge (extreme storm tides) and tsunami. The effects of sea level rise are a relevant component to these coastal hazards. 14. The coastal edge of the Viaduct Harbour contains hard engineering structures which are resistance to erosion and scour. Potential Environmental Effects 15. From the author’s experience with waterfront projects, the effects during construction are expected to be less than minor. Some resuspension of sediment could be expected but will be localised and temporary. Any disturbed material will be deposited in the vicinity of the Project Area. 16. The Proposal will not change tidal currents within the harbour wide context and any changes will be local and of a low magnitude. Flushing of the Viaduct Basin will remain unchanged. 17. Any potential adverse effects related to wave/wake changes, sedimentation and scour will be negligible. 18. Coastal hazards (including the projected effects of climate change) have been considered for the Proposal as a whole. The lifting section of the proposed Wynyard Crossing bridge can be functional over a 100 year period, and the fixed sections of the bridge can be regraded to accommodate sea level rise. 19. As the overall adverse effects associated with this project are less than minor and probably negligible, no physical monitoring of water or sediment quality is proposed. Viaduct Harbour Bridge Coastal Effects Assessment | 3911594 | NZ1-16166731-13 0.13 | 12 June 2019 | Rev C | Introduction | 1 Introduction Beca has been engaged by Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) to carry out the coastal processes assessment for
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kaipatiki Local Board.20110510.Minutesattachments
    Item 18 Attachment D Prioritisation table of initiatives. The Kaipatiki Local Board is seeking funding for the initiatives in the following table for its 2011/12 Local Board Agreement (note: this is not a ranked list). Initiative Rationale Costs Enhancement of all local A number of existing local Unknown assets that serve a regional or parks and facilities within sub-regional function such as Kaipatiki provide for sub- netball, football etc and regional and regional provide support for the club activities. To ensure on-going that use the facilities levels of service are maintained and enhanced regional support for the costs of these facilities should be provided at a regional level. Improvements to the North The North Shore Events Unknown Shore Events Centre Centre requires climate including climate control and control for minimum sound proofing standards for the National Basketball League (for the NZ Breakers) and sound proofing to minimise adverse effects on neighbours. Improvements to the venue will provide opportunities to secure other events Urgently undertake the de- Ponds require urgent Onepoto c$70k silting of Onepoto, Link Drive, maintenance for the de- Chelsea Chelsea and Totaravale silting: Others Unknown stormwater ponds - offensive odours; - wildlife is dying and - the silt is causing problems for recreational users. Development of parking on The site purchase for Unknown vacant site of 450 Glenfield additional parking in Road Glenfield. Budget needs to be provided to remove the house and establish the parking. Site is in an unacceptable condition. Northcote Mainstreet Gateway Identified through the Town Unknown project Centre plan as a priority. Land has become available for the gateway and is needed for this centre identified for growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Fairfax/NZME – Response to Questions Arising from the Conference
    1 PUBLIC VERSION NZME AND FAIRFAX RESPONSE TO COMMERCE COMMISSION QUESTIONS ARISING FROM THE CONFERENCE ON 6 AND 7 DECEMBER 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. During its recent Conference held on 6 and 7 December 2016, the Commissioners asked the parties to follow up on a number of points. This paper sets out the parties' responses on those questions, and also provides answers to some further follow-up questions that the parties have received since the Conference. 2. The main points that this response covers are as follows: (a) Inefficient duplication of commodity news (external plurality): The Commissioners asked the parties to produce examples of "commodity" news coverage as between the five main media organisations being similar ("digger hits bridge" was provided as an example of where all the major media organisations covered effectively the same point). Reducing that duplication will be efficiency enhancing and will not materially detract from the volume or quality of news coverage. (b) A wide variety of perspectives are covered within each publication (internal plurality): The editors provided the Commission with examples of how each publication covers a wide variety of perspectives, as that is what attracts the greatest audience. This is true both within and across each of the parties' publications. The Commission asked for examples, which are provided in this response, together with additional material about why those incentives do not change post-Merger. (c) Constitutional safeguards on editorial independence: The Commissioners asked about what existing structures protected editorial independence and balance and fairness in reporting. This was asked both in the context of a possible future sale of Fairfax's stake, and in the context of the protections available to those subject to negative reporting seeking fairness and balance.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering Walk Final with out Cover Re-Print.Indd
    Heritage Walks _ The Engineering Heritage of Auckland 5 The Auckland City Refuse Destructor 1905 Early Electricity Generation 1908 9 Wynyard Wharf 1922 3 13 Auckland Electric 1 Hobson Wharf The New Zealand National Maritime Museum Tramways Co. Ltd Princes Wharf 1937 1989 1899–1902 1921–24 12 7 2 The Viaduct 10 4 11 The Auckland Gasworks, Tepid Baths Lift Bridge The Auckland Harbour Bridge The Sky Tower Viaduct Harbour first supply to Auckland 1865 1914 1932 1955-59 1997 1998-99 Route A 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Route B 14 Old 15 Auckland High Court 13 The Old Synagogue 1 10 Albert Park 1942 Government 1865-7 1884-85 The Ferry Building House 1912 1856 16 Parnell Railway Bridge and Viaduct 5 The Dingwall Building 1935 1865-66 3 Chief Post Office 1911 The Britomart Transport Centre 7 The Ligar Canal, named 1852, improved 1860s, covered 1870s 6 8 Civic Theatre 1929 2001-2004 New Zealand 9 Guardian Trust The Auckland Town Hall Building 1911 1914 17 The Auckland Railway Station 1927-37 11 Albert Barracks Wall 2 Queens Wharf 1913 1846-7 4 The Dilworth Building 1926 12 University of Auckland Old Arts Building 1923-26 10 Route A, approx 2.5 hours r St 9 Route B, approx 2.5 hours Hame Brigham St Other features Jellicoe St 1 f r ha W Madden s 2 e St St rf Princ a 12 h 13 W s Beaumont START HERE een 11 Qu Pakenha m St St 1 son ob H St bert y St n St Gaunt St Al 2 e e Pakenh S ue ket Place H1 am Q Hals St 3 ar Customs M St Quay St 3 4 18 NORTH Sw 8 St anson S Fanshawe t 5 7 6 Wyn Shortla dham nd
    [Show full text]
  • THE WATERFRONT PLAN AKL 2012 Tamaki – Kainga Nga Ika Me Nga Wheua Katoa! Auckland – Where the Fish Are So Succulent You Can Eat Them Bones and All!
    THE WATERFRONT PLAN AKL 2012 Tamaki – kainga nga ika me nga wheua katoa! Auckland – where the fish are so succulent you can eat them bones and all! This proverb alludes to the once abundant and sought after marine resources of Auckland’s waterfront. It signals Waterfront Auckland’s desire to create a sustainable waterfront providing for the current and future generations of Aucklanders. A place all Aucklanders can access the Waitemata Harbour for recreation, business or cultural practices. FOREWORD The waterfront has reignited Aucklander’s pride in their city. The pride and enthusiasm with which Aucklanders have embraced their new waterfront continues to amaze me. Although in its infancy, stage one of the redeveloped Wynyard Quarter and the expanse of Queens Wharf, attract people day after day, rain and shine. When Waterfront Auckland put forward its draft plans for the redevelopment of the whole waterfront last year we received hundreds of letters, emails and submissions. Most were hugely positive. “Just get on with it!” was the cry. Our job at Waterfront Auckland is to lead the momentum of the revitalisation, and of pride. Having listened to Aucklanders, we have refined our plans and here, we present a vision for how the waterfront could be redeveloped, how it can continue to create transformational change. We are living in an extraordinary time, perhaps unprecedented in recent history where opportunity is constrained and likely to remain so for some time to come. Our approach in these plans is to strike a balance that seizes opportunity while it is offering and continues to strive for a visionary outcome that our city and its people deserve.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Auckland
    H l t a rd S e R n N P fo v n N s A e e l r u l u o a ve o o rtsea t e e ve ra g Av or e v e n o e n P P B A na r l S d ter w e an r C a at a o d t a C l w K m C d ysw n ra h m G d S fford Bay A R o d S a R B r t r o t R t d t n e u en e e A l l inc S z l i S s B o l e V s e l u ce Bayswater v u n u c C e t e n M ra Ne v e n r e r W ls A r W d i P r la son A a e a a H e r Ave na b ll u H T e a l P l n o a P a a l n i e ce am a R g n m r s e m s i ti R A i A r a e it S r e r d e o d n a o u m r M a M a i d C R o a R W a MAP KEY d a g ur R arin akak at d S a St S Ng u u l l p p ve PostPost Office OfficeMAPPost KEY Office h h t A u o N u o Pl N c e i s e r ston a r A en g av B Post Office a a R Ti a ToiletsToiletsPost OfficeToilets z h z h a r a a e t a t rd t S Post Office d rt P a r P t a ath l o a R l R o B S c h N h N d d N a N i-SITEi-SitesToiletsi-Sites Visitori-Sites Information Centre 1 A d B Cnemoa D E F G H I e J Toilets in R Toilets a R Hi R v ng P A n d tau d C a K L e r n a w O i a Visitori-SitesMain InformationbusMain depots bus depots n ce r R Maini-Sites bus depots erra m r R i-SITES c Te A i-Sites o T D a rih b e A t e r a s i W E a W E a r R InterMainFerry City bus BusFerry depots Depots b Main bus depots b S Ferry S Main bus depots R d e ve y d Main Bus depots t t e A d c y A d d Cheltenham Beach ra b S rr Lake n e Lake lle R Explore T T A t FerryFerry Train line A l O TrainFerry line S d l Ferry S a u a uc RdJim Tit or x Ferry k ss i c fo d a f l ces h s i o a Acc e t e R n n Bay A o v R h r d ringa B n o t d atari e
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Transport Agency Additional Waitemata
    Attachment A New Zealand Transport Agency Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing Preliminary Business Case Restrictions of this report This report has been prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) for the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) solely for the purposes stated herein and should not be relied upon for any other purpose. We accept no liability to any party should it be used for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared. This Report is strictly confidential and (save to the extent required by applicable law and/or regulation) must not be released to any third party without our express written consent which is at our sole discretion. To the fullest extent permitted by law, PwC accepts no duty of care to any third party in connection with the provision of this Report and/or any related information or explanation (together, the “Information”). Accordingly, regardless of the form of action, whether in contract, tort (including without limitation, negligence) or otherwise, and to the extent permitted by applicable law, PwC accepts no liability of any kind to any third party and disclaims all responsibility for the consequences of any third party acting or refraining to act in reliance on the Information. We have not independently verified the accuracy of information provided to us, and have not conducted any form of audit in respect of NZTA. Accordingly, we express no opinion on the reliability, accuracy, or completeness of the information provided to us and upon which we have relied. The statements and opinions expressed herein have been made in good faith, and on the basis that all information relied upon is true and accurate in all material respects, and not misleading by reason of omission or otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • Auckland Transport Alignment Project April 2018
    Auckland Transport Alignment Project April 2018 Foreword I welcome the advice provided by the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP). The ATAP package is a transformative transport programme. Investment in transport shapes our city’s development and is a key contributor to economic, social and environmental goals. The direction signalled in this update is shared by Government and Auckland Council and demonstrates our commitment to working together for a better Auckland. Auckland is facing unprecedented population growth, and over the next 30 years a million more people will call Auckland home. Growth brings opportunities but when combined with historic under- investment in infrastructure the strain on the Auckland transport system is unrelenting. Existing congestion on our roads costs New Zealand’s economy $1.3b annually. We need to do things differently to what has been done in the past. Auckland needs a transport system that provides genuine choice for people, enables access to opportunities, achieves safety, health and environmental outcomes and underpins economic development. Our aspiration must be to make sure Auckland is a world class city. Auckland’s success is important not just for Aucklanders, but for our country’s long-term growth and productivity. The Government and Auckland Council have agreed to a transformative and visionary plan. ATAP is a game-changer for Auckland commuters and the first-step in easing congestion and allowing Auckland to move freely. I believe this ATAP package marks a significant step in building a modern transport system in Auckland. ATAP accelerates delivery of Auckland’s rapid transit network, with the aim of unlocking urban development opportunities, encourages walking and cycling, and invests in public transport, commuter and freight rail and funds road improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael John Foster
    Experience Cont. Michael John Foster Citizenship: New Zealand Education: Bachelor of Arts (Massey) Diploma of Town Planning (Auckland) Membership: Fellow, New Zealand Planning Institute Member, Planning Institute of Australia Member, Resource Management Law Association Member, RMA Streamlining & Simplifying Technical Advisory Group 2009 Chairman, Infrastructure Technical Advisory Group 2010 Competence: Strategic peer review, Project Management, environmental assessment, resource management planning, regional planning, airport planning, transportation planning, conceptual land development planning, development proposal formulation and urban growth strategies. Relevant Experience: In a career extending over 35 years Mike has more relevant experience in major infrastructure planning and projects than many people in New Zealand. From January 1985 until October 2001 Mike was Director of Planning for Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner Limited. He then set up a new Company operating as an independent planning consultant. His most relevant airport planning, major land use and strategic transportation experience is briefly defined below. AIRPORT PLANNING Board of Airline Representatives of New Zealand (BARNZ) (2010 - ongoing) Since 2010 Mike has been retained as specialist aviation adviser to BARNZ on a range of aviation planning related uses. (Client: BARNZ) Ashburton Airport Future Proofing (2004 – ongoing) Mike is retained as specialist aviation planning adviser to land and airspace designations to plan and protect for the future growth of Ashburton Airport. (Client: Ashburton District Council) Hawkes Bay Airport Expansion (2009 – 2010) Mike was retained as specialist aviation planning adviser to the airport company with respect to a proposed major runway extension. (Client: Hawkes Bay Regional Airport Ltd) Queenstown Airport Expansion (2006) Mike was retained as specialist aviation planning adviser to Queenstown Airport Corporation in the scoping phase of the planned long term review of RESA requirements and revision of the existing air noise boundary controls.
    [Show full text]
  • Tonkin & Taylor Hydraulic Modelling Report
    America's Cup 36 Coastal Processes and Dredging Technical Report Appendix C Tonkin & Taylor Hydraulic Modelling Report Beca // 12 January 2018 3233847 // NZ1-14861405-218 0.218 // 1 REPORT AC36 Waterfront Development Hydraulic Modelling Report D Prepared for Panuku Development Auckland Prepared by R Tonkin & Taylor Ltd Date A January 2018 Job Number F 1005128.v5 T Tonkin & Taylor Ltd January 2018 AC36 Waterfront Development - Hydraulic Modelling Report Job No: 1005128.v5 Panuku Development Auckland Document Control Title: AC36 Waterfront Development Date Version Description Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorised by: 6/12/17 v1 Preliminary Draft for information TDS RRH RRH 13/12/17 v2 Draft for Client review TDS RRH RRH 21/12/17 v3 Draft for Client review TDS RRH RRH 22/12/17 v4 Final Draft Tom Shand Richard Richard Reinen-Hamill Reinen-Hamill 05/01/18 v5 Final for Consent Application Tom Shand Richard Richard Reinen-Hamill Reinen-Hamill Distribution: Panuku Development Auckland Pdf BECA Pdf Tonkin & Taylor Ltd (FILE) 1 copy Table of contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Scope of works 2 1.2 Report structure Error! Bookmark not defined. 2 Existing environment 3 2.1 General description 3 2.2 Existing structures 3 2.3 Bathymetry 5 2.4 Sediments 6 2.5 Water levels 8 2.5.1 Tidal levels 8 2.5.2 Extreme water levels 8 2.5.3 Sea level rise 8 2.6 Winds 9 2.7 Waves 9 2.7.1 Vessel wakes 9 2.8 Currents 10 3 Proposed modifications 15 3.1 Structure layout 15 3.2 Bathymetry 15 3.3 Basin and entrance characteristics 16 3.3.1 Wynyard Wharf South Waterspace 16 3.3.2
    [Show full text]
  • Explore. Efforts, Just by Coming on Board
    6 map ref C2 Whale and dolphin watching direct from Never miss a beat Auckland city. I Discover Today Protect for Tomorrow URAK 9 map ref C2 RADIO HA HITS FROM THE 90’S TILL NOW ROCKALTERNATIVE TEXT ‘FREQ’ TO 4487 TEXT ‘FREQ’ TO 3483 With white sand beaches, clear waters, a lively FOR FREQUENCIES FOR FREQUENCIES AUCKLAND EXPRESS dining scene, high end shopping, beautiful parks and HIGHLIGHTS TOUR reserves, Auckland’s North Shore is renowned for its 20% OFF wonderful lifestyle. Auckland’s magnificent connected Admission Meet a local who will show you the best of coast is just a short ferry ride across the Waitemat White sand and calm Harbour into Devonport, or by bus or private vehicle waters of Cheltenham Auckland in 3 hours Present this ad on-site to receive the discount off the walkup admission price. over the Auckland Harbour Bridge. Here the noise Beach, Devonport. One voucher is valid for one transaction. Cannot be used in conjunction with TOP 40 • We visit the volcanoes, learn about the Polynesian any other special offer. Not redeemable for cash. Offer expires on 31/12/2019. BEATS THAT MOVE YOU Promo code: 0239 TEXT ‘FREQ’ TO 9696 TEXT ‘FREQ’ TO 8200 & Maori history, plus see amazing scenery. and pace of the CBD gives way to the relaxed beach- Milford Beach, Reserve, FOR FREQUENCIES FOR FREQUENCIES • Adult $89/Child $49 – Book online now! side vibe that the North Shore is known for. Pirate Playground and Marina. Takapuna’s white sands, www.torutours.com 027 457 0011 BEACHES water sports and magnificent 8 map ref H2 OK DI The North Shore is blessed with a beautiful all-abilities playground.
    [Show full text]
  • Pūhoi to Warkworth Section Proposal
    TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF INQUIRY Ara Tūhono - Pūhoi to Wellsford Road of National Significance: Pūhoi to Warkworth Section Proposal HEARING at NORTHRIDGE COUNTRY LODGE, SILVERDALE, AUCKLAND on 09 April 2014 BOARD OF INQUIRY: The Honourable John Priestley CNZM QC (Chairperson) David Chandler (Board Member) Michael Parsonson (Board Member) Bronwyn Hunt (Board Member) Alan Withy (Board Member) Page 250 APPEARANCES <ANDREW BELL, resworn [10.12 am] ...................................................... 253 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLIAMS [10.13 am] ........... 254 5 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LANNING [11.14 am] ............. 278 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VELLA [11.50 am] .................. 288 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR THALLER [12.48 pm]............. 312 <RE-EXAMINATION BY MS BROSNAHAN [12.53 pm] .............. 315 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW [12.57 pm] ....................................... 317 10 <ROGER WILLIAMS, affirmed [2.20 pm] ................................................ 338 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BROSNAHAN [3.52 pm] ........ 366 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DILLON [4.05 pm] .................. 372 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VELLA [4.08 pm] .................... 373 15 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.28 pm] ......................................... 383 <CAMERON PITCHES, affirmed [4.30 pm] ............................................. 383 Northridge Country Lodge, Auckland 09.04.14 Page 251 [10.05 am] CHAIRPERSON: Counsel, before we re-swear the witness and continue where we left off yesterday, there are two matters which we want to 5 inform
    [Show full text]
  • Te Wero Bridge Transport Assessment May 2008
    Te Wero Bridge Transport Assessment May 2008 Project: Te Wero Bridge Title: Transport Assessment Document Reference: S:\accx\059\CR140508-1 te wero.doc Prepared by: Karl Hancock Reviewed by: Ian Clark Revisions: Date Status Reference Approved by Initials 30 March 2008 Draft AR300308-1 I Clark 8 April 2008 Draft for circulation to BR080408-1 I Clark ARTA, ARC and PB 14 May 2008 Final CR140508-1 I Clark Te Wero Bridge Transport Assessment i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides a transport assessment of the proposed Te Wero Bridge. This Bridge would provide a link between Jellicoe Street, within the Wynyard Quarter, to the west, and Quay Street, on the approach to the Britomart Transport Centre, to the east. It is proposed that the Bridge would accommodate pedestrians, cyclists and scheduled buses, but not general traffic. The proposed Bridge is considered to be an essential element of the Wynyard Quarter Plan Change, which seeks to achieve the framework for quality, mixed use development on a substantial waterfront site, within the northwestern sector of the Auckland CBD. The Wynyard Quarter area is surrounded on three sides by water. Fanshawe Street is located along the southern side (i.e. the fourth side) and this is a busy route for traffic between the Northern Motorway and the CBD. It is also an important leg of the Northern Busway. The Wynyard Quarter Plan Change recognises the transport challenges affecting the accessibility of the site, and it puts forward a solution which emphasises travel by modes of travel other than the single occupancy private vehicle.
    [Show full text]