RESOURCE CONSENT DECISION New Zealand Transport Agency
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
RESOURCE CONSENT DECISION New Zealand Transport Agency (Transport Registry Centre Palmerston North) Decision on an application for resource consents to undertake vegetation clearance, land disturbance, discharge to water and drilling in the bed of a river for geotechnical investigations in and around the Manawatū River, Parahaki Island, and At-Risk, Rare and Threatened habitats adjacent to the Manawatū River, associated with Te Ahu a Tūranga - Manawatū Gorge Replacement at SH3, Palmerston North Application Reference: APP-2019202606.00 Decision Date: 26 February 2020 Expiry Date: 26 February 2022 Application Summary Proposal The New Zealand Transport Agency (the Applicant) has applied for resource consents to enable geotechnical investigations to inform the design and construction of the Te Ahu a Turanga (Manawatū Tararua Highway project). The Applicant has requested that the works be considered as two distinct locations as follows: 1. Up to six boreholes located to the immediate east of Parahaki Island, within the bed of the Manawatū River and the true left bank of the Manawatū River; and 2. Up to 13 boreholes located on land on the true right of the Manawatū River, and adjacent land on Raupo dominated seepage wetland and within Old Growth forest, which are considered to be At- Risk, Rare or Threatened habitats in Schedule F of the One Plan. The application notes that for some locations, 2-3 boreholes maybe required, with the final number being dependent on the geotechnical findings. The proposed location of the bore holes are shown in Figure one below. Figure 1 - Borehole locations The proposed boreholes are proposed to range between 0-70m in depth, with a casing size of 102mm. Each borehole will take approximately 7-8 working days to complete. For works within the bed and the true left bank of the Manawatū River, access will be via the access track authorised by APP-2018202144.01. No additional vegetation clearance is proposed on the true left bank. Page 2 of 35 Water required for drilling will be taken from the Manawatū River, which a daily volume to not exceed 6 cubic metres per day (m3/day), and a maximum instantaneous rate of 2 litres per second (L/s). Drilling within the bed of the Manawatū River may result in the potential for drilling fluids to be discharged to water. The Applicant is proposing to construct water tight bunds around the bores proposed to be constructed on the true left bank to collect the drilling slurry. This is proposed to be collected and disposed of to an approved collection facility. For those bores to be constructed in the bed of the River, no bunding is proposed. For the works on the northern side of the Manawatū River a crawler drilling rig will be moved onto the site via Track 1 authorised by APP-2019202470.00). From there the rig will be moved to the various bore locations. At the end of Track 1, the rig will be required to cross a stream in two locations. A small amount of vegetation trimming maybe required to allow the rig to move past low hanging branches. No vegetation clearance associated with moving the drilling rig within any At-Risk, Rare or Threatened habitat is proposed. An ecologist will be on site when the drilling rig is moved to each site in identified sensitive areas. To allow access to bore holes BH2011 and BH2013, 185m2 of vegetation clearance is required within secondary broadleaved and scrubland habitat. The Applicant considers this vegetation to not be an At-Risk, Rare or Threatened habitat. To access boreholes within the short length of Raupo dominated seepage wetland, 60m2 of Raupo (Rare habitat) may need to be cut of a minimum height of 0.5m above ground level. To minimise damage to the Raupo, swamp mats are proposed to be used. Any trimming of Raupo fronds will be supervised by an ecologist. The Applicant has proposed a comprehensive suite of proposed consent conditions as part of their application. The Applicant is seeking the following consents: Discharge Permit for the discharge of drilling fluid to water as a Discretionary Activity under Rule 14-30; Land Use Consent for drilling within the bed of the Manawatū River, which holds a Schedule B value of Site of Significance – Cultural as a Discretionary Activity under Rule 17-3; Land Use Consent for vegetation clearance for access as a Discretionary Activity under Rule 13-7 as vegetation clearance will be required within 10m of the bed of a permanently flowing river; Land Use Consent for land disturbance (drilling of boreholes) and associated discharge of artesian water to water within At-Risk habitats as a Discretionary Activity under Rule 13-8; and Page 3 of 35 Land Use Consent for land disturbance (drilling of boreholes) and associated discharge of artesian water to water within Rare and Threatened habitats as a Non-Complying Activity under Rule 13-9. Water is proposed to be abstracted from surface water to support the drilling. Given this is estimated at 6m3/day and at an instantaneous rate at or below 2L/s. This meets the Permitted Activity Rule 16-1, no consent is required for this abstraction. The Applicant is seeking a term of 2 years for these consents. Activity Summary Activity Description Status Authorisation Number Land Use Consent, River and Lake Beds, Te Ahu a Discretionary Activity ATH-2019203034.00 Tūranga Geotechnical Investigations (Rule 17-3) Discharge Permit, To Water, Te Ahu a Tūranga Discretionary Activity ATH-2019203119.00 Geotechnical Drilling Discharge (Rule 14-30) Land Use Consent, Land, Te Ahu a Tūranga Non-Complying Activity ATH-2019203121.00 Vegetation Clearance and Land Disturbance (Rules 13-7, 13-8 and 13- 9) Bundling Principle The Applicant has requested that the activities be considered as two distinct sites, works to be undertaken on in the bed of the Manawatū River and the true left bank, and works to be undertaken on the true right bank and within at-risk, rare and threatened habitats. I agree with the Applicant that the two sites can be considered distinct from each other and they also trigger separate rules under the One Plan. On that basis, the bundling principle is considered to relate to the separate sites. The bundling principle requires the most onerous activity status to be applied to the proposed activities. On this basis, the works on the true left and bed of the Manawatū River will be considered on a Discretionary basis, and the works on the true right and within at-risk, rare and threatened habitats will be considered on a Non-Complying Activity basis. Page 4 of 35 Assessment Summary The application has been assessed by James Lambie, Consultant Ecologist on behalf of the Manawatū- Whanganui Regional Council with respect to terrestrial ecology effects and Logan Brown, Manager Freshwater and Partnerships, Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council. The following assessment is based on their reviews. 1.1 Environmental Effects (Section 104(1)(a)) Actual and Potential Environmental Effects Terrestrial Ecology Mr Lambie advises that the geotechnical investigations involve a number of habitats of significance relating to the maintenance of indigenous biodiversity, namely: The riparian margin of the true right bank of the Manawatu River, which holds a Schedule B value of Site of Significance – Riparian for black fronted and banded dotterel; Kanuka forest (Threatened habitat as defined in Schedule F of the One Plan); Alluvial Old Growth Forest, consistent with Kahitakea-pukatea-tawa forest (Threatened habitat as defined in Schedule F of the One Plan); Raupo dominated seepage wetland, consistent with Seepage and spring wetland (Rare habitat as defined in Schedule F of the One Plan). Mr Lambie notes that the indigenous habitat ‘secondary broadleaved forest and scrubland’ is habitat for the relict fern Adiantum formosum and this species is limited in is distribution in New Zealand as it is mainly confined to the Manawatu area. The Applicant considers that given the habitat type is not listed in Schedule F of the One Plan, it does not meet the criteria for significance under Policy 13-5, and draws attention to the definition of ‘At-Risk habitat’s which is: “At-Risk habitat means an area determined to be an at-risk habitat in accordance with Schedule F and, for the avoidance of doubt, excludes any area in Table F.2(b).” I agree with the Applicant that if the habitat type is not detailed in Schedule F, then it is unable to be considered an At-Risk habitat. However, the clearance of the secondary broadleaved forest and scrubland requires consent as a Discretionary Activity given it is proposed to occur within 10m of the bed of the Manawatu River. On this basis I consider there to be scope to consider the effects of this vegetation clearance. The application summarises the habitats to be found within the project area and Mr Lambie concurs with this assessment and considers no additional rare, threatened or at-risk habitats are involved. Mr Lambie also considers Appendix C of the application provides a good account of the values and effects of the proposal. The Applicant considers that the anticipated changes to the habitats will be discernible but Page 5 of 35 localised. Mr Lambie also agrees with the Applicant that with the proposed effects management regime in place, such changes will not diminish the overall characteristics or viability of the affected ecosystems. Mr Lambie agrees that the unavoidable effects are likely to be low (no more than minor) if the proposed management measures to mitigate potential effects are implemented. Mr Lambie considers the conditions proposed by the Applicant with respect to biodiversity to be sufficient and recommends their adoption.