Appendix I
Cultural Impact Assessments
Transpower Ltd
TRANSPOWER RANGATAUA REALIGMENT PROJECT Ngati He Cultural Impact Assessment
Prepared by Des Heke of Papatuanuku Services September 2017
Karakia
He hōnore
He korōria ki te Atua
He maungārongo ki te whenua
He whakaaro pai ki ngā tāngata katoa
Mihi
He mihi Ki te tahuna o Rangataua,
Ki nga pa tawhito
Ko Te Pa o Te Ariki
Ko Te Ngaio
Ko te Marae o Opopoti
Ki nga whare tipuna ko Te Aotakawhaki
Ko Wairakewa
He mihi ki o matou tipuna o Ngati He
He mihi ki nga kaumatua me nga kuia o Ngati He
Hei mahi mo nga uri o Ngati He
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 2
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ...... 4
2.0 Project Background ...... 4
3.0 Methodology ...... 5
4.0 Historical Background ...... 6
5.0 Ko Ngati He te Hapu ...... 6
6.0 Inventory Significant Sites Potentially Affected ...... 8
7.0 Analysis of Ngati He Geographical Information ...... 9
8.0 Urbanisation of Maungatapu ...... 15
9.0 Assment of effects to the Ngati He hapu and Maungatapu Marae ...... 19
Recommendations...... 20 10.0 Visual Assessment of Proposed Mono Pole Powerline Structures ...... 22
11.0 Recommendations ...... 25
12.0 References ...... 26
Appendix 1 ...... 27
Consents Required ...... 27 Appendix 2 ...... 28
Effects Assessment Criteria using the Purpose of the RMA and Principles ...... 28 Appendix 3 ...... 29
Appendix 4 ...... 32
Appendix 5 ...... 33
Appendix 6: Earthworks Monitoring Protocol ...... 34
Appendix 7: Kaitemako B & C Public Works Taking for Substation ...... 36
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 3
Photo 1: Maungatapu Marae
1.0 Introduction
This Report outlines the values of Ngati He associated with proposed relocation of the powerline network from Maungatapu to Matapihi. The values relate to the historical and contemporary association with sites of cultural significance to Ngati He Hapu. The Report also provides areas of significance through the description of sites and maps. These outline the influence of Ngati He within the extent of proposed works by Transpower. Also provided is a Hapu protocol, relating to discoveries and the tikanga involved that would also guide an archaeological investigation.
2.0 Project Background
The extent of the proposed works for the relocation of the Transpower powerline network are between the Maungatapu and Matapihi Peninsula’s. The purpose of the relocation is to remove the powerlines off private land which has encumbered and historically desecrated culturally significant sites to Ngati He. It also secures the future supply of electricity to the Mount Maunganui and wider community.
Transpower requires a Heritage Authority from Heritage New Zealand to undertake geotechnical works that will test the soil suitability for the proposed power poles used for the relocation of the powerline network.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 4
Representatives of Ngati He have met with the proposed project Archaeologists Danielle Tiffin and have undertaken a cultural induction to the Project Site and key areas of interest for Ngati He. These included the power poles at Te Ariki Park, the recent archaeological investigations for the NZTA Median Strip Barrier and the Kaitemako Substation.
3.0 Methodology
GIS Analysis: -Cultural sites and effected areas within Realignment Project. -Transpower Network
Ngati He Historical Brief: -History -Urbanisation of Maungatapu
Desktop Review: -Consents required -Realignment Options -Visual Assessment
Site Visits and Engagement: -Maungatapu Marae Grounds and Foreshore 1. Poles -inspect condition and install safety fencing and designed hazard signs, and 2. Anchor Structure-Regional Council & Maintenance Staff to bring structure to standard -Maungatapu Marae Visual Site Assessment (TBC) -Te Ngaio Block and Maungatapu Marae (Archaeological Investigations-with Authorised Project Archaeologist). A cultural induction was undertaken for the Archaeologist also. -Public consultation hui at Maungatapu School -Ngati He representative hui with Transpower on the draft CIA Friday 8 September 2017, 1pm – 3pm, Tauranga Moana Maori Trust Board, 3 The Strand
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 5
Assessment of Effects:
The assessment of effects was undertaking using the Assessment of Effects proposed by Transpower. Utilizing the purpose and principles of the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991 the issues have been articulated and weighted accordingly within the legislative hierarchy framework. Being the Matters of National Important, other Matters and the Treaty of Waitangi Principles. 4.0 Historical Background
The Transpower Network currently is erected along the Road Corridor and private land. These lands all belonged to Ngati He individuals after being awarded the Maungatapu Block at Maungatapu and Te Ngaio at the Matapihi Peninsula following the Native Land Court Grants. In 1864, the Battles of Gate Pa and Te Ranga were fought between the British and Tauranga Hapu which saw the confiscation of 290,000 acers under legislation imposed by the Government of the time. This seen the land being surveyed and then vested into owners such as the Crown, settlers and local Hapu. Ngati He were awarded land blocks surveyed where the current Transpower network lies. These Blocks include: Te Ngaio, Maungatapu, Waitaia, Waipapa, Tongaparaoa, Poike, Kaitimako, Otawa, Waitaha No2, Ohauiti No 2, Te Aute, Te Papa Parish Oropi, Oropi 1 &2 and Taumata. A number of shared interests in these Blocks occur in Ohauiti, Oropi, Waitaia and Tongaparaoa and Poike with Ngai Te Ahi hapu. The Kaitimako Substation sits on the former Kaitimako B&C Blocks that were acquired under the Public Works Act in 1963. At that time, these lands were part of the owners Farming scheme through their Maori Trust producing Dairy milk. The Transpower Network has its power poles erected on and adjacent too sites of cultural significance to Ngati He, from areas south of the Tauranga City such as Maungarangi at the back of Welcome Bay and Te Aute which is beyond the suburb of Ohauiti. There are also power poles erected on areas within the City which are significant to Ngati He. This includes the Maungatapu and Matapihi Penins ula’s, where several known sites of significance have been effected by the power poles. For the scope of the geotechnical works. These sites are: Omanu, Te Pa o Te Ariki, Opopoti, Te Ngaio, Puwhariki, Tukiata, Tumatanui and Oruamatua
5.0 Ko Ngati He te Hapu
Ngati He has many hapu representation of many families that settled and remained on lands from Otawa to Ranginui, Te Auhi, Tongaparaoa, Waoku, Ohauiti, Kaitimako, Maungatapu and Te Ngaio. (Hamilton, November 2000). Mataatua Waka: Ngati He whanau descend from Tamapiri son of Tamapahore. Ngati He also descend from Te Rangihouhiri from Kaimawhatu of Tamawhariua. Rangihouhiri is the ancestor remembered by the Iwi Ngai Te Rangi. Ngati He also relate to Ngati Pukenga through whakapapa. This kinship was evident in military support for Ngati He is times of strife although
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 6 the alliances changed given the politics also of the time. Ngati He acknowledged Ngati Pukenga and gifted land known as Ngapeke. Te Arawa Waka: Ngati He has ancestral connection to Waitaha in particular Kumaramaoa, Hikapa, Rakei and Rehu. The connection to Te Arawa waka through Waitaha give rise to a long occupation and vast settlement of lands in the Tauranga area from the Rangataua through to Te Rerenga. These are settlements as given above. Waitaha too were living on Mauao, through the eastern areas through to Kaitimako, Maungarangi, Otawa, Waoku and Otanewainuku. This including also Maungatapu. Takitimu Waka: Ngai Te Rangi attacked Kinonui of Ngati Ranginui at the Settlement of Ruarapapari on Mauao in the Battle of Te Kokowai. Ngati Ranginui Hapu also settled Poike, Tongaparaoa, Ohauiti, Oropi, Waoku, Taumata. Ngati He are closely related to the Hapu Ngai Te Ahi of Ngati Ranginui.
Ko Ngati He te Hapu Ko Opopoti te Marae Ko Wairakewa te Whare Tipuna Ko Te Aotakawhaki te Wharekai Ko Ngai Te Rangi te Iwi
Opopoti: This is the land that sits below Te Pa o Te Ariki where the current marae facilities are. These include the Wharetipuna, Wharekai, Te Rangimarie of Te Haahi Ratana, Te Kohanga Reo o Opopoti and the Hauora Te Aotakawhaki: Te Aotakawhaki is a wife of Tamapahore. They had Kahukino and then descends Rangihouhiri III or Te Rangohouhiri a Kahukino. He married Hinewa of Otumoetai Pa in settleing peace with Ngati Ranginui. Te Rangihouhiri a Kahukino initially attacked Maungatapu at Te Tumu o Oue, Whenuahou and Te Pa o Te Ariki when Hikapa the Waitaha fighting Chief had mana over that area. Pa o Te Ariki was not taken though following years seen permission granted for descendants of Tamapahore to stay eventually remaining there at Maungatapu. Wairakewa: Wairakewa is the mother of Toroa who captained the Mataatua Waka. The Eastern Bay of Plenty tribes of Mataatua refer to the name of Irakewa. It is also disputed whether Wairakewa is a man or woman. Ngati He: The name was given to the people living at Maungatapu at the time of the misunderstanding of the tipuna, Turapaki. There was confusion on his whereabouts and safety and he was lost presumably killed in transit between relatives up the Coast at Te Whanau a Apanui and home. The remembrance of this event is referred to as the ‘He’ or misunderstanding.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 7
Tuwairua (f) = Romainohorangi = Paewhitu (f) Tamapahore Rangihouhiri Tamapiri Tamawhariua Te Ipurehe = Kaimawhatu Huirau = Wahanui Turapaki Te Pa o Te Ariki: Sometimes referred to as Maungatapu Pa. This Pa is significant to Ngati He and is known to have never suffered a defeat upon attacking war parties. Rangihouhiri a Kahukino could not penetrate the defences during the initial attack a few years after the battle of Te Kokowai at Mauao. During the Musket War period (1820-1840s) the Pa was defended against Hauraki, Northern and Te Arawa Tribes. (Kahotea, December 1999). The Pa site became abandoned after the great influenza epidemics and many people were buried there during this time. Currently the area has been modified since the establishment of the SH29 Maungatapu Bridge in the 1960’s and the development of the Rangataua Club grounds including the courts and rugby field as well as the Club house facilities. The tapu associated with Te Pa o Te Ariki was acknowledged and lifted to make way for the safe progress of the people and use of the land for future generations. Ngati He Hapu: These are some of the Hapu that historically aligned with the current Ngati He Hapu as we know today. Ngati He, Ngati Whainoa, Ngati Hoko, Ngati Hinewa, Te Whanau Whero, Ngati Rurea, Ngati Rakei, Ngati Tama, Ngati Rehu Ngati He is also closely affiliated with Ngai Te Ahi Hapu of Ngati Ranginui Iwi. The waka of Ngati Ranginui is Takitimu.
6.0 Inventory Significant Sites Potentially Affected
Omanu: This is a hill and former Pa lookout point overseeing the Maungatapu Peninsula to the surrounding landscape and harbour. This site has been heavily modified with both the formation of the Road corridor benching into the eastern side. Also, there is residential development on the western side. The power pole erected in this area may come across features of former occupation. Te Pa o Te Ariki: The history given above and current focus of attention due to the effects of erosion evident with the anchor structure discussions for power pole 117. The effects to identify here would take issue of artefacts, features or koiwi being discovered. Opopoti: The history is also given above and many of the Maungatapu Marae facilities are based on this area. The proposed large pole is to be constructed in the area so the proposed geotechnical and power pole are of concern to discoveries also. PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 8
Te Ngaio: This is a large Pa heavily modified by the construction of the SH29/2 State Highway in the 1960’s. Te Ngaio Is also th e name of the Blocks 1 & 2 that were originally awarded to Ngati He individuals during the land Grants of the Native Land Court. There are numerous Pa that are located within the Te Ngaio Blocks being Te Ngaio Pa, Puwhaariki, Tukiata and Tumatanui. Wharekaia is also a Pa located within this Block. A number of these Pa date back to the Waitaha time which was pre Batttle of Te Kokowai (circa. 1650-1700). At least two of these Pa being Tumatanui and Tukiata were constructed and used from 1857-1859 over the Matapihi -Ohuki dispute between Ngati He and Ngai Tukairangi. Puwhaariki: Like Te Ngaio a traditional Pa site dating back prior to the Battle of Te Kokowai. This is located just north of Te Ngaio. Tukiata: This Pa was commanded by Tareha Kiharoa of Ngati He and his brother Manihera. They were also noted of being of the Hapu Ngati Hoko. The dispute was over land vacated by Ngati Pukenga from the time they resided at Oruamatua and moved to Manaia. The land was good for the growing crops to trade as Ngati He also had two Schooners that were trading overseas. The surrounding Gun Pa site area is also protected by palisades. There are numerous amounts of Kumara storage puts and Rua surrounding Tukiata. Recent monitoring of excavations required for the NZTA Median Strip Barrier had uncovered the gun fighter Pa and evidence of settlement through storage pits, shell disposal, Rua and cooking areas. The technology of gun fighter pa construction is very significant as it was developed and used in the Battle of Gate Pa at Pukehinahina. Then from there most probably the Boer Wars in South Africa and the trenches in World War One.
Tumatanui: A gunfighter Pa built by Rawiri Puhirake of Ngai Tukairangi and Penetaka Tuaia of Te Matekiwaho. They had learnt and refined the art from the time of being up North by Nga Puhi during battles at Mauao.
7.0 Analysis of Ngati He Geographical Information
An Analysis using ARC GIS software was undertaken with the information provided on maps to interpret and identify the issues. Maps regarding the Anchor Structure have been useful in assessing the effects for the recent permit to occupy the foreshore. These are attached in Appendix 3 with the Assessment Table. (Kaiawha, Cultural Impact Assessment: Anchor Structure, 2017). The two maps Maori Values Assessment provided are within the Project Area for the Proposed Realignment works. Map 1 of the two identifies the sites of interest at the Te Ngaio Block, Matapihi. Map 2 identifies Maungatapu sites of interest in particular the Maungatapu Marae Reservation and the Marae area known as Opopoti. (Kaiawha, Maori Values Assessment Heritage Authority, 2017).
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 9
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 10
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 11
In addition to the analysis for the Realignment project area a Map Series was produced in preparation for developing a memorandum of understanding between Ngati He and Transpower. This shows the areas of interest to Ngati He in relation to Transpower Network. The main network routes are the Tarukenga to Kaitimako Line, the Kaitemako to Mount Line and Greerton and the Te Puke to Kaitemako. It is important to note that in 2006 the Kaitemako Substation was constructed on land acquired from Ngati He landowners under the public works legislation in 1963.The Map series shows a vast area from Te Rerenga in the South, Otawa in the East, Poike in the West and Oruamatua to the North. The many hapu of Ngati He as listed above occupied and settled these areas. (Kaiawha, Ngati He Map Series, 2017)
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 12
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 13
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 14
8.0 Urbanisation of Maungatapu
The land that currently accommodates the Rangataua Sports and Cultural Club building, its rugby field, tennis and netball courts, is known as “Pa O te Ariki”. It is a Maori Reservation and is overseen, administered, and managed by members from the Ngati He hapu (subtribe). It is from this site, in 1898 that the Maungatapu Marae was relocated to its current position on the Maungatapu peninsula waterfront (Opopoti). After the whare (main meeting house) was moved to its current location the land itself remained in partial use as an urupa (cemetery) until after the Influenza Pandemic of 1918. In the late 1930s the urupa was spiritually cleansed so the koiwi (bones of the dead) could later be removed. This was with a view to the site being re-utilised for future development and henceforth where the Sports club and its amenities sit today. Many that reside in the immediate locality are not aware that a large corridor of land belonging to the hapu is negotiated by large powerlines owned and maintained by State-owned Transpower. One of the structures that sits on the Sports Grounds, the edge of the peninsula itself, has been an ongoing concern for its members and their families for decades. This pole is connected to another that sits in the middle of the wider Tauranga Moana Harbour. The powerlines were the first public works to affect the Pa site. There were objections by Ngati He land owners on the basis that the area of land proposed for power lines and pole structures were part of a Reserve. Further in 1955 plans for the Maungatapu bridge had been finalised with an agreed list of condition. However, these agreements did not go through as a new route had been planned and those conditions bypassed. (Bassett, July 1996).
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 15
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 16
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 17
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 18
9.0 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS TO THE NGATI HE HAPU AND MAUNGATAPU MARAE
Transpower have considered multiple options and have proceeded with the option known as 3 (a) which consists of a single span crossing. Based on the high- level assessments undertaken on the ‘long list’ of options, two aerial crossing options were shortlisted for further assessment, and a preferred option has been identified to progress to the resource consent phase. The preferred option includes a single span crossing of Rangataua Bay with the construction of a new monopole support structure on either side of the waterway, and removal of the existing pole from Rangataua Bay. The assessment has been based on Preferred Option known as 3 (a) in the Realignment Report updated in July 2017.
Having Regard to Ngati He Kaitiakitanga over Ancestral Lands and Sites. Removal of existing lines and support structures from significant areas of private residential and Māori land , resulting in substantial amenity benefits. This will see Transpower maintenance operation no longer entering the Maungatapu Marae premises. The line removal will also see the sports field hazard being removed from the threat of live overhead powerlines. The Rangataua Sports and Cultural Club have been encumbered by the management of the overhead powerline hazard. This has not be beneficial to hosting many sporting events and when the powerlines and power poles are removed it is expected that the Sports activities are increased. It is also evident that the proposed mono structure will have an adverse visual effect. The current view shafts of the ancestral maunga of Mangatawa and Kopukairoa is evident. Mangatawa a maunga that had fortified Pa occupied by Tauranga Moana ancestors is also the mother whale in the legend of the three whales of Rangataua.Kopukairoa is the father whale. Kopukairoa is a registered waahi tapu with Heritage NZ. The visual assessment data demonstrates the view once established and highlights the visual impact on this ancestral landscape for the Pa o Te Ariki viewpoint up at the current Rangataua Clubrooms and the view from the Marae atea Opopoti. The proposed high tower mono pole structure will have an adverse visual effect on the view shaft to the ancestral maunga of Mangatawa and Kopukairoa. These maunga are revered for acknowledge in ongoing traditions of whaikorero and waiata that occur on the Marae especially during pohiri. Taking into Account Ngati He Treaty Principles of Partnership to address a Long-term Land Issue Addresses security of supply risk due to coastal erosion issues affecting Pole A117 , and need for a long- term replacement or upgrade of Pole 116. This a primary reason for Transpower to move the powerlines. The Ngati He relationship to the ancestral Te Pa o te Ariki Site and current Maungatapu Marae Reservation area needs to be recognised and provided for. This issue is of common interest and mutual benefit as both Hapu and Crown have acknowledged the issue of slope stability and erosion. This issue is key in developing a maintaining the relationship between the two parties.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 19
It is recommended that this issue will be remedied by ongoing relationship which will incorporate a development of a Memorandum of Understanding and a Commissioned Engineering Report outlining the slope stability options to address the erosion issue.
• Having Regard to Kaitiakitanga and Taking into Account Hapu Rangatiratanga over the Marae. The Treaty principle of tino rangatiratanga is the right to retain their own customary law and traditions on the Marae of Maungatapu must be recognised. It is the ancestral relationship Ngati He hapu have with its Marae Atea known as Opopoti that is of high value.
The Opopoti area transcends the Marae Reservation area and traditionally was utilised to where much of the current State Highway occupies and the adjacent Tauranga City Council assets being the sewage pump station and dwelling. The accumulative adverse effects of having a sewage structure which has been known to overflow, a state highway and now a proposed power pole all have an adverse effect on the Marae. It has been already recognised that the large monopole structure on either side of Rangataua Bay will have some adverse visual/landscape effects. The actual adverse impact in relation to the proposed pole structure situation on the Maungatapu side of the Estuary crossing will be visual impact from Maungatapu Marae. This will also cause an accumulative effect of vehicular movements in both visual and noise. There has been no remedy or mitigation ever offered to address the noise and visual impact of the state highway through which was the traditional Marae grounds known as Opopoti. Recommendations Given the actual and accumulative adverse effects to Maungatapu Marae it is important that the traditions undertaken on the marae are no longer encumbered by noise and visual effects. It is proposed that to mitigate the visual impact a Waharoa or carved entrance is established. Because of the location of the pole structure it is in direct line of sight with the Marae entrance. The accumulative impacts of noise could be further mitigated by the installation of a PA system on the Marae including the Roro, Paepae and Waharoa. • Recognising Ngati He Ancestral Relationship to Lands and Waahi Tapu and Active Protection of Taonga and Heritage. Potential disturbance of archaeology within the Te Ngaio Block Area from earthworks. Ngati He Pa have been identified and protocols have been provided to ensure any artefacts and discoveries are appropriately dealt with. Ngati He do no permit any removal of artefacts and discoveries without the Karakia and recording of the find first. This Te Ngaio Block contains numerous amount of Pa including Tukiata, Te Ngaio and Puwhaariki. This Block was returned to Ngati He after the confiscation (Raupatu o Tauranga Moana) to Ngati He Hapu individuals who were granted the title only to have it acquired by the Crown under the Public Works legislation from their descendants for the purposes of State Highway in the 70 years later. More recently this year the Ngati He Pa Tukiata which was commanded by Tareha Kiharoa was discovered when the NZ Transport Agency undertook earthworks for a median strip barrier.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 20
• Recognising Ngati He Ancestral Relationship to Water Removal of the Harbour Tower Structure from the Tahuna o Rangataua. Rangataua is a large body of water that has sustained Ngati He Hapu for many generations and a close relationship can be found with the Tahuna and Ngati He through the representation of the Papaka. It is important that this is Structure is removed primarily for safety reasons. As the potential for incidents by people hitting the structure or even those venturing out to play on the structure is a risk. The Maungatapu Bridge itself is a risk to pedestrians, boat users and vehicles. Ngati He has had kaumatua on numerous occasions to bless the locations where there had been accidents and fatalities on the Bridge. • Having Regard to Ngati He Kaitiakitanga in the Coastal Marine Area. Temporary seabed disturbance associated with tower foundation removal. The work associated will be cause some disturbance to habitat. This is the habitat of the Papaka. This is the iconic proverbial representation of the tangata whenua of Rangataua. It is represented by the Rangataua Sports and Cultural Club which sits on the Maungatapu Marae Reservation where the Sports Field is Situated Te Pa o Te Ariki or Ariki Park.
Monitoring of the Papaka is required in order that they have adequate habitat to relocate too. If not then it is recommended that the papaka are translocated. This will be part of an amended monitoring protocol requiring translocation. Papaka habitat affected would be the foundation removal work on the subsurface seabed level.
The current and proposed mono structure on the Te Ngaio side of the Rangataua Tahuna will be impacted. It is recommended that no further visual and cultural impact is proposed. This will include the erection of any buildings associated with the proposed development. The people of Ngati He and the visitors enjoy the outlook to Te Ngaio. However currently encumbered by the visual and noise impacts of the State Highway it is advised that no further impacts are created above the proposed monopole structure at Te Ngaiao. A pre work inspection including a baseline survey will be made by a hapu monitor to assist with any translocation of papaka if required. It was discussed at the review of the draft meeting that a possible shelter structure could be offered by Transpower to accommodate mitigation. Any structure or activity on the Te Ngaiao Peninsula is of concern because of all the accumulative and potential effects that could add to the Maungatapu marae. In the past ski lanes and associated jet ski activities have impacted on Maungatapu. Also recently a Bay of Plenty news item reported the Te Ngaiao Penuinsula as a potential jet ski area with access for vehicles. The hapu representatives advised at this meeting that roadway access and any building structure would be of concern to Ngati he and not respectful of Maungatapu marae.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 21
10.0 Visual Assessment of Proposed Mono Pole Powerline Structures
One of the most adverse effects identified regarding the proposed application for Ngati He and Maungatapu Marae are the visual effects. By analysing the view shaft and poles projections from the draft Isthmus Report July 2017 it is more readily identified. In particular view Shaft 11 -Marae Foreshore- was reviewed, which showed an effect which is more than minor. It is felt that any further access tracks or buildings created as well as the remnant Te Ngaio Block Mono pole structure would not be agreed to by Ngati He and the Maungatapu Marae. These additional aspects would change the passive space into a more recreational and active area causing further reason for any water sport activities that may cause adverse effects to traditions and functions held at the Maungatapu Marae.
After reviewing the draft Isthmus Visual Assessment, a later request made to have two new view shafts photographed so they can be assessed. These viewshafts were taken by Isthmus in August site visit and complied in a later Report from in front of the Meeting House (points 1,2, and 3) -with 2 being from Wharenui entrance and the Rangataua Clubrooms (4) in below.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 22
View Shaft 4. Rangataua Clubrooms
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 23
View Shaft 1,2 &3. From Marae at Meeting House The visual effects from the visual simulation identifying the proposed mono pole are deemed to be adverse to the traditions conducted on the Marae and the existing view shafts to the ancestral maunga of Ranginui, Kopukairoa and Mangatawa.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 24
11.0 Recommendations
The following recommendations have been identified with regards to the offsetting of the effects outlined above . 1. Earthwork Monitoring Protocol implemented see appendix 6
2. Slope Stability Options Report commissioned by independent suitably qualified engineer
3. Marine monitoring and translocation protocol for papaka present during tower structure removal with an amended monitoring protocol developed prior to commencement of work there
4. Waharoa Marae Entrance designed and established to counter the visual impact of the new mono pole structure
5. Funding assistance for Maungatapu Marae and Rangataua Sports and Cultural Club from Transpowers community fund. A process of assistance to apply for the grants on the contestable funds provisions
6. Plan developed for site reinstatement for removal of poles 116 and 117 on the Maungatapu Reservation. To ascertain if the poles shall remain in whole or part and any immediate planting and information panels are required.
7. Memorandum of Understanding developed
8. No other buildings or access infrastructure to be erected at Te Ngaio end power pole structure. The existing passive and tranquil nature of the foreshore of Te Ngaio opposite the Marae must be maintained
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 25
12.0 References
Bassett, H. (July 1996). Aspects of the Urbanisation of the Maungatapu and Hairini, Tauranga. Wai 215.
Hamilton, F. (November 2000). Ngati He Historical Report: The Nineteenth Century. Wellington: Crown Forestry Rental Trust: Wai 342, A3.
Kahotea, D. T. (December 1999). Nga Mana Me Nga Whenua Ki Tauranga Moana Tauranga a Waka. Wai 215, F14.
Kaiawha, D. H. (2017). Cultural Impact Assessment: Anchor Structure. Tauranga: Papatuanuku Services.
Kaiawha, D. H. (2017). Drone Imagery. Tauranga: Papatuanuku Services.
Kaiawha, D. H. (2017). Maori Values Assessment Heritage Authority. Tauranga: Papatuanuku Services.
Kaiawha, D. H. (2017). Ngati He Map Series. Tauranga: Papatuanuku Services.
Young, G. (March 2001). The Alienation by sale of the Hapu Estate of Ngati He at Tauranga Moana. Volume One: The Nineteenth Century. Waitangi Tribunal: WAI 342.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 26
Appendix 1
Consents Required Provisionally this is the consents needed. Activity Rule/ Regulation Reference Activity class Tauranga City Council Relocation of transmission line support structures that do not meet the permitted activity conditions. Regulation 15 NESETA Controlled activity Relocation of transmission line support structures that do not meet the permitted activity or controlled activity conditions. Regulation 16 NESETA Restricted Discretionary Activity Construction of additional poles that are not relocations. Regulation 39 NESETA Discretionary activity Bay of Plenty Regional Council Disturbance of seabed associated with removal of Tower A118 PRCEP Rule DD14 Discretionary Activity Earthworks within 20m of CMA (Poles B33C and B33D) Regional Water and Land Plan, Rule 1C Discretionary Activity Disturbance of contaminated land (identify poles) Regional Water and Land Plan, Rule 35 Restricted Discretionary Activity Drilling of foundations below ground water (Poles B33C and B33D) Regional Water and Land Plan Rule, Rule 40A Controlled Activity Occupation of the CMA (conductors) between poles B33C and B33D Regulation 33 NESETA Discretionary Activity
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 27
Appendix 2
Effects Assessment Criteria using the Purpose of the RMA and Principles The following account is outlined in the Environmental Guide of the Environment Foundation. The effects identified in the Transpower Realignment Proposal and gauged towards aligning with the Principles so that the respective weighting can be derived by those Authorities who have delegated Authority to issue resource consent or permits. “…The overriding purpose of the RMA is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. This is defined in section 5(2). Section 5 - Purpose (1) The purpose of this Act is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. (2) In this Act, sustainable management means managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while — (a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and (b) Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and (c) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment. These Principles are summarised in the “…The Resource Management Act identifies a number of matters that are of special significance for resource management, which are set out in sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Act. These principles give “further elaboration” to the section 5 purpose of su stainable management by stating particular obligations for those administering the RMA. There are three sets of principles: i. Matters of national importance - which decision makers must 'recognise and provide for' ii. Other matters - which decision makers must 'have particular regard to' iii. The principles of the Treaty of Waitangi - which decision makers are required to 'take into account' The ‘statutory hierarchy’ means that a “stronger direction” is given in relation to matters of national importance (section 6) as compared to other matters (section 7). The requirement to “recognise and provide for” matters requires the decision -maker to make actual provision for the listed matters. In contrast, the obligation to “have particular regard to” matters require those matters to be given genuine attention and thought although they may be rejected. The requirement to “take into account” the principles of the Treaty requires the decision -maker to consider the relevant Treaty principles, to weigh those up with other relevant factors and to give them the weight that is appropriate in the circumstances.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 28
Appendix 3 Anchor Structure Consent to Regional Council
Cultural Values Assessment Matrix Affected Party Ngati He Hapu Project Anchor Structure Consent Bay of Plenty Regional Authority Council Applicant Transpower Date Apr-17 Site Visit Yes with Transpower and Regional Council Recommended bring Anchor Structure to standard. This has been completed. Background supporting Recommendation Issues identified Effects commentary s Large area of soil material Accumulativ Reinstatement Loss of land as the slip built up behind the anchor e effect and stabilisation inceases behind anchor structure since its orignal causing of area is structure installation in July 2005 erosion recommended Commission an Indepe ndent report on slope stability options for reinstatement Monitoring of anchor structure Cultural and regular site effect on the visits to be The immediate area above is wellbeing on agreed on. High Risk koiwi and artefacts Pa o te Ariki. There have the hapu rainfall events, being exposed due to been koiwi found up top and and having eart hqua kes and erosion even below in the past. hapu to slips and also reintern any times when the koiwi structure will need to be monitored. Public may Hapu protocols take any for monitoring of artefacts site when that may be eventually found in the removal of foreshore structure area Development of The area under which Accumulativ Highlighted in BECA and an engineered the structure sits is e effects of Incite reports structure i.e. constantly shifting. erosion seawall.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 29
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 30
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 31
Appendix 4 Urbanisation of Maungatapu and Hairini. By Heather Bassett for the Waitangi Tribunal 1996
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 32
Appendix 5
Lands Returned to Ngati He
1. Te Ngaio Block
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 33
Appendix 6: Earthworks Monitoring Protocol
This Protocol outlines that: i. Two cultural monitors are approved by Ngati He kaumatua and Maungatapu Marae Trustees. ii. Notification of any earthworks must be provided to the monitor at least 48 hours in advance. iii. At least one monitor is on-site during topsoil stripping and any earthworks around waterways. iv. The monitors will be part of the site induction for contractors working on-site to ensure safety on-site protocols are observed. Notification of earthworks through the briefing and supplying of plans is also required to assist the monitor in observing the works going on in a safe and efficient manner. vi. Some of the artefacts and material may be returned or reburied onsite at a place recommended by the monitor to the hapu for approval. vii. The monitor will advise site managers and plant operators of any areas to be scraped by a digger by a process of topsoil stripping where there may be a likelihood of discovering a site or taonga (treasures, artefacts). If there is a suspect burial of human remains the advice would be to work away from the area until such time further guidance can be given from kaumatua. viii. More than one monitor and/or the kaitiaki may be required if works are occurring in two different areas at the same time, or that when a site, koiwi (human bones) or taonga are discovered. This will allow the machinery to continue elsewhere subject to any approval by the authorised archaeologists while the work necessary is carried out. This will involve either the on-site supervisor, monitor to mark out and secure the area. ix. The use of video recording and photographic devices by the Monitor will be used for monitoring and planning purposes only related to this Project and the cultural heritage of the Hapu. This information can be provided to Transpower or any nominee on request, however remains the property of the monitor at the approval of Ngati He representatives. x. When sites, taonga or koiwi are discovered the machinery in the affected area will cease work immediately while again, steps are undertaken to mark out, record and assess. Dependant on the nature and extent of the find, immediate advisory will be given to both the Archaeologists and Project supervisors. xi. The cultural monitor will be present with the archaeologists on site surveys and recording procedures if sites or taonga are discovered. xii. If an archaeological site or taonga are unearthed or discovered the site manager or cultural monitor must contact the archaeologist. Ngati He representatives need to be informed through the kaitiaki if the discovery is significant. This will be determined by the kaitiaki and monitor.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 34 xiii. If koiwi are found and confirmed by the archaeologist, then further contact with the N.Z. Police is also required. Ngati He representatives will need to be contacted at their discretion will involve Kaumatua and/or Church Minister. xiv. Project management representative(s) are to ensure that Heritage New Zealand processes are followed xv. With regards to discovering taonga, guidelines around the Antiques Act may need to be adhered to, to determine intellectual properties issues that may arise dependent on the artefacts or antiques found. xvi. Monitors will also mark out sites, taonga and koiwi if discovered and provide this information to both the Site and Project Managers. xvii. Transpower and its contractors are still recommended in this Protocol to comply with all consents and authorities such as Heritage New Zealand authorities, Local and Regional Councils consents and rules. xviii. All contractor and workers onsite are to have a cultural induction. xix. Before any taonga or artefacts are removed from site or as they are discovered, a karakia must be performed first. xx. Any machinery working in and around waterways including puna (springs) are required to be monitored. No puna (springs) or waterways are to be caped or filled in, diverted, or drained without further consultation with the Kaitiaki. Any of this type of work affecting the waterways will required a karakia. xxi. An on-site blessing must be conducted before the commencement of any earthworks.
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 35
Appendix 7: Kaitemako B & C Public Works Taking for Substation
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 36
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 37
Karakia
Kia tau ki a tātou katoa Te atawhai o tō tātou Ariki, a Ihu Karaiti Me te aroha o te Atua Me te whiwhingatahitanga Ki te wairua tapu Ake, ake, ake Amine
PREPARED BY DES HEKE OF PAPATUANUKU SERVI CES 38
TRANSPOWER LINE REALIGNMENT PROJECT HAI-MTM A&B Alteration
NGAI TUKAIRANGI HAPU CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
By Hikitapua Ngata
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...... 3
He Korero Timatanga ...... 5
1.0 Introduction ...... 6 1.1 Transpower Project...... 6 1.1.1 Potential Objectives of the Project ...... 6 1.2 Report Writer...... 7
2.0 Ngai Tukairangi ...... 8 2.1 Post Maori Land War Deliberations ...... 8 2.2 Ngai Tukairangi Hapu Claims to the Waitangi Tribunal ...... 10 2.2.1 WAI211 – Ngai Tukairangi Hapu ...... 10 2.2.2 WAI668 – Ngai Tukairangi Trust ...... 10 2.2.3 Transmission Lines ...... 11 2.2.4 Relevant Matapihi Blocks ...... 11 2.2.5 Ngai Tukairangi Efforts at Compensation ...... 12 2.2.6 Consultation with Ngai Tukairangi Koroua ...... 13
3.0 Transpower Design Outline ...... 15 3.1 Current Transmission Lines ...... 16 3.2 Harbour Link ...... 17 3.3 Connection to Maungatapu/Ngati He ...... 17
4.0 Project Pros and Cons ...... 18 4.1 Cultural ...... 18 4.2 Environmental ...... 18 4.3 Technical ...... 19 4.4 Residual Issues ...... 19
5.0 Recommendations ...... 20
6.0 Conclusion ...... 21
Bibliography...... 22
2 Executive Summary
This cultural impact assessment (CIA) report outlines how Ngai Tukairangi hapu will respond to the proposed Transpower Line Realignment Project (the Project). It also recommends actions to assist with mitigating the impact of the Project. In 1997, Wiparera Te Kani lodged a Waitangi Tribunal claim on behalf of the Ngai Tukairangi Trust seeking removal of certain power lines located on Maori owned land; particularly those located on the Ngai Tukairangi Trust.
After 40 years, with limited opportunities for negotiations, Transpower has begun plans to remove lines from several specific blocks. As part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), Transpower must provide an opportunity for those affected to prepare a CIA; to inform how progress can be made on the proposal by tangata whenua. It has been found that through the years, many conflicts have occurred between the Crown and Maori landowners. This discussions have resulted in hapu members losing a lot of land. The trend continued with transmission lines going across Matapihi land blocks, instructed as such by the Crown through the Public Works Act 1928; all without landowner approval or consent. The lines that were placed on the Matapihi blocks stymied agricultural and horticultural activity, restricted housing development, restricted orchard operations; and was just an eye sore to the majority of the people who live around these lines.
The Project and its related design of the transmission lines focuses on removal and construction as part of the alteration process which sees a large section of the lines removed from Matapihi land blocks. Where possible, Maori values should be acknowledged regularly throughout the process to prevent future conflict and keep development efficient. In addition, a community hui was held and a small number of kaumatua were consulted as part of compiling this CIA. As part of the report, a list of pros and cons are provided, but the overall impression of the Project is largely positive. Although not all of the poles are being removed, the removal of several of them will free up space for landowners to utilise the land more efficiently. From a legal point of view, the Project addresses significant issues highlighted within the
3 WAI668 Tribunal claim lodged by Wiparera Te Kani. There are also opportunities to imbed this Project positively within the psyche of the hapu members and representatives of Transpower, where possible, are making efforts to collaborate with members of the hapu to make this a reality. The Project also helps bring a sense of justice and relief back to hapu representatives who have been trying for several years to remove the lines.
4 He Korero Timatanga
My father Wiparera Te Kani worked tirelessly for his hapu, Ngai Tukairangi and Ngati Tapu of Matapihi. He was also very heavily involved in the Treaty claims process and one of the claims he submitted Wai 668 was never resolved whilst alive. He was the Chairperson of the Ngai Tukairangi Trust, and participated in awkward discussions focused upon the removal of the power lines from our land blocks. His cousin Mahaki Ellis, at that time was the Hapu Claimant, and Kihi Ngatai his whanaunga and friend was one of the Ngai Te Rangi claimants. Our hapu leaders were at the forefront of these types of discussions.
For Ngai Tukairangi, the claim my father submitted has the potential to be partially resolved through this process. By moving the power lines from many of the Trust lands, we can at least in our lifetimes, see some resolution to these outstanding matters.
We therefore have an inclination to support this initiative, which is tempered with an understanding that mitigation opportunities included in this report, like many that arise in other similar assessments, can be taken up within the guise of the Resource Management Act, and therefore should be taken up. We are therefore heartened. We have also been encouraged that this work has given my nephew, who is a technically inclined individual, an opportunity to apply his thinking and learn more about the historical, environmental and cultural perspectives that have arisen from the research associated with this report. We look forward to working more closely with Transpower on this Project in the future.
Nga mihi nui Neil Te Kani Ngai Tukairangi Hapu - Chairperson
5 1.0 Introduction
This Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) aims to ascertain what cultural impacts may occur in relation to the Transpower Transmission Realignment Project scheduled to occur along State Highway 29A and within the boundaries of the Matapihi peninsular. The CIA will also illustrate potential technical and environmental impacts, if any.
Transpower is the government agency responsible for this Project. Their representatives have commissioned this work based on its proposed work schedule to complete the Project, and as a necessary means to progress to the next steps, hopefully in the process gaining hapu support and endorsement. Transpower is responsible for the design construction of this Project and must also follow through with the Resource Management consent process and the interrelated components. This CIA will also focus on key benefits and issues and help communicate ideas between the parties involved.
1.1 Transpower Project
1.1.1 Potential Objectives of the Project Transpower proposes to move the existing transmission line from its current location within Matapihi, to a new location along State Highway 2 (Figure 3). By moving the transmission line to the proposed new line, it creates a more efficient line for maintenance and electricity transportation and as outlined in the presentation by Transpower held on the 17 th of August 2017, at the Ngai Tukairangi Trust office, it will also ensure the integrity of two major lines and structures over the next thirty years or so.
A secondary outcome from the Project is that the lines are removed from Maori owned land, freeing it up for more opportunities for the owners. This action by association will consequently address a Waitangi Tribunal Claim, which was submitted by the Ngai Tukairangi Trust in 1997. Transpower had proposed several
6 years ago to undertake this work, however, due to other national priorities and financial restraints, the Project has only begun to take place.
1.2 Report Writer My name is Hikitapua Ngata and I have prepared the CIA. I am of Ngai Tukairangi descent, from Ngai Te Rangi through my mother. I have recently graduated with a Bachelor in Engineering specialising in chemical and biological processes. I have prepared an earlier technical research report related to the Mobil Oil Spill, which occurred early last year. This is my second research report. My key area of work is of a technical scientific nature, business decision-making, and other feasibility projects.
7 2.0 Ngai Tukairangi
Ngai Tukairangi is a hapu (sub-tribe) of Ngai Te Rangi. Our ancestor is Tukairangi, the son of Taapuiti and the grandson of Te Rangihouhiri, the eponymous ancestor of Ngai Te Rangi. Our uri were part of Te Heke o Rangihouhiri, where we migrated from the East Coast, before eventually arriving in Tauranga. We also derive from Tarawera/Rotoehu known then as Ngati Irawharo.
Ngai Tukairangi settled around Mauao, Matapihi, Otumoetai and Otamataha following the battle of Kokowai. There were interests throughout Tauranga Moana, for example resource gathering at Ongare Point and Te Poripori. It can be said that Ngai Tukairangi is a cooperative hapu with other sub-groups such as Ngati Kuku, Matewaitai, Matekiwaho, Ngati Kahurere, Ngati Irawharo and Ngati Rawharo. Although Ngai Tukairangi centralises around Whareroa and Hungahungatoroa Marae, we have a strong association in other areas such as Otumoetai and Otamataha.
Our whakapapa is as follows
Figure 1: Ngai Tukairangi Whakapapa
2.1 Post Maori Land War Deliberations Ngai Te Rangi, like several tribes around Aotearoa New Zealand fared poorly from the colonial impositions and gestations. Following, the Battle of Pukehinahina and
8 Te Ranga in 1864, land was confiscated and Ngai Tukairangi did not escape those impacts. It is little wonder that over the generations, Ngai Tukairangi developed bitterness towards the Crown for multiple actions its representatives committed to tarnish what we valued. In 1883, the Crown awarded 1,263 acres of Whareroa block to Ngai Tukairangi landowners in the greater Mt Maunganui area, but by 1998 the Crown had acquired 98.2% of those holdings through the Public Works Act 1928. Still to this day, Maori landowners long for compensation from the Government due to the impact of those takings, but yet not has been received.
Early town planning put legislation in place to manage Maori and environmental interests, such as the Town and Country Act 1997 (Section 3). However, the Planning Tribunal took a narrow point of view approach, which lead to the failure of developers to comprehend Maori values. Essentially, the infrastructure developments occurred with limited Maori engagement, resulting in a constant cycle of damaged land. More recently, through the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), resource related activities and plans require authorities to pay attention to Treaty principles, and in particular make provisions. This means developers must recognise and acknowledge principles of kaitiakitanga, which is defined in the RMA Act Section 7 as ‘the exercise of guardianship and in relation to a resource includes the ethic of stewardship based on the nature of the resource itself’. Cultural significance has regularly been exercised by having these provisions in place, but due misconnection and miscommunication between non-Maori and Maori, key cultural values have been jeopardised and significant land marks destroyed.
Cultural practices that are exercised by Tauranga tangata whenua include principles Maori have been performing and teaching for generations across Aotearoa; such as, growing food, collecting kai moana, whakawhanaungatanga, being ‘guardians’ of the land, and practicing waiata and karakia. Variations of cultural practices arise depending on which iwi, hapu or whanau you come from. Ngai Te Rangi people have been taught to collect kai moana, grow food, karakia (prayers), protect sacred war pa and other significant places, and give back to Papatuanuku in the form of ‘tangi’ and ‘whenua ki te whenua’ for generations. However, this was significantly affected
9 when land was utilised for development purposes, especially in the Ngai Tukairangi rohe. Maori lost the opportunity to farm, to collect kai, and opportunities to teach earlier generations have become less significant as developments have forced Maori to adapt to a more modern, less culturally aligned environment.
With ongoing development within the Mount Maunganui area and its related environment, Ngai Tukairangi people have lost significant amounts of property and have not fared well in regards to land use and cultural conservation. In regards to the transmission lines, the same theme has occurred where the erection of the lines on blocks that are owned by Ngai Tukairangi have occurred without notice causing significant cultural damage with no compensation towards the land owners at all.
2.2 Ngai Tukairangi Hapu Claims to the Waitangi Tribunal
2.2.1 WAI211 – Ngai Tukairangi Hapu Mahaki Ellis lodged the Ngai Tukairangi Hapu claim in 1988. On July 31 st 1998, an amendment to the claim was put forward stating that the Crown breached the Treaty of Waitangi by failing to consider non-Maori land for public works takings. It was also claimed that the Crown failed to ensure alternatives such as leasehold arrangements, could be considered before controlling the block. Ngai Tukairangi hapu representatives have always been advocates for retribution in relation to the lines.
2.2.2 WAI668 – Ngai Tukairangi Trust In 1997, Wiparera Te Kani lodged a claim known as WAI668. The claim outlines that it was prejudicial to construct the power lines on Matapihi land across the Ngai Tukairangi block with no compensation for utilising the property nor consultation with landowners. The claim made links to section 311 of the Public Works Act 1928, which allowed the State Hydroelectric Department to construct electricity transmission lines over the Ngai Tukairangi block, without permission of the land owners.
10 Wiparera Te Kani
Figure 2: Wiparera Te Kani
2.2.3 Transmission Lines The lines were constructed in 1950 over a few Matapihi blocks. Since then there have been multiple attempts to remove the lines off Matapihi owned lands. Recently, proposals have been put through Transpower and the lines will be removed. HAI-MTM – A line will be removed and the existing HAI-MTM – B will accommodate the removed A line. The map shows the location of the lines in relation to the specific blocks in Matapihi (see illustration on page 15).
2.2.4 Relevant Matapihi Blocks On the Ngai Tukairangi Trust blocks, the relevant areas are occupied: Te Ngaio 1 and 2 blocks; Puwhariki; Taumatanui 3, 2, 1B and 1A; Oruamatua 2A and 2B; Parts Ohuki 2D, 2C1, 2B, 2C2B, 1D, 1E, 1F3 and 1G2; Otumoko B4; Part Sections 3 and 7 Block XI Tauranga Survey District.
11 Other Ngai Tukairangi Individuals, who held shares in other blocks were also impacted: Otumoko B4 owned by Mahaki Ellis and relations Ohuki 2B and 2C2D owned by Kihi Ngatai Ohuki 1E owned by Hori Ross 1G2 owned by Hauoterangi Dickson and relations Ohuki 1F3 owned by Mr and Mrs M Bennett
2.2.5 Ngai Tukairangi Efforts at Compensation In 1976, the Ngai Tukairangi Trust put forward a claim of $28,500, which saw no action. The issue came to light again in 1993 as Transpower investigated the feasibility of moving the transmission line from Hairini to Maungatapu and Matapihi. Concerns were raised as trustees outlined: compensation was still outstanding and transmission lines needed removing, and to be placed along the highway. John Burke took over the Financial Controller role for the Ngai Tukairangi Trust in 1996, the issue managed to pass through the Transpower board where they stated any compensation was now well out of time. However, in the same letter it was said Allan Burdett was writing a paper to the Transpower Board requesting that it consider approving an ex-gratia payment based on an amount of compensation that should have been paid with interest. By 1 st January 1997, compensation was valued at $150,000 and Allan Burdett, a Transpower representative discussed with John Burke, possibly joining line ‘A’ and ‘B’ together. However, In February 1997, Allan Burdett wrote a letter to the Trust rejecting the proposal for compensation and the removal of transmission lines.
Apart from legal issues surrounding these poles, the poles run through orchards creating obstacles and preventing better utilization of Maori owned land. For example trees cannot grow near power lines, and machinery must maneuver around the poles when conducting scheduled operations. The transmission lines would also hinder future plans for land use, as the poles occupy a large area around each pole.
12 2.2.6 Consultation with Ngai Tukairangi Koroua It was also necessary to gather input by hapu representatives as the Project involves Transpower, hapu members and the surrounding community. A few selected kaumatua were sought as part of the information gathering exercise to provide their views. In particular, five key questions were posed, which focused on the following issues: 1. Can you tell me a bit about what you know about the powerlines, and what you recall?
2. Could you tell me whether there were any cultural impacts that you recall, and why?
3. I understand there has been a claim put forward by several parties, orchards, whanau, hapu about these lines, what was being sought in terms of the land taken?
4. How has that impacted whanau? Hapu? Iwi?
5. Do you know what the current plans are for the lines? We will be holding a hui to discuss next week. But for now, the general plan is to?
6. Not everyone will be included, so there will be some whanau who miss out.
7. Do you think it is positive, or negative?
The responses gleaned from the queries were significant as they provided a greater connection with the situation compared to anyone else in the community. There were reflections on the land indicating strong farming and agricultural ventures prior to the transmission lines being erected. There has been strong concern shown as the lines prevent housing, agricultural growth, and seem to disturb a selected few poles, which have a foreign and disruptive feeling towards them. As can be seen from communal worries, the removal of the lines will provide benefits towards the community and kaumatua.
Most whanau look up to koroua within the community such as Turirangi Te Kani. He had a vision for the Matapihi papakainga and whanau with regards to housing developments, agriculture and horticulture developments, and other beneficial developments for growth within the area. His first cousins Mahaki Ellis and Wiparera Te Kani, who both Chaired the Ngai Tukairangi Trust land were also driven by those aspirations. His whakapapa and that of the Te Kani whanau is as follows:
13
As a result the following generations have also inherited the same vision. The kaumatua continually have doubts about the future for their grandchildren as developments slowly intrude on the lands in question. This intrusion means it will be more difficult to provide whanau with land, housing, and stable living conditions, as the developments usually mean taking ancestral land for infrastructure, and with a general increase in housing prices, it just adds to the difficulty. The power lines provide an obstacle for developments and the wider community, share the same concerns. As a result, there can only be beneficial reasons for having the poles removed from the respective lands in question. Although compensation may not be paid, at least the land can be given back to the landowners. As quoted by the late
Mahaki Ellis, “ in lieu of compensation we want the land returned ” (Ellis, 2006).
14 3.0 Transpower Design Outline
Figure 3: Location of new and old transmission line
The general design specifications include the basic removal of HAI-MTM A and transferring it to HAI-MTM B as outlined in the diagram above. As per the picture, the actions related to each pole in the line are recorded below.
In summary, the design specifications are: Line – Location -- Description HAI-MTM A – Removed HAI-MTM B – Existing Transmission Line
HAI-MTM B – 33A -- New 22.4m steel pole Maungatapu side HAI-MTM B – 33B -- New 19.4m concrete pole HAI-MTM B – 33C -- New 34.4m steel pole HAI-MTM B – 33D -- New 46.5m steel pole
HAI-MTM B – 33E -- New 24m steel pole All Matapihi 2nd circuit added to 37-38 but no change to pole structure
15 HAI-MTM B – 38A, 39A, 40A, 41A, 42A, 43A, 44A, 45A -- New 19.4m concrete pole with 3.6 embedment HAI-MTM B – 43B, 43C, 44B -- New 19.4m concrete pole with 3.6 embedment HAI-MTM B –43A -- To be removed HAI-MTM B –44A, 45, 46 -- 2nd circuit added, no change to structure HAI-MTM B –47A -- New 22.8m steel pole with 3.2m embedment HAI-MTM B –48C -- New 28.2m steel pole with 3.8m embedment HAI-MTM B –48D -- New 26.2m steel pole with 3.8m embedment HAI-MTM B –47, 49A, 50 -- To be removed HAI-MTM B – 48 -- New twin 22.8m steel poles, 3.2m embedment, renamed as 48A and 48B HAI-MTM B – 48C -- New 22.8m steel pole with 3.2m embedment (replaces 49A) HAI-MTM B – 48E -- New 22.8m steel pole with 3.2m embedment HAI-MTM B – 48F -- New 21.8m steel pole with 4.2m embedment (replaces 51) HAI-MTM B – 48D -- New 26.2m steel pole with 3.8m embedment (replaces 50) HAI-MTM B – 127A -- New twin 19.4m concrete pole with 3.6m embedment HAI-MTM B – 128A -- New twin 11.2m concrete pole with 4.3m embedment HAI-MTM B – 51 -- Removed
3.1 Current Transmission Lines
Figure 4: Current images of the powerlines
16 At the moment the lines run through several Matapihi blocks, and over the harbour through to Maungatapu. The poles are all the same except for the support pole in the middle of the harbour. The poles vary in height to compensate for the variation in the landscape the poles are on.
3.2 Harbour Link With regards to the new transmission line, it will be constructed so the line will go above the harbour. The previous designs show lines running though the harbour with a pole located in the middle of the water. This will change with two large poles located at each side of the bridge with the lines connecting between these two poles.
3.3 Connection to Maungatapu/Ngati He Ngati He occupies the block, Ahipouto which is managed by the Matapihi Ohuki Trust, and which is situated immediately adjacent to the Ngai Tukairangi Trust blocks. It is incumbent upon the Trust, to ensure that some interrelationships occur in terms of how, and what will occur once the lines leave the Trust blocks, and continue across other blocks including these. In addition, the transfer of the lines across the harbour has an immediate relationship to our lands as well. Notwithstanding this issue, discussions with Ngati He may be required.
17 4.0 Project Pros and Cons
Due to the conditions and scope of the Project, naturally there would be advantages and disadvantages that arise and these must be looked at and an overall comparison must be drawn. Although the majority of attention will be focused on cultural differences, attention must be also focused on technical and environmental issues as well.
4.1 Cultural Cons
Still lingering injustice and anger felt from hapu members from what the Crown has done. In regards to the land that is having the transmission lines removed, compensation has not yet been paid to the landowners; it is believed that the compensation will not happen. Loss of time that could have been used to utilise the taken land for farming or other ventures that helps Maori economic growth. Pros
Action finally taking place after many years, for Waitangi Claim WAI688, which was made in 1997; but proceedings for compensation were first initiated as far back as 1977. Land being freed from all government planned ventures, and therefore an opportunity exists to utilise the land for beneficial iwi and hapu growth. Dignity has been given back to our hapu after unjust action from the Crown.
4.2 Environmental Cons
There will be a brief increase of development that will increase emissions, noise, and congestion while development is taking place. Organic matter may need to be removed if necessary. Pros
Use of infrastructure efficiently, leaving less concrete for the same amount of electricity transportation.
18 Taller transmission poles are being installed making it less likely for trees to interact with lines.
4.3 Technical Cons
Safety risks will arise during the period where construction is taking place, not only for workers but also general pedestrians. Pros
Newly installed transmission lines will be easier to perform maintenance on as they will all be located alongside the highway. Relatively limited time span for removal and new replacement of lines. No loss of power to areas surrounding power lines during alteration process.
The biggest disadvantage is that this Project will not be able to remove the frustration Ngai Tukairangi Hapu has felt as representatives been trying for many years to get the claim resolved. Also, there will be time lost since the lines were originally erected that cannot be utilised effectively through orchard productivity that was halted due to the poles.
4.4 Residual Issues With regards to the Waitangi Tribunal claim, it is highly unlikely that compensation will be paid. It is a difficult situation to argue as Maori require compensation from damaged lands from the Public Works Act takings. Transpower does not abide by the Act due to the Act being between Government and Iwi. The Government does not have regulations to determine what is considered to be damaged land. The situation that has occurred is due to faults in regulations and or legal instruments. Only discussion between parties can highlight ongoing issues. Some recompense may be warranted as a result of not being able to address this particular issue or matter.
19 5.0 Recommendations
1. It is recommended that Ngai Tukairangi members are included in as many remedial considerations as possible.
2. It is recommended that trees are planted in empty spaces that transmission poles used to occupy or to provide an opportunity for Ngai Tukairangi to engage in a planting exercise, where appropriate, and with support by landowners.
3. It is recommended that karakia is practiced. Karakia is a cultural practice that acknowledges ancestors and as this project is a small segment of what Maori ancestors tried to prevent. This will only make it more relevant to have a karakia before or after the process has completed.
4. It is recommended that cultural monitoring should be incorporated in the Project to ensure cultural values are not overlooked and that environmental havoc that might occur, through land being unearthed with human remains, or more recently, significant archaeological value can be preserved.
5. It is recommended that legally, for damages to Maori land, compensation must be paid. If negotiations around compensation are still viable these should still continue.
6. It is recommended that Transpower support the removal of the transmissions lines from all of the blocks if possible.
7. It is recommended that young people are included in this Project. Therefore, it is a good idea to keep the younger generation amongst significant projects to ensure they learn and have the potential to do it better with their peers in the future. Providing internship opportunities will benefit future growth of our hapu members.
8. It is recommended that Transpower and local hapu representatives collaborate on projects that could benefit both sides their whanau members.
20 6.0 Conclusion
Transpower has proposes to implement a re-alignment of the transmission lines project that geos over the Ngai Tukairangi block. Designs and proposed plans have been put through and the Hapu is also making efforts to help assist in any way possible. Whilst these actions can be seen as partial remedy, there are some hapu members that do not have the opportunity to have these pylons removed, which is unfortunate, questioning whether the proposal should go ahead.
Since the first murmurings on this issue in the 1970s, and since 1997, when koro Wiparera lodged the WAI688 claim to remove the transmission lines off the Matapihi peninsular, progress has been relatively stagnant until recently. The proposal for change has been long since awaited. Benefits arise from the proposed design for Ngai Tukairangi associated with the Project, specifically with reference to technical, cultural and environmental matters as the lines are removed.
It is important to understand that conflict occurs regularly in regards to Maori land and economic development. As a result of these conflicts, Iwi and hapu grow bitter and a cycle of anger is born and continues through generations towards developers and the Crown. Non-Maori are unaware of the injustice these activities create and also how they develop and communicate false representation of Maori and forget that Maori are connected to these lands. Only understanding and teaching can help prevent these situations from occurring in the future with the next generation.
However, the largest benefit is that Maori feel a sense of relief as land that was unfairly taken for development has now been returned that can be used effectively for cultural growth and for that key reason, notwithstanding the recommendations for mitigating risks as outlined in Section 5, the Hapu are largely supportive of the realignment plans, and seek ongoing input into the Project to address the recommendations suggested.
21 Bibliography
Willan, R. (1999). From Country To Town. University of Victoria. Wellington: University of Victoria. Ellis, M (2006). Statement of Evidence of Mahaki Ellis. Hamilton: Waitangi Tribunal of New Zealand. Dickson, M (2006). Statement of Evidence. Hamilton: Waitangi Tribunal of New Zealand. Neverman, J (2006). Statement of Evidence of J Neverman. Hamilton: Waitangi Tribunal of New Zealand. Te Kani, W., (1997), Waitangi Tribunal Claim for the Ngai Tukairangi Trust, WAI668 (Waitangi Tribunal 3 27, 1997). Ellis, M., (2006), Waitangi Tribunal Claim for Ngai Tukairangi Hapu, Wai 211 (Waitangi Tribunal, 1988) Ngai Tukairangi Hapu of Ngaiterangi, WAI211 (Dept. of Justice Wellington 6 24, 1988). Ngatai, K. (2006) Statement Of Evidence Of Kihi Ngatai. Hamilton: Waitangi Tribunal of New Zealand. Ross, H. (2006) Statement of Evidence of Hori Paki Ross. Hamilton: Waitangi Tribunal of New Zealand. Te Kani, N. (2006), Ngai Tukairangi Hapu Cultural Impact Report For The Southern Pipeline, Tauranga.
22
Matapihi Ohuki Trust Cultural Impact Assessment
Transpower New Zealand Limited
Transmission Line Alterations
Contents
Mihimihi ...... 3 Executive Summary ...... 3 Project Team ...... 3 Introduction ...... 4 Background ...... 4 Matapihi – Ohuki Trust ...... 4 Mana Whenua ...... 5 History of Land Acquisition ...... 5 Scope of Assessment ...... 7 Site Location ...... 8 Cultural Assessment of Effects & Recommendations ...... 11 Conclusion ...... 13
2
Mihimihi
Papaki tū ana ngā tai ki Mauao I whakanukunukuhia, i whakanekenekehia, I whiua rerehia e Hotu a Wahinerua ki te wai
Ki tai wīwī, ki tai wāwā Ki te whai ao ki te ao mārama. Tihei mauriora!
Executive Summary In response to consultation with Matapihi - Ohuki Trust, Transpower New Zealand Limited (Transpower) engaged representatives of the Trust to provide a cultural impact assessment (CIA). The purpose of this report is to articulate the cultural perspectives on the effects of the Realignment of the HAI-MTM-A Transmission Line, Maungatapu to Matapihi including Rangataua Bay, Tauranga. The Matapihi Ohuki Trust is the land administrator of blocks Te Ngaio No.1 and Ohuki No.2D. During the process of collecting information pertaining to this activity, discussion with the land owners, hapū community, and a site visit was carried out by the project team. The following documents were reviewed in relation to the proposed realignment: Draft Agreement to Grant Easement; Assessment of Effects on the Environment (AEE); Tauranga Moana Iwi Management Plan; Ngāi Tūkairangi, Ngāti Tapu Hapū Management Plan . Recommendations bought forward within this report are primarily based on discussions with representatives of Transpower. The realignment project seeks to alleviate the historic grievances between Transpower , local hapū and landowners.
Project Team
Kia Maia Ellis Author of CIA Tio Faulkner Chairman – Matapihi Ohuki Trust Chris Stokes Trustee – Matapihi Ohuki Trust Hayden Henry Trustee – Matapihi Ohuki Trust
3
Introduction
Background The power realignment project is currently progressing through the detailed design, easements and consenting phase. The build will take between 9 – 13 months with completion estimated to be finished by February 2020. Decommissioning of existing lines are expected to be complete by April 2020. Transpower is currently seeking Hapū endorsement, which includes the Matapihi – Ohuki Trust land owners. As a part of that process, the Trust has been commissioned to complete this assessment. The Cultural Impact Assessment will be filed along with the resource consent application, which is a notified process requiring a hearing. “The Matapihi coastline is an outstanding landscape feature for the City. It is visible from many areas in the district including the Tauranga CBD. The preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment, including wetland areas previously identified, is a principal consideration when addressing land use activities that could detract from these features.” This assessment is primarily focused on the parts of the realignment that relate to Matapihi where the administration of the Matapihi Ohuki managed blocks occur.
Matapihi – Ohuki Trust During the 1970’s, Matapihi land owners set up two section 438 Trusts on Matapihi. One was the Matapihi Ohuki Trust, which consists of 50 small blocks for horticultural development. The other is the Ngāi Tūkairangi Trust, which consists of amalgamated titles of seven blocks. These were developed into a kiwifruit orchard. Horticultural development was a key factor to retaining the land and keeping up with rates payments to council (Willan, 1999). Largely, due to the foresight of tangata whenua and the section 438 trusts, Matapihi remains a rural area despite numerous attempts to include in the Tauranga city. Horticultural development has strengthened the land owners position and largely resisted land speculators (Willan, 1999). As a result, Matapihi has remained semi-rural.
4
Mana Whenua Ngāi Tūkairangi and Ngāti Kuku are two closely connected hapū through whakapapa (genealogy) and have inhabited some of the same areas over time. Both hapū have are affiliated to the Matap ihi Ohuki Trust. The people of Ng āi Tū kairangi are descendants of Taapuiti. Taapuiti is a child of Te Rangihouhiri, who is regarded in history as a pro minent ancestor of Ngāi Te Rangi . Taapuiti played a key role in the ‘battle of kokowai’ which led to the iwi of Ngāi Te Rangi taking residence of Mauao and other areas in Tauranga Moana. Following this, Ngāi Tūkairangi settled at Whareroa, Matapihi, Otamataha and Otumoetai. Other groups that occupied Matapihi and Mount Maunganui were Ngāti Kuku, Ngāti Mateika, Ngāti Rawharo, and Ngāi Wai, all of which are closely interconnected through whakapapa. Ngāi Tūkairangi were the last inhabitants on Mauao. The hapū lived on the Mount Maunganui peninsular, all the way to Arataki, and out towards Matapihi. The Te Papa and Otamataha areas were occupied by Ngāi Tūkairangi descendants, including Koraurau who was the chief in this area.Today, Ngāi Tūkairangi is very well known to have mana whenua in Mount Maunganui, Te Papa (Tauranga City) and Matapihi. Whilst it is recog nised that these are the primary areas; Whakahinga, sister to Tūkairangi lived in the Papamoa area closer to Te Tumu, and whanau members were heavily involved in traditional harvesting of kai and kai moana from that area. Ngāti Kuku also have mana whenua at Mauao, Whareroa, Otumoetai, Te Wairoa, and Kaimai and on Karewa and Tuhua Islands. Whareroa Marae was established Hori Ngātai in the 1860’s after the people relocated from Otumoetai. By the late 1860’s, Whareroa had become Ngāti Kuku’s principle are of settlement (Waitangi Tribunal Report) Ko Rauru Ki Tahi te Wharenui, ko Kura i Monoa te Wharekai, Ko Whareroa te Marae, Ko Ngāi Tūkairangi me Ngāti Kuku ngā Hapū Ngāti Tapu built the first Tapukino wharenui at Te Mania at the southern end of the Matapihi railway bridge. In 1901, hapū decided to move the marae to higher ground in Matapihi where it stands today. The customary interests of Ngāti Tapu lay within an area stretching from Otumoetai, Te Papa and Matapihi inland to Maenene in the bush. Ngāti He als o has shared interests at Matapihi and have maintained a distinct identity associated primarily at Maungatapu. History of Land Acquisition The erection of power lines over Matapihi land occurred between 1956-1959 under the section 43 of the Public Works Act 1948. The power line traversed through the following blocks: Te Ngaio 1 and 2 blocks; Puwhariki; Taumatanui 3, 2, 1B and 1A; Oruamatua 2A and 2[?] and roadline; Otumoko; Ohuki 1G, 1F, 1E, and 1D; Part sections 3 and 7 block XI Tauranga Survey District.
5
Under section 43 of the Public Works Act 1943, the Minister of Works was required to notify landowners and occupants, but in this case it is unlikely that the owners were notified. The Electricity Department later admitted that consultation with the owners was limited, and they had notified occupiers but no notice was given to the Māori landowners (Willan, 1999). Although the Māori Trustee requested compensation for this public work several times, compensation was denied based on the Minister’s discretion ary power to offer or deny compensation.
During the 1960’s, the Electricity Department sought to increase power supply to the Mount Maunganui area. The main 3 proposed routes were; 1. Across the Maungatapu – Matapihi bridge along the main highway; 2. Through the inner harbour, (Welcome Bay and Papamoa); 3. Route to the south of Mangatawa. The department favored the inner harbour route because it was most cost effective and apparently less environmentally damaging. There is little record of consultation wi th Māori (landowners) aside from the public notices showing the departments preferred inner harbour route. In 1982, a middle line proclamation for the harbour was published in the Gazette and construction was expected to begin after January 1987. The department continued to study alternative routes. Then in 1986, the department sent public notices to householders explaining the Minister of Electricity’s intentions to erect the line between Hairini and Mount Maunganui. From 1987 to 1991, the electricity industry went through a restructuring. This resulted in Transpower acquiring transmission line and substation assets. Little progress was made on the line to Mount Maunganui until mid 1991, when Transpower and the Tauranga Electric Power Board signed an agreement to construct a second line from Hairini to Mount Maunganui, following the inner harbour route. Welcome Bay Māori highlighted opposition to this route and Transpower were forced to look at alternatives. In 1993, Transpower did a feasibility study of erecting their line along the Maungatapu to Matapihi portion of the highway. They met with a group of land owners, kaumatua, and orchard trustees and toured the proposed route. Land owners noted some concerns about the land taken for the motorway, particularly that it was not used for the purposes that it was taken and that it sliced through significant pa sites. During the early 1990’s, Ngāi Tūkairangi Orchard raised concerns about lack of compensation and their preference to move the line from the Orchard. Whare Dickson wrote to Transpower stating that the hapū were opposed to the proposal to run feeder lines over land using pole structures and would only support underground feeder lines. In 1994, Ngāi Tūkairangi hapū served notice that compensation would b e sought for the compulsorily acquired land and associated easement rights which prevented its productive use. It appears that the compensation claims were never resolved.
6
Scope of Assessment Services being the development of a Cultural Impact Assessment regarding the resource consent… The scope of services for the project are to; Identify the cultural values from the land owners perspective associated with the resource consent, taking into account Hapū and Iwi Management Plans ; Identify the history of the associated area post-colonial settlement in Tauranga. Assess the potential impact of the resource consent on cultural values; and Make recommendations based on actual/potential impacts on cultural values.
Table 1. Provides detail of associated tasks carried for the assessment Task Description 1 Engagement with the client or representative To confirm the scope of the assessment and timeframes. 2 Desktop review Gathering relevant project literature. Desk top research, references to any RMA Planning documents eg Iwi/Hapu Management plans, City and Regional Plans, Waitangi Tribunal Reports Review of recorded archaeological sites.
3 Field Research Hui with land trustees, kaumatua (elders) and other relevant participants. A minimum of one site visit. Technical advice if required. 4 Development of assessment framework Cultural history and significance of the area. Cultural / Environmental Effects. Recommendations.
5 Drafting Report Include plans showing any known archaeological sites, and any Waahi tapu areas within the scope of the project. Writing. Map production.
6 Consultation internally with land trustees on final draft report. Seeking any further feedback.
7 Final draft to client for comment Presentation of a draft in consultation with the Transpower or its designated consultancy.
8 Final Report. Comments from task 7 and any other agreed amendments are incorporated into the report.
7
Site Location The project area is highlighted in the figure below by the black and yellow dotted line, with the Matapihi peninsular in the top half of the picture.
The proposed power realignment that relates to the Matapihi Ohuki Trust includes two sites on the plan. 1. a new 46.1m steel structure founded on bored pile, 46.5m above ground level on the Te Ngaio No.1 block. 2. and a replacement pole proposed to be constructed on the part of the land comprised in the Ohuki No.2D block.
8
Figure 1 New 45.1m tall steel structure founded on bored pile - Height above GL 46.5m
9
Figure 2 Existing structure to be replaced with twin concrete structures 11.2m tall
10
Cultural Assessment of Effects & Recommendations This section provides a response to the transmission realignment plan and outlines recommendations to mitigate effects based on this assessment and consultation that was undertaken. As described in the Regional Policy Statement (RPS), the location and functional constraints associated with the development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of transmission infrastructure may conflict with the protection provisions for significant ecological, landscape, and cultural values. These conflicts necessitates the balancing of the benefits of the transmission of energy against the protection provisions within statutory documents (Operative RPS, 2014). The RPS also states that “Maintaining the output from existing electricity generation schemes is essential for ensuring that people, communities and industry are able to provide for their social, economic and cultural well-being and health and safety.” The Matapihi Ohuki Trust appreciates that consultation has been undertaken in an effort to balance these needs. Removal of power line from CMA The plethora of bridges, causeways, and other man-made structures scattered throughout Tauranga harbour has altered the natural flow of the tide, creating unnatural sand banks. This has become a deterrence to marine mammals visiting the way once did in the past. Dolphins and other marine mammals no longer enter the Rangataua regularly as they once did. Removal of power line structure from the Coastal Marine Area that has ONFL status is supported by the trust, the Tauranga Moana Iwi Management Plan and the Ngāi Tūkairangi, Ngāti Tapu Hapū Management Plan. Disturbance of foreshore and seabed will cause temporary disruption to the environment. However the long term effects are positive. Potentially reducing sediment build up and improving access to the Rangataua for marine animals feeding. Placement of New Transmission Structure on Te Ngaio Block Te Ngaio pa site viewed as area which has significant cultural, spiritual and historical values. In light of this, the Trust would like to seek enhancement and cultural recognition along with the other relative hapu of this area. This would suitably provide for ecological enhancement of the area. o Discussion for support towards removal of pest plants and replanting of natives; o Pou and korero – interpretation panels outlining the cultural significance; This has also been highlighted by Ngati He as an aspiration within the Matapihi Land Use Plan 2008. In response, Transpower have not committed to pest plant removal, replanting or cultural recognition elements in Te Ngaio Block. Access Road to Te Ngaio Block The access track into this block would need to upgraded to prevent damage to the property from heavy vehicles accessing the site to complete works. Construction of tracks typically involves removal of topsoil or placement of a geotextile fabric and installation of hard fill. Less earthworks may be required if construction is undertaken when ground conditions are firm. Stormwater control measures and scouring prevention must be in place. Surplus excavated material will be used as fill elsewhere on the property as agreed with the landowner. If unsuitable, the material will be removed.
11
The trust will require cultural monitors on site for any earthworks activity. Trees that will be necessary to remove will be limbed and cut into logs for use if agreeable to the land owners. A 400V power supply (pillar box) and a water supply (tap) for land owners use will be provided near the location of the existing Powerco owned 11kV pole as indicated in the photo below (Draft Access and Construction Assessment). Access from Station 355 is across pasture along an existing fence line for a distance of approximately 45m to the north western boundary of the property adjacent to the harbours edge. It will be necessary to create an all-weather track in this section that will remain in place at the completion of the project. Trees along this fence line may need to be trimmed. Access from Station 400 is across pasture along an existing fence line for a distance of approximately 30m to Pole 33D. It will be necessary to create an all-weather track in this section that will remain in place on conclusion of the works. At Station 400, a shelter will be provided (approximately 4m x 6m) on a concrete base including seating around 2 of its sides. The low profile shelter and construction materials used will ensure that it will have minimal visual impact and the shelter will not have walls. This space is intended as a quiet land-owners space and not available for public use, so appropriate signage will need to be in place at the entrance. The gates to the property will continue to be locked so that non-authorised access will not be permitted.
Replacement of Existing Structure - Ohuki No 2 Transpower will commission a landscaping report for managing the land interest near 128A (at the northern end of the alteration). However, Transpower are not committed to fund the landscaping. This is the Ohuki No 2 block which is noted as a significant ecological area. See figure 2 for the location of this part of the works. 12
Given the new route of the line to A128A is different from the current one, there are exotics trees that would need to be removed and the project would undertake to replant with suitable natives. Track upgrades Any damages to property or existing tracks during construction will be repaired. Any new gates are requested to remain in place where appropriate. Earthworks There is much heritage in these lands and tangata whenua must ensure the correct processes are followed to ensure the whenua is treated with respect. Any earthworks require cultural monitor onsite. Accidental discovery protocol in place. Should any taonga be found during works, discussion with relative hapū representatives must occur to ensure that tikanga Māori is applied to its where abouts at all times.
Conclusion
The Matapihi Ohuki Trust agrees to provide support towards the resource consent application for the proposed realignment project based on the agreements reached on recommendations as outlined in the previous chapter. We expect that Transpower will be committed to ensuring that the project is carried out with respect for the land and respect for the affiliated tangata whenua.
“Whatungarongaro te tangata, toitū te whenua”
13
Appendix J
Preliminary Site Investigation Report
Transpower Ltd