I hereby give notice that a hearing by commissioners will be held on:
Date: Tuesday 8 October and Wednesday 9 October 2019 Time: 9.30am Meeting Room: Reception Lounge Venue: Level 2, Auckland Town Hall, 301-303 Queen Street, Auckland
HEARING REPORT 42 REIMERS AVENUE, KINGSLAND EDEN PARK TRUST BOARD
COMMISSIONERS
Chairperson David Hill Commissioners Nigel Mark-Brown Pamela Peters
Sam Otter HEARINGS ADVISOR
Telephone: 09 353 9587 or 021 196 2582 Email: [email protected] Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Note: The reports contained within this document are for consideration and should not be construed as a decision of Council. Should commissioners require further information relating to any reports, please contact the hearings advisor. WHAT HAPPENS AT A HEARING At the start of the hearing, the Chairperson will introduce the commissioners and council staff and will briefly outline the procedure. The Chairperson may then call upon the parties present to introduce themselves to the panel. The Chairperson is addressed as Mr Chairman or Madam Chair.
Any party intending to give written or spoken evidence in Māori or speak in sign language should advise the hearings advisor at least five working days before the hearing so that a qualified interpreter can be provided.
Catering is not provided at the hearing. Please note that the hearing may be audio recorded.
Scheduling submitters to be heard
A timetable will be prepared approximately one week before the hearing for all submitters who have returned their hearing attendance form. Please note that during the course of the hearing changing circumstances may mean the proposed timetable is delayed or brought forward. Submitters wishing to be heard are requested to ensure they are available to attend the hearing and present their evidence when required. The hearings advisor will advise submitters of any changes to the timetable at the earliest possible opportunity.
The Hearing Procedure
The usual hearing procedure is: • The applicant will be called upon to present his/her case. The applicant may be represented by legal counsel or consultants and may call witnesses in support of the application. After the applicant has presented his/her case, members of the hearing panel may ask questions to clarify the information presented. • The relevant local board may wish to present comments. These comments do not constitute a submission however the Local Government Act allows the local board to make the interests and preferences of the people in its area known to the hearing panel. If present, the local board will speak between the applicant and any submitters. • Submitters (for and against the application) are then called upon to speak. Submitters may also be represented by legal counsel or consultants and may call witnesses on their behalf. The hearing panel may then question each speaker. The council officer’s report will identify any submissions received outside of the submission period. At the hearing, late submitters may be asked to address the panel on why their submission should be accepted. Late submitters can speak only if the hearing panel accepts the late submission. • Should you wish to present written information (evidence) in support of your application or your submission please ensure you provide the number of copies indicated in the notification letter. • Only members of the hearing panel can ask questions about submissions or evidence. Attendees may suggest questions for the panel to ask but it does not have to ask them. No cross-examination - either by the applicant or by those who have lodged submissions – is permitted at the hearing. • After the applicant and submitters have presented their cases, the chairperson may call upon council officers to comment on any matters of fact or clarification. • When those who have lodged submissions and wish to be heard have completed their presentations, the applicant or his/her representative has the right to summarise the application and reply to matters raised by submitters. Hearing panel members may further question the applicant at this stage. • The chairperson then generally closes the hearing and the applicant, submitters and their representatives leave the room. The hearing panel will then deliberate “in committee” and make its decision. • Decisions are usually available within 15 working days of the hearing.
42 Reimers Avenue, Kingsland Tuesday 8 October and Wednesday 9 October 2019
A NOTIFIED RETRICTED DISCRETIONARY ACTIVITY RESOURCE CONSENT APPLICATION BY EDEN PARK TRUST BOARD
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.
Reporting officer’s report 5 – 38
Attachment 1 Section 92 Request and Response 39 – 50
Attachment Two Council Peer Reviews (Traffic and Noise) 51 – 66
Attachment Three Previous Resource Consents R/LUC/2006/4828 and 67 - 114 LUC60337912
Attachment Four Map of submitters’ locations (local only) 115 - 118
Attachment Five Submissions – The Submissions have been recreated in two volumes and can be found on the Hearing Page here https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/have-your- say/hearings/find-hearing/Pages/resource-consent- hearing-documents.aspx?HearingId=234
Reporting Officer, Michael Campbell, Planner
Reporting on an application to hold a one-off night-time match on a Sunday being a T20 cricket match between India and NZ. The match is proposed to take place on the 26 January 2020 (the Sunday of Auckland Anniversary Weekend 2020). at 42 Reimers Avenue, Kingsland. The reporting officer is recommending, subject to contrary or additional information being received at the hearing, that the application be CONSENTED to, subject to certain conditions.
APPLICANT: EDEN PARK TRUST BOARD
SUBMITTERS: A full list of submitters is available in the Submission Documents linked to in Attachment 5 above
Page 3 42 Reimers Avenue, Kingsland Tuesday 8 October and Wednesday 9 October 2019
Hearing v2.3B
Report on notified application for resource consent(s) under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA)
Restricted Discretionary activity
To: Independent Hearing Commissioners From: Michael Campbell – Consultant Planner | BREP (Hons) | MNZPI Campbell Brown Planning Limited Hearing date:
Note: This is not the decision on the application.
• This report sets out the advice and recommendation of the reporting planner. • This report has yet to be considered by the independent hearing commissioners delegated by Auckland Council to decide this resource consent application. • The decision will be made by the independent hearing commissioners only after they have considered the application and heard from the applicant, submitters and council officers.
1. Application description Application and property details
Application number: LUC60338953 Applicant's name: Eden Park Trust Site address: 42 Reimers Avenue, Kingsland, Auckland Lodgement date: 17 May 2019 Notification date: 25 June 2019 Submission period ended: 23 July 2019, 11pm
Number of submissions received: 857 in support 2 neutral 27 in opposition1
1 While there were 30 submitters noted as opposing the application in Question 1 of the online submission form spreadsheet, four submitters (Ronald Kumar – ID 4592 / John Hagen – ID 4141 / Grant Gothard – ID 4598 /) appear to have opposed the application and one submitter has said they are neutral (Raj Patel – ID4243) in error. This is because their responses in Questions 2 and 3 of their submission indicate full support for the proposal.
Application No: LUC60338953 v2.3 5 Locality Plan
Figure 1: Locality Plan
Application documents All information submitted with the application is detailed below, and all referenced by the council as consent number LUC60338953.
• Application Form, and Assessment of Environmental Effects prepared by Tattico dated May 2019 and all referenced by the Council as consent number LUC60338953, including the following:
Report title and reference Author Rev Dated Eden Park Operating Management Plan Eden Park - Dec 2016 Traffic Assessment TPC C 15 May 2019 Acoustic Assessment Marshall Day - 13 May 2019
Other additional information Author Rev Dated Letter from Tattico Tattico - 14 Aug 2019 Letter from NZ Cricket NZ Cricket - 9 Aug 2019 Marshall Day Section 92 Response Marshall Day - 21 Aug 2019 Email from Tattico Tattico - 6 Sept 2019
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
6 Adequacy of information
The information submitted by the applicant is sufficiently comprehensive to enable the consideration of the following matters on an informed basis:
• The nature and scope of the proposed activity that the applicant is seeking resource consent(s) for. • The extent and scale of the actual and potential effects on the environment. • Those persons and / or customary rights holders who may be adversely affected. • The requirements of the relevant legislation.
A request for further information under s92 of the RMA was made on 1 August 2019. The applicant provided all of the information requested on 14 August 2019 and 21 August 2019. The section 92 request and response is provided as attachment 1 of this report. Report and assessment methodology
The application is appropriately detailed and comprehensive, and includes two expert assessments. Accordingly, no undue repetition of descriptions or assessments from the application is made in this report.
I have made a separate and independent assessment of the proposal, with the review of technical aspects by independent experts engaged by the council, as needed. Where there is agreement on any descriptions or assessments in the application material, this is identified in this report.
Where professional opinions differ, or extra assessment and / or consideration is needed for any reason, the relevant points of difference of approach, assessment, or conclusions are detailed. In addition, the implications for any professional difference in findings in the overall recommendation is provided.
The assessment in this report also relies on reviews and advice from the following specialists:
• Mr Jon Styles – Styles Group – Report dated 27 August 2019 • Mr Ian Clark – Flow Transportation – Report dated 19 August 2019
These peer review assessments are included in attachment 2 of this report.
This report is prepared by: Michael Campbell – Consultant Planner | BREP (Hons) | MNZPI Campbell Brown Planning Limited Signed:
Date: 9 September 2019
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 7
Reviewed and approved for release by: Fennel Mason, Team Leader, Resource Consents Signed:
Date: 11 September 2019
2. Executive summary Eden Park Trust (EPT) has applied to the Auckland Council for resource consent to enable a one off T20 cricket match to take place on Sunday 26 January 2020 over Auckland Anniversary Weekend. The match is scheduled to commence at 8.00pm and is scheduled to finish at 11.00pm. The applicant advises that the match is being played as part of India Republic Day celebrations. The match is scheduled for the day before Auckland Anniversary Day, which is a public holiday.
The site is subject to I1310 Eden Park Precinct of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Eden Park Trust (EPT) requires a resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity because it is proposed to hold the match on a Sunday up to a scheduled finish of 11pm. Under the Eden Park Precinct, Sunday night matches are not permitted, and the proposal will also result in an infringement to the noise standard after 10:30pm.
A total of 886 submissions were received for this application with 857 submissions in support, 2 neutral submissions and 27 submissions in opposition to the proposal.
Key issues of concern raised by submitters relate to the noise, traffic and amenity effects of the proposal. Concerns have also been raised that the event will run past the scheduled finish time. A large number of submitters have expressed support for the event generally in terms of benefits and enjoyment to the community and use of an existing facility.
The application has been reviewed by technical specialists, particularly in relation to noise and traffic effects. Those assessments have concluded that, subject to conditions of consent, the actual or potential effects of this proposal can be mitigated. In terms of noise effects, Mr Styles considers that the adverse noise effects are mitigated by the following factors:
“1) The affected residents would be given advance warning of the match that might finish late so they can plan around it if desired;
2) The extra match time (30-70mins) of noise up to 20dB above the AUP limits is limited to 1 occasion;
3) The late finish will be on Sunday night which does not precede a normal working / school day; and
4) The effectiveness of the OMP.”
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
8 The proposal will provide for the operation of Eden Park, which is a nationally significant venue, and it will enable people and communities to provide for their social wellbeing and their economic needs. It is my opinion that the proposal is consistent with the relevant statutory documents. In particular, the proposal will meet the relevant objectives, policies and assessment criteria of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
Accordingly, based on the information provided to date, it is my recommendation that resource consent can be granted, subject to conditions of consent, as set out in this report.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
9 3. The proposal, site and locality description
Proposal
The applicant seeks resource consent to enable a one off cricket match to take place on a Sunday night. Specifically, EPT propose to host a T20 cricket match between India and NZ which is proposed to take place on Sunday 26 January 2020 over Auckland Anniversary Weekend. Play is scheduled to commence at 8.00pm and is scheduled to finish at 11.00pm. The applicant advises that the T20 match is being played as part of India Republic Day celebrations.
This application also includes matches involving the Indian women’s team on the Number 2 field on Saturday 25 January, and Monday 27 January 2020, both during the daytime.
It is noted that the proposal would not increase the total number of night games/matches per year. This would remain at a maximum of 25 per year (as specified within the existing resource consents and as stipulated in the Eden Park Precinct rules).
EPT has advised2 the following in terms of the application:
“New Zealand Cricket wishes to select Auckland, and specifically Eden Park, to host this event because it has the capacity to accommodate the number of patrons expected for the match and because its floodlights meet the strict requirements of the International Cricket Council for T20 matches.
The Eden Park precinct provisions state that organised sports and recreation activities undertaken at night time on the Number 1 field shall not be undertaken on a Sunday and that the noise limits for all times outside of the hours of 8.00am and 10.30pm Monday to Saturday must not exceed 40dB. The proposed game will comply in all respects with the other standards of the precinct.
Eden Park operations around the proposed T20 cricket match will be undertaken in accordance with Eden Park’s comprehensive operating management plan which has been prepared, incorporating the requirements of the Unitary Plan, and is appended in Attachment B. The OMP contains the following three integrated components:
1. Community Consultation and Communications Management Plan;
2. Transport and Traffic Management Plans; and
3. Event Management Plans.
The OMP includes both internal and external processes and procedures design to:
2 Refer to the AEE report prepared by Tattico - Pages 13-14
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
10 • Provide a safe and compliant environment for patrons within the stadium; and • Mitigated the effect that events may have on the surrounding residential amenity.
The operational processes developed for the above components combine to manage the overall effect of Eden Park operations on the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The following bullet points summarise the key components of the operational plan:
• Alcohol management processes and procedures; • Traffic management strategies, including through a Traffic Management Group (TMG); • Communication mechanisms (e.g. hot line/resident letter drop/ email messaging/ complaints procedures); • Collaborative working relationships with external agencies such as Police, Auckland Council, Auckland Transport, District Licensing Authority and emergency services; • Feedback mechanisms to residents via the Community Liaison Group (CLG) and direct with individual members of the CLG; • Letter bins and public conveniences placed in surrounding streets; and • Post event residential litter cleaning.
The basis for the level or extent of activation (i.e. number of security personnel, a number of gates opened, TMP implemented, whether or not liquor checkpoints are activated) is determined by estimated crowd size, which is provided by the event or venue hirer. In addition to anticipated crowd size, the duration of event will also influence activation levels.
The mitigations contained in the OMP are based on those successfully used to deliver large scale events such as the Rugby World Cup and Cricket World Cup games, NRL nines and international rugby and cricket tests. They were developed in conjunction with feedback from Police, District Licensing Authority, Auckland Council Compliance Monitoring, Auckland Transport and the Community Liaison Group.”
I note that, as a result of submissions lodged, clarification of the proposal was sought in relation to the potential for matches to run over the scheduled finish time of 11pm.
The applicant’s planning consultant has clarified this aspect of the proposal as follows3:
“This application (as with every previous sporting match held at Eden Park) is based on a scheduled finish time for the completion of the game. The scheduled finish time is the official time that a game is scheduled to be completed within the rules of the sporting code. This is no different to any other venue in New Zealand.
As with any other event, there is the potential for the match to run past the scheduled finish time due to unforeseen stoppages such as injury time, bad light or rain. In the event of a tied match, a super over for each team is held to determine a winner. In accordance with the rules of the International Cricket Committee, the conduct and timing of the match on the day is determined by the match officials and referee and is outside the control of Eden Park and New Zealand Cricket.
3 Refer to Tattico Letter dated 14 August 2019.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 11 Notwithstanding this, New Zealand Cricket is committed to using its best endeavours to ensure that all matches run to schedule as set out in the attached letter from David White.”
Site, locality, catchment and environs description
A full description of the application site (Eden Park) and surrounding area has been provided within the Tattico Limited Resource Consent Application and Assessment of Environmental Effects report (AEE). Having undertaken a site visit on a number of occasions (most recently on 7 September 2019), I concur with that description.
The site is known as Eden Park and the site address is 42 Reimers Avenue, Kingsland. The site is a large well-established international sports stadium. The site is contained within almost all of the land bounded by Reimers Avenue to the south, Cricket Avenue to the east, Walters Road to the north and Sandringham Road to the west. Figure 1 above identifies the site.
The local centre of Kingsland (including Kingsland Train Station) is located to the north approximately 200 metres from Eden Park.
The main stadium with the number one field is located on the eastern part of the block. The main stadium was the subject of extensive renovations as part of New Zealand hosting the Rugby World Cup in 2011. The western side of Eden Park generally comprises the Number 2 field, parking areas, and a range of smaller ancillary buildings. The majority of the sites that surround Eden Park (to the north, east and south) are zoned Single House, with a Residential Isthmus A Special Character Area Overlay. The overlay area is of significance because it includes substantial areas of the earliest European settlement and development that occurred in and around Auckland City in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Houses in the area built between the 1860s and 1940 are predominantly detached one and two- storey houses, set within a well-established treed landscape. The land use zoning to the west is more intensive with a mixture of neighbourhood centre and Terrace Housing and Apartment Building zones located opposite the site along Sandringham Road.
The surrounding zoning map is provided below in Figure 2:
Figure 2: Zoning Map – Auckland Unitary Plan
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 12 The topography of the site and the immediate surrounds is reasonably flat. The surrounding street network comprises local residential roads with the exception of Sandringham Road which is an arterial road that includes a number of regular bus routes.
Background
Tattico Limited has provided a detailed summary of the development of Eden Park dating back since the Eden Cricket Club made the original land purchase in 19034. The Tattico Limited AEE also provides an outline of the consenting history applicable to the site.
The site is zoned Special Purpose: Major Recreation Facility zone. The Precinct description states that:
“The Eden Park Precinct provides specific planning controls for the use, development and redevelopment of Eden Park. Eden Park was established as the home of Auckland Cricket in 1910, with Auckland Rugby joining in 1925. Eden Park is a multi-purpose stadium and is one of New Zealand’s premier sports facilities.
The zoning of the land within the Eden Park Precinct is Special Purpose - Major Recreation Facility Zone. Refer to the planning maps for the location and extent of the precinct.”
The Precinct provisions include rules pertaining to organised sports and recreation activities undertaken at night time on the Number 1 (main) field. Rule I310.6.11 states that these activities must meet all of the following standards:
4 Refer Tattico AEE report - Page 6-7
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 13 As set out in the applicant’s AEE report:
“EPT has relied on various resource consents (the first granted in 1997) that have enabled it to host a range of events over the last 20 years. This includes the resource consent (R/LUC/2006/4828) for the redevelopment of Eden Park and enable it to host night-time sporting events that rely on the use of lights. The resource consent includes conditions that specify detailed operational parameters (start times, finishing times and frequency) that apply in the case of events using lights”
….
“EPT holds an existing resource consent for T20 and ODI cricket matches, providing for play to occur on weekdays, between the hours of 7-10pm and 2-10pm respectively.”
I also note that LUC60337912 granted (on 30th May 2019) the EPT resource consent to amend the finishing times of One Day Internationals (ODI) and T20 cricket matches at Eden Park, for future tours by the India national team. The approved consent allows the following:
• that ODI’s start at 3:00pm and finish at 11:00pm (Friday and Saturday only); • that T20’s start at 8:00pm and finish at 11:00pm (Friday and Saturday only); • that the amended finishing times apply to ODI and T20 cricket matches involving the India men’s national team only; • that such games involving the India national cricket team only are limited to a maximum of three games per year within the existing 25 night-time games provided for (these are not additional games).
A copy of these decisions are included as attachment 3.
4. Reasons for the application Resource consent is required for the following reasons: Land use consents (s9) – LUC60338953
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)
The following consents are required pursuant to the AUP (OIP):
• Activity Table I310.4.1 (A4) states that organised sports and recreation undertaken during the night time require consent as a Controlled Activity.
• Standard I310.6.1 (1) states that the noise level from any activity (as measured within the boundary of any site in a residential zoned property, not owned by the Eden Park Trust) must not be greater than the noise limits in Table I310.6.1.1 (below).
The noise limit for all days/times outside of 8.00am – 10.30pm is 40dB LA10.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
14 • Standard I310.6.11 (5) states that night time activities must not be undertaken on a Sunday.
Consent is required to infringe the 40dB LA10 by up to 20 dB) for up to 30 mins (until 11pm) on Sunday the 26th January 2020.
The infringement of standards I310.6.1 (1) and I310.6.11 (5) requires resource consent pursuant to Rule C1.9 (2) as a Restricted Discretionary Activity.
5. Status of the application The appropriate practice is to consider the applications together if there is an overlap between: the consents required; the matters over which the plan has limited its discretion; the effects of the activities; and whether consideration of one would likely affect the outcome of another. In this instance the consents required overlap and are considered together as a restricted discretionary activity overall.
6. Notification and submissions Notification background The application was publicly notified on 25 June 2019 at the request of the applicant. Submissions When the submission period ended, a total of 886 submissions were received. No submissions were received late after the close of the submission period.
A map showing the location of local submitters is attached as attachment 4, noting that there are a large number of submitters who are located away from the site, and the map only shows those submitters located in the immediate area.
Of the submissions received:
857 in support 2 neutral 27 opposing5 A summary of the issues raised in submissions together with the relief sought by the submitters is set out in the table below.
This table is only a summary of the key issues raised in submissions. For the specific details, refer to the full set of submissions (with attachment where lodged), included in attachment 5 to this report.
5 While there were 30 submitters noted as opposing the application in Question 1 of the online submission form spreadsheet, four submitters (Ronald Kumar – ID 4592 / John Hagen – ID 4141 / Grant Gothard – ID 4598 /) appear to have opposed the application and one submitter has said they are neutral (Raj Patel – ID4243), in error. This is because their responses in Questions 2 and 3 of the online submission form of their submission indicates full support for the proposal.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 15 Summary of submissions
Issues raised: 1. Hours of operation – Events running past the scheduled time of 11pm 27 2. Noise effects – crowd noise, spectators leaving the venue, PA System, the 27 lack of an acoustic barrier on the east stand. 3. Traffic effects – on–street parking, lack of public transport 27 4 Antisocial Behaviour - Fighting, Drunkenness etc. 27 5. Lighting Spill 15 6. Positive effects of the event / Support the Match 856
Relief sought: A. Grant consent 857 B. Refuse consent 27 C. Neutral 2 D. grant consent subject to conditions - traffic 7
Written Approvals The applicant has not obtained the written approval from any persons. Pre-hearing meeting No pre-hearing meeting has been held. Amendments to the application following notification After the submission period ended, the applicant provided further information and assessments in relation to an explanation on the scheduled hours and circumstances where there might be the potential to run past the scheduled finish. This information is included in attachment 1 of this report and / or referenced earlier in this report.
This additional information forms part of the application and is considered in this report.
Consideration of the application
7. Statutory considerations Resource Management Act 1991 When considering an application for resource consent the council must have regard to Part 2 (“purpose and principles” – sections 5 to 8), and sections 104, 104C, and 108.
For restricted discretionary activities, the council has regard to part 2 insofar as it falls within the matters for control or discretion the council has limited or reserved in its plan, and must have regard to s104C for restricted discretionary activities. Section 104C is set out as follows:
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 16 104C Determination of applications for restricted discretionary activities (1) When considering an application for a resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity, a consent authority must consider only those matters over which— (a) a discretion is restricted in national environmental standards or other regulations: (b) it has restricted the exercise of its discretion in its plan or proposed plan. (2) The consent authority may grant or refuse the application. (3) However, if it grants the application, the consent authority may impose conditions under section 108 only for those matters over which— (a) a discretion is restricted in national environmental standards or other regulations: (b) it has restricted the exercise of its discretion in its plan or proposed plan.
In considering any application for resource consent and any submissions received, the council must have regard to the following requirements under s104(1) – which are subject to Part 2 (the purpose and principles), subject to the restrictions set out on 104C above:
• any actual and potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity; • any relevant provisions of national policy statements, New Zealand coastal policy statement; a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement; a plan or proposed plan, a national environmental standard (NES), or any other regulations; and • any other matter the council considers relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the application.
When considering any actual or potential effects, the council may disregard any adverse effects that arise from permitted activities in a NES or a plan (the permitted baseline). The council has discretion whether to apply this permitted baseline.
As a restricted discretionary activity, the council may grant or refuse consent (under s104C). It must only consider those matters specified in the plan over which it restricted the exercise of its discretion. Any conditions are also limited to these matters of restricted discretion.
Section 108 provides for consent to be granted subject to conditions and sets out the kind of conditions that may be imposed.
8. Actual and potential effects on the environment – s104(1)(a) Effects that must be disregarded
Any effect on a person who has given written approval to the application
No written approvals have been submitted with this application.
Trade competition
Having reviewing the submissions, this application does not raise any trade competition issues.
Effects that may be disregarded – Permitted baseline assessment
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 17 The permitted baseline refers to permitted activities on the subject site. In this case, as all night time activities are subject to a controlled activity, the permitted baseline does not apply. I note that the applicant also agrees that the permitted baseline does not apply6.
Receiving environment
The receiving environment is made up of:
• the existing environment and associated effects from lawfully established activities; • effects from any consents on the subject site (not impacted by proposal) that are likely to be implemented; • the existing environment as modified by any resource consents granted and likely to be implemented; and • the environment as likely to be modified by activities permitted in the plan.
This is the reasonably foreseeable environment within which the adverse effects of the proposal are considered. I note that Rule I310.6.11 of the AUP sets out the controlled activity standards for organised sport and recreation undertaken at night time at the stadium. By way of a summary, the standards specify:
1) 25 activities within any 12-month period (but no more than four within a 35 day period) with a crowd capacity of 50,000 persons;
2) Activity to occur between Monday and Friday after 7.30pm and be scheduled to finish no later than 9.30pm (activities on public holidays are excluded from these time limits);
3) No activities on a Sunday; and
4) One day/night cricket test match of up to five days in duration within any 12-month period and counted as one activity.
As set out in the applicant’s AEE report:
“EPT has relied on various resource consents (the first granted in 1997) that have enabled it to host a range of events over the last 20 years. This includes the resource consent (R/LUC/2006/4828) for the redevelopment of Eden Park and enable it to host night-time sporting events that rely on the use of lights. The resource consent includes conditions that specify detailed operational parameters (start times, finishing times and frequency) that apply in the case of events using lights”
“EPT holds an existing resource consent for T20 and ODI cricket matches, providing for play to occur on weekdays, between the hours of 7-10pm and 2-10pm respectively.”
I also note that LUC60337912 granted the EPT resource consent to amend the finishing times of One Day Internationals (ODI) and T20 cricket matches at Eden Park, for future tours by the India national team. The approved consent allows the following:
6 Refer AEE report by Tattico - Page 18.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 18 • that ODI’s start at 3:00pm and finish at 11:00pm (Friday and Saturday only); • that T20’s start at 8:00pm and finish at 11:00pm (Friday and Saturday only); • that the amended finishing times apply to ODI and T20 cricket matches involving the India men’s national team only; • that such games involving the India national cricket team only are limited to a maximum of three games per year within the existing 25 night-time games provided for (these are not additional games).
The consent was granted on 30th May 2019. A copy of these decisions are provide at attachment 3.
In my opinion, the presence of these consents forms a baseline of effects that are currently anticipated at Eden Park.
Assessment of effects
While having regard to the above, the following assessment has been undertaken after I have:
• analysed the application (including any proposed mitigation measures); • visited the site and surrounds; • reviewed the council’s records (relating to the main approved consents); • reviewed the submissions received; and • taken advice from appropriate experts.
In the context of a restricted discretionary activity, I have restricted my assessment of effects to those matters where the Council has restricted the exercise of its discretion in the Unitary Plan. I note that rule C1.9(3) (Infringements of standards) of the AUP states that:
When considering an application for a resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity for an infringement of a standard under Rule C1.9(2), the Council will restrict its discretion to all of the following relevant matters:
(a) any objective or policy which is relevant to the standard;
(b) the purpose (if stated) of the standard and whether that purpose will still be achieved if consent is granted;
(c) any specific matter identified in the relevant rule or any relevant matter of discretion or assessment criterion associated with that rule;
(d) any special or unusual characteristic of the site which is relevant to the standard;
(e) the effects of the infringement of the standard; and
(f) where more than one standard will be infringed, the effects of all infringements considered together.
The following actual and potential effects have been identified.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 19 Positive effects
Rule C1.8 (3) of Chapter C General rules states: “The absence of any specific reference to positive effects in the objectives, policies, matters of discretion or assessment criteria does not mean that any positive effects of allowing an activity are not relevant to the consideration of an application for resource consent for that activity.”
Eden Park is an internationally renowned venue that has been home to some of New Zealand’s most iconic sporting moments, including two Rugby World Cup tournaments and various Cricket world cup matches.
The proposed match will provide positive economic benefits to the Auckland economy and it will contribute to the wellbeing of the community through joyous, and sometimes controversial moments in New Zealand sporting history.
Noise effects
A significant issue for consideration of this resource consent application relates to the noise effects arising from the proposal to hold a T20 cricket match on a Sunday, with a scheduled finish time of 11:00pm.
The applicant has provided an acoustic assessment by Mr Christopher Day of Marshall Day, which assesses the noise effects of the proposal. A full copy of that assessment is included within the application documentation.
In considering the actual or potential noise effects arising from the proposal, Mr Day concludes the following:
“In my opinion the sensitivity to noise on a Sunday is no different to a weekday/Saturday. This approach is reinforced by the District Plan noise limits which are the same on Sundays as on other days.
In my opinion there will be no difference in noise output from a T20 match on a Sunday compared with other days. Aside from this lack of difference in noise level (weekday to Sunday) the overall noise effects of the event are not significant as it will only occur on one Sunday and it can comply with the Eden Park noise limits which are the most restrictive of any stadium in New Zealand.
In my opinion, the overall noise effects from the application to move a one-off T20 from a weekday/Saturday to a Sunday (with a holiday on the following day) will be negligible.”
In response to a further information request in relation for the potential for the match to overrun past the scheduled finish time of 11pm, Mr Day considers that while there is a statistical possibility that some residents could be disturbed by additional crowd noise during matches overrunning up to 11:40pm, the historic data suggests that the residents are statistically likely to experience less effects than for an 11pm finish. Mr Day considers that the noise effects in general are mitigated by the one-off occurrence of the event and the public holiday occurring the next day.
Overall, Mr Day supports the proposal from an acoustic perspective.
As noted in the applicant’s section 92 response, there is the potential for the event to run past its scheduled finish time. I agree that, like other sporting events, there is the potential for the match to run past the scheduled finish time due to unforeseen stoppages. The applicant has noted that
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953 20 of the 12 matches played, five matches finished earlier than scheduled and seven matches concluded later than the scheduled finish time. Two of these later finishes were rain related with the remainder due to on-field stoppages. The duration of match time after the scheduled finish time ranges from 7 minutes to 38 minutes.
The Council has obtained a peer review of the Marshall Day report by Mr Jon Styles of Styles Group. Please refer to attachment 2.
Mr Styles considers that the Marshall Day report does not provide an assessment of effects arising from the additional half hour of noise beyond 10.30pm up to 20dB above the levels permitted by the AUP. He does note that the applicant’s AEE sets out the reasons for consent clearly at section 6 of the AEE report and that the noise limits will be infringed for the last half hour of the match.
Mr Styles notes that the effect of the infringement of standard I310.6.1 is that noise levels will be 20-25dB higher than what is normally permitted between 10.30pm and 11pm, with the possibility of those effects extending until approximately 11.40pm. Mr Styles considers that a 20dB relaxation of the noise limit would be perceived as a significant change.
In addition, Mr Styles notes that:
“In addition, the proposal would permit crowd noise to be generated inside the stadium for the extra match time. As set out at the bottom of page 2 of the MDA Report, crowd noise could be as loud as 65-68dB LAeq during periods when the crowd is cheering. I agree with the estimate of crowd noise based on a capacity of around 36-37,000 people.
If the effects of the increase in the noise limit and the extension of hours that would permit crowd noise to 11pm or later, the change in noise level in the community is likely to be approximately 20-25dB compared to what is permitted by the AUP beyond 10.30pm. This is a significant difference in the noise environment.”
Mr Styles considers that the MDA letter fails to acknowledge that the last scheduled half hour of the match will be in the ‘noise night time’ where the AUP provides much lower noise limits for the protection of sleep. Mr Styles notes that:
“…paragraph 4 of the conclusion in the MDA report states that “...it [the T20 match] can comply with the Eden Park noise limits...”. This is clearly incorrect. I consider that the failure to acknowledge the proposed 20dB infringement of the night time noise limits is a significant omission. This omission is dealt with in the MDA Response.”
Mr Styles goes on to state that:
“I consider the description of the effects is incorrect and should not be relied upon for several reasons:
1) The event extends beyond the noise ‘daytime’ and into the night time period according to I310.6.1 (the daytime period ends at 10.30pm, and the event could run until 11:40pm);
2) In order to achieve a level of 35dB or 40dB LA10 inside a dwelling with windows open, the outdoor noise level would have to be no greater than approximately 50-55dB LA10;
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
21 3) The sound system noise is limited to an average noise limit of 55dB LA10. During a cricket match, the sound system is permitted to generate a noise level of 60dB LA10(10min) for up to the full 3 hour period. This is 20dB greater than the internal level of 40dB LA10 stated in the MDA report and requires a level of attenuation unachievable through a normal open window of a dwelling (15dB is typically regarded as the maximum attenuation practicably achievable);
4) The assessment in the MDA Report is based only on the noise from the sound system, which is limited by the AUP (and the proposed conditions) to 55dB LA10 as an average over 13 hours during the day as it is received in the community. When there is an event on at Eden Park, the sound received in the community is made up of several sources, including the crowd noise. As set out above, crowd noise can reach 65-68dB LAeq for a crowd of the size expected for this match. The outdoor noise level from all sources is therefore likely to be considerably greater than 55dB LA10, and likely to be up to approximately 62-65dB LA10 during the match (60dB LA10 from the sound system, plus crowd noise over the period of the match);
5) Based on the four factors above, the noise level inside a bedroom with an open window is more likely to be approximately 50dB LA10 if windows are required to be slightly open for ventilation and cooling, (especially likely in February);
6) The paragraph refers to NZS2107:2016 Acoustics—Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors. Section 2.2 Limitations of this standard states:
This Standard is not intended for – ... (b) application to sounds which are not categorised as steady-state or quasi-steady-state;
(c) either the assessment or prescription of acceptable recommended noise levels from transient or variable noises outside of the building such as – ... (v) crowd noise, e.g. from parades and sporting events;
The noise from Eden Park is not steady-state or quasi-steady-state. It is highly variable and fits the exclusion in (v). Based on this, it is my view that quoting any part of AS/NZS2170:2016 in this context is inappropriate.”
Mr Styles goes on to note that, if residential windows need to be open for ventilation and cooling, the noise levels inside are likely to be in the order of 50-55dB LA10 during the match. Mr Styles considers that such levels of noise “would preclude sleep for most people and be intrusive in most residential settings. Such effects could extend to 11.40pm from the match itself, with post-event noise in the community until well after midnight depending on the crowd size.”
In terms of holding the event on a Sunday, Mr Styles agrees that there is no differentiation between noise levels on Sundays compared to any other day of the week. However, Mr Styles is of the view that the effects of a night game on a normal Sunday would be considerably greater than on any other day of the week as, in his view a large proportion of the public still recognise Sundays as being a day of rest and respite.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
22 Mr Styles does however agree with the applicant’s AEE report and Marshall Day that having the game on a Sunday preceding a public holiday will generate a considerably lesser degree of adverse effect on most people compared to a normal Sunday night before a working day.
Mr Styles recommends that the possibility of holding a night game on the Saturday before the Sunday match is precluded by a condition of consent on the basis that two night games in a row would exacerbate the effects of the extended Sunday night game proposed. I concur with that recommendation.
Overall and having regard to the proposal and the Marshall Day report, and the Section 92 response, Mr Styles advises the following:
“I agree with the first point that the noise output of the match will not change appreciably on a Sunday compared to if it was held on any other day of the week.
In my experience there is a considerable difference in the general sensitivity to noise late into a Sunday night (11pm and beyond) compared to a Friday or Saturday night. However, this general difference in sensitivity is mitigated by the fact that the proposed match precedes a public holiday, so may be similar in effect to a normal Friday or Saturday night.
The proposed T20 match will generate noise levels from the sound system that are 20dB above the noise limits for Eden Park as set out in the AUP from 10.30pm to the finish time. I therefore disagree with the MDA Report that the proposal will be compliant with the noise limits in the AUP for Eden Park.
I consider that the effects of the infringement to the noise limits will be significant to the surrounding community, with noise levels up to 20dB higher than what is permitted by the AUP between 10.30pm and 11pm or possibly later, and with the additional noise of spectators clearing the area for 20-40 minutes after the finishing time, up to as late as 12.30am.
I agree with the MDA Report that in this case, with a public holiday following the match day, the Sunday match is likely to be little different to most people than a Saturday night match, running to the same time.
The adverse noise effects are mitigated by the following factors:
1) The affected residents would be given advance warning of the match that might finish late so they can plan around it if desired;
2) The extra match time (30-70mins) of noise up to 20dB above the AUP limits is limited to 1 occasion;
3) The late finish will be on Sunday night which does not precede a normal working / school day; and
4) The effectiveness of the OMP.”
Overall, having reviewed the technical noise reports, it is my opinion that based on the particular circumstances of this proposal, the actual or potential noise effects can be suitably mitigated. I agree that it would be appropriate to impose a restriction on EPT holding a night game on the Saturday night before the Sunday event. While I acknowledge that the proposal will result in
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
23 noise effects that are not able to be fully internalised, the one off nature of the event, together with the fact that it will precede a public holiday means that the noise effects will be acceptable in this instance, subject to conditions, including the restriction on any Saturday night event and the ongoing use of the OMP.
Traffic effects
The applicant has provided a transport assessment, prepared by Mr Todd Langwell of Traffic Planning Consultants (TPC), which assesses the transport effects of the proposal. A full copy of that assessment is included within the application documentation.
Mr Langwell considers that the traffic effects of the proposal can be accommodated on the road network without compromising its function, capacity or safety.
The Council has obtained a peer review of the TPC report by Mr Ian Clark of Flow Transportation. Please refer to attachment 2 for a copy of that report. Having considered the proposal, Mr Clark concludes that:
“As a result, we consider that the transport effects of the proposed T20 cricket match on Sunday 26 January 2020 on public transport and the wider transport network will be very minor, as long as the following points are carried through:
• Implementation of the appropriate traffic and transport management plan around the stadium. This is required by the current consent, but it could be that a TMP level 5 should be explicitly require for this event, to avoid any ambiguity
• A condition requiring provision of additional train services and carriages on the Western Line and special event bus services, noting that Auckland Transport has not yet indicated support in principle
• A condition requiring provision of a range of later night Sunday evening public transport services than is normally provided on Sunday evenings, over a wide area, to ensure that event goers can be confident of getting home by public transport. We consider that this issue is one that is specific to the proposal to hold the event late on a Sunday evening
• Implementation of a communications strategy covering the event and travel planning and the wider community. This is required by the current consents, but will be specifically required in order to ensure that event goers are aware of the specific late night arrangements for public transport.
In response to the suggested conditions, Mr Mark Vinall from Tattico on behalf of EPT has stated:
“We note in the transport report that the author suggests imposing conditions to require the consent holder to implement additional transport services and that TMP 5 should be explicitly required for the event. We do not consider that the imposition of the conditions suggested is necessary.
The event will be held under the current operational traffic management plans approved by Auckland Transport to manage traffic and pedestrians. The traffic management response around the Eden Park environs is designed to mitigate the effects of traffic and ensure pedestrian safety
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
24 while minimising the impact traffic management has on the residential amenity. The traffic management plans are tailored to include traffic management measures relative to crowd sizes under the direction of Auckland Transport.
We also make the following observations:
. PT is not the only option for travel to and from Eden Park, and the traffic management plan is a proven method to minimise effects on the network and neighbours. . We are not aware that any other venues are subject to the suggested conditions and expectations around public transport, yet the risk is the same of an event finishing later than scheduled.”
Having regard to the above technical assessments, it is my view that, subject to conditions, the traffic effects of the proposal will be acceptable. That being said, I am inclined to support the view of Mr Clark that given the day of the operation, on a Sunday, with its later finish time, for the avoidance of doubt it would be prudent to ensure that the matters raised by Mr Clark are addressed. I am particularly mindful that this is the first time (as I understand it) that a night event will have been held on a Sunday at Eden Park, and any steps to get the crowd away from the venue as soon as the match has been completed would assist in mitigating any ongoing noise effects.
Overall, subject to conditions of consent, it is my opinion that any traffic effects will be acceptable.
Lighting effects
The applicant has advised that the Eden Park lights will operate for the full duration of the match under normal cricket match operating conditions. The applicant has noted that Eden Park complies with the lighting requirements of the Unitary Plan.7
In my opinion, the lighting effects will be largely similar to a typical event held at Eden Park and such effects will be acceptable.
Amenity (crowd behaviour) effects
The effects of crowd behaviour is an important aspect in managing the amenity effects on the surrounding residents. I concur with the applicant’s AEE assessment8 that any actual adverse effects associated with the change from a weekday or Saturday to a Sunday will be limited and similar to a typical night event. Because the match falls on a public holiday weekend and within the daylight savings period, more residents in the surrounding locality are likely to be out of town and partaking in other activities across the city than other periods of the year.
The application prepared by Tattico Limited states that all matches enabled by this application will be managed in accordance with Eden Park’s Operating Management Plan (OMP). The OMP includes the following:
• Community Consultation and Communication Management Plan; and
• Transport and Traffic Management Plans; and
7 Refer AEE report by Tattico – Page 25 8 Refer AEE report by Tattico – Pages 18-22
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
25 • Event Management Plans
As noted by the applicant, the OMP includes both internal and external processes and procedures designed to provide a safe and compliant environment for patrons within the stadium and mitigate the effects that this event may have on surrounding residential amenity.
It is my opinion that the effects of night time use of the stadium can be adequately avoided, remedied and mitigated through the consultation and communication process and procedures identified in the application and in the OMP.
Effects conclusion
In summary, it is my opinion that the effects of this one off T20 match have been suitably mitigated for the following reasons:
1) The affected residents will be given advance warning of the match that might finish late so they can plan around this event, if desired;
2) The Sunday event with extra match time (30-70 mins) after 10:30 of noise up to 20dB above the AUP limits, and the traffic and amenity effects is limited to one occasion, with a restriction on any event on the Saturday night proposed;
3) The proposal will not result in an increase in the total number of 25 matches provided for at Eden Park by the Unitary Plan.
3) The late finish will be on Sunday night which does not precede a normal working / school day given Auckland Anniversary day; and
4) The OMP will be in place to manage crowd behavior, noise and traffic effects.
Overall, I generally agree with the applicant’s AEE and conclude that subject to conditions of consent, any actual or potential effects arising from this current application will not be significant. I am mindful of the potential for cumulative effects that may arise given the existing resource consent(s) that have been granted for the site, however, in this instance, having considered all information including the specialist reports by Styles Group and Flow Transportation, I am satisfied that such cumulative effects will not eventuate in this instance. This is particularly the case because this one-off event would replace one of the 25 existing approved events rather than add to that number.
Based on the assessment undertaken above, it is my opinion that the actual or potential adverse effects arising from this proposal will, subject to conditions, be suitably mitigated.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
26 9. Relevant statutory documents - s104(1)(b) The following are not applicable to the current resource consent application:
• No national environmental standards are relevant to this application (s104(1)(b)(i)) • No other regulations apply to this application (s104(1)(b)(ii)) • The NZCPS is not relevant to this application. • No national policy statements are relevant to this application. • Sections 7 & 8 of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act (HGMPA) (as a NZCPS) is not relevant to this application as the proposal has no impact on the coastal environment of the Hauraki Gulf (s104)(1)(b)(iv).
Accordingly, only the relevant statutory documents and other matters are considered below. Auckland Council Regional Policy Statement – s104(1)(b)(v) The operative Auckland Council Regional Policy Statement (ACRPS) sets out the strategic framework for managing the use, development and protection of the natural and physical resources of the Auckland region in an integrated and co-ordinated manner.
I concur with the applicant’s AEE report that the proposal will be consistent the ACRPS. As noted in the application9, the open space and recreation facilities objectives and policies are set out in B7.2.1 and B2.7.2 respectively and seek to enable the development of and use of existing and new major recreation facilities in a manner that avoids, remedies or mitigates significant adverse effects from the use of these facilities on nearby residents and communities. Plan or Proposed Plan – section 104(1)(b)(vi) The relevant plans are identified in section 4 above of this report, and the proposal is considered against the relevant provisions below.
9 Refer AEE report by Tattico – Page 28
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
27 Relevant objectives and policies
Chapter H26 Special Purpose – Major Recreation Facility Zone
H26 Objectives
1. Major recreation facilities are protected and enabled to provide for the social and economic well- being of people and communities. 2. Adverse effects generated by the operation, development, redevelopment and intensification of major recreation facilities are avoided, remedied or mitigated as far as is practical. 3. Major recreation facilities are protected from the reverse sensitivity effects of adjacent activities.
H26 Policies
1. Enable the safe and efficient operation of the primary activities within each precinct. 2. Provide for a range of appropriate accessory and compatible activities within the precincts. 3. Discourage activities that may give rise to adverse effects on i. the function, role, or amenity of any metropolitan town or local centre beyond those effects ordinarily associated with trade effects on trade competitors; and ii. the safe and efficient operation of the transport network. 4. Avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of major recreation facilities on adjacent development. 5. Enable the appropriate development and redevelopment of buildings whilst managing the adverse effects at the precinct interface. 6. Recognise the potential for major recreation facilities to give rise to reverse sensitivity effects and require new activities that are likely to be sensitive to these effects generated within the precinct to manage the risk of generating reverse sensitivity effects.
Comment
The purpose of the Major Recreation Facility zone is to provide for large multi-functional facilities capable of hosting large-scale sports events, while ensuring that any adverse effects arising from these activities are minimised. Importantly, the policy direction explicitly recognises the need for major recreation facilities in Auckland to provide for the social and economic well-being of people and communities and to meet the recreation and leisure needs of the city’s residents.
In my opinion, the proposed T20 match is consistent with the objectives and policies of the Major Recreation Facility and is acceptable subject to the activity proceeding in accordance with management plans noted in the application.
Eden Park Precinct
I310.2. Objectives
(1) Eden Park is protected as a regionally, nationally and internationally important venue for all of the following primary activities: (a) organised sports and recreation; (b) informal recreation; and (c) day time non-sporting events. (2) A range of activities compatible with, or accessory to, the primary activities are enabled.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
28 (3) The adverse effects of the operation of Eden Park are avoided, remedied or mitigated as far as is practicable recognising that the primary activities will by virtue of their nature, character, scale and intensity, generate adverse effects on surrounding land uses which are not able to be fully internalised.
I310.3. Policies
(1) Enable the safe and efficient operation of Eden Park for its primary activities. (2) Protect the primary activities of Eden Park from the reverse sensitivity effects of adjacent development. (3) Enable a range of accessory and compatible activities where they achieve all of the following: (a) avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects; and (b) are of a character and scale which will not displace the primary activities. (4) Manage the adverse effects of the operation of Eden Park, having regard to the amenity of surrounding properties. (5) Recognise that Eden Park's primary activities may generate adverse effects that are not able to be fully internalised and may need to be further mitigated by limiting or controlling their scheduling, duration and frequency.
Comment
I consider that the objectives and policies of the Precinct overlay recognise that Eden Park is a multi-purpose sports facility and the AUP specifically recognises and provides for the efficient on- going use of Eden Park. In doing so, the provisions of the precinct seek to manage the adverse effects of the operation of Eden Park having regard to the amenity of the surrounding properties, while recognising that Eden Park’s primary activities (matches) may generate adverse effects that are not able to be fully internalised.
Overall, it is my opinion that the proposal will not be contrary to the above objectives and policies. The foregoing assessment has concluded that the actual or potential adverse effects of this proposal can be suitably mitigated. Having regard to the scope of the application, it is my view that the proposal will not be contrary to the key outcomes that are sought by the Eden Park precinct overlay.
E25 Noise and vibration
In addition to the zone and precinct objectives and policies, the Auckland wide policies apply to the precinct. I consider that the following noise objectives and policies have some relevance:
E25.2. Objectives “(1) People are protected from unreasonable levels of noise and vibration.
(2) The amenity values of residential zones are protected from unreasonable noise and vibration, particularly at night.
…”
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
29
E25.3. Policies (1) Set appropriate noise and vibration standards to reflect each zone’s function and permitted activities, while ensuring that the potential adverse effects of noise and vibration are avoided, remedied or mitigated. (2) Minimise, where practicable, noise and vibration at its source or on the site from which it is generated to mitigate adverse effects on adjacent sites. (3) Encourage activities to locate in zones where the noise generated is compatible with other activities and, where practicable, adjacent zones. (4) Use area or activity specific rules where the particular functional or operational needs of the area or activity make such rules appropriate. (5) Prevent significant noise-generating activities other than roads and railway lines from establishing in or immediately adjoining residential zones. (6) Avoid activities sensitive to noise from establishing in industrial zones where adverse effects (including reverse sensitivity effects) arise that cannot be otherwise appropriately remedied or mitigated. (7) Require activities to be appropriately located and/or designed to avoid where practicable or otherwise remedy or mitigate reverse sensitivity effects on: (a) existing or authorised infrastructure; (b) adjacent Business – Light Industry Zone and Business – Heavy Industry Zone; (c) existing lawfully established rural production activities; (d) major recreation facilities; (e) existing lawfully established commercial activities within Business – City Centre Zone, Business – Metropolitan Centre Zone, Business – Town Centre Zone, Business – Local Centre Zone, Business – Neighbourhood Centre Zone, Business – Mixed Use Zone; or (f) regionally significant mineral extraction activities.
Comment I acknowledge that there is the potential for some tension between the more general policies set out in the noise chapter of the Plan, and that of the Precinct Plan. Clearly the boundary between Eden Park and its surrounding neighbours is not a typical interface. In my view, the precinct recognises the historic context of the site and objective and policies of the Precinct Plan acknowledge that there will be noise effects that are unable to be internalised. I remain of the view that given the nature of the proposed activity and noting that night time events are provided for within the Eden Park Precinct (to be undertaken in accordance with the specific management plans), the proposal will not be contrary to the relevant objectives and policies.
The adaptive management plans are the appropriate method employed in the Unitary Plan to give effect to objective I310.3.3 and policies I310.3.4 and I3130.3.5. Those provisions seek to minimise the effects of the operation of Eden Park, as far as is practicable, while recognising that activities at Eden Park will by virtue of their nature, character, scale and intensity generate adverse effects on the surrounding land uses which are not able to be fully internalised.
Relevant assessment criteria
As noted above, in the context of a restricted discretionary activity, I have restricted my assessment of effects to those matters where the Council has restricted the exercise of its
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
30 discretion in the Unitary Plan. I note that rule C1.9. Infringements of standards of the AUP states that:
When considering an application for a resource consent for a restricted discretionary activity for an infringement of a standard under Rule C1.9(2), the Council will restrict its discretion to all of the following relevant matters:
(a) any objective or policy which is relevant to the standard;
(b) the purpose (if stated) of the standard and whether that purpose will still be achieved if consent is granted;
(c) any specific matter identified in the relevant rule or any relevant matter of discretion or assessment criterion associated with that rule;
(d) any special or unusual characteristic of the site which is relevant to the standard;
(e) the effects of the infringement of the standard; and
(f) where more than one standard will be infringed, the effects of all infringements considered together.
In terms of I310.8.2. Assessment criteria of I310 Eden Park Precinct, the following matters are relevant, particularly as they relate to the noise effects of the proposal:
(1) the effects of non-compliance with a noise and/or lighting standard on the amenity values of surrounding properties and safety of transport networks:
(a) whether the effects of the activity will give rise to noise effects that are unreasonable, having regard to all of the following:
(i) the cumulative noise effects of other activities which are permitted on the site;
(ii) the cumulative effect of numerous infringements of the noise standards; and
(iii) the degree of non-compliance.
(b) whether people likely to be affected by the exceedance of noise standards will be given reasonable notice of the likely effects of the infringement including start time and end time;
(c) the extent to which duration and hours of operation are managed to minimise the effects of the infringement having regard to the operational requirements and reason for the infringement;
Comment Based on the foregoing assessment, I consider that the proposal will be consistent with the relevant assessment criteria of the plan.
In addition, the implementation of the OMP around the stadium following the completion of the match ensures that the crowd disperses quickly from Eden Park, thus limiting the impact on the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The Eden Park Operating Management Plan combines the Community Consultation and Community Management Plan, and a suite of Event Management and Transport and Traffic Management Plans.
Based on the foregoing assessment of effects, I am satisfied that the proposal remains consistent with the relevant assessment criteria.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
31 Conclusion
Overall, it is my opinion that the proposal will not be contrary to the relevant objectives, policies and assessment criteria. The foregoing assessment has concluded that the actual or potential adverse effects of this proposal can be suitably mitigated. Having regard to the key policies and assessment criteria set out in the precinct provisions, it is my view that the proposal will not be contrary to the key outcomes that are sought by the Eden Park precinct overlay or the wider policy framework.
10. Any other matters - s104(1)(c) Section 104(1)(c) requires that any other matter the consent authority considers relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the application be considered. In this case the following matters are considered relevant. Submissions
All of the submissions received by the council in the processing of this application have been reviewed and considered in the overall assessment of effects in this report. The council’s specialists have also reviewed the relevant submissions as required and incorporated comments into their assessments accordingly. Many of these submissions raised similar issues and have been dealt with generically in the body of this report. Those that have raised specific resource management matters and points of clarification have been specifically addressed in the assessment of actual and potential effects contained in section 8 above of this report.
In terms of the issue of the scheduled finish times, I acknowledge that there is the potential for additional effects to arise should the event overrun. Overall however, having regard to the technical assessment provided with the application, and the peer reviews undertaken by Council, it is my view that subject to conditions, these effects can be suitably managed.
As noted by Mr Styles, a number of submitters have raised the issue of the absence of the proposed acoustic barrier on the east stand. Mr Styles notes that if the barrier was constructed, the noise levels of the sound system as received in the community would remain similar to the current level, as the barrier would permit an increase in the source levels to combat low intelligibility in some areas of the grandstands. However, the barrier would reduce crowd noise to some extent, so there would be some benefit to its construction. As noted by Mr Styles, the applicant is best-placed to respond to this issue at the hearing. Local Board comments
No Local Board comments were provided.
11. Other relevant RMA provisions Conditions of resource consents – s108 The recommended conditions of consent are contained in section 14 below.
In addition to the conditions offered by the applicant or inherent in the application proposal, and any identified in the s104 assessment above, the conditions are recommended to minimise the traffic and noise effects of the proposal.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
32 Lapsing of resource consents – s125 Under s125, if a resource consent is not given effect to within five years of the date of the commencement (or any other time as specified) it lapses automatically unless the council has granted an extension. In this case, this resource consent will be valid only for Sunday 26 January 2020.
12. Consideration of Part 2 (Purpose and Principles) Purpose Section 5 identifies the purpose of the RMA as the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. This means managing the use of natural and physical resources in a way that enables people and communities to provide for their social, cultural and economic well-being while sustaining those resources for future generations, protecting the life supporting capacity of ecosystems, and avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse effects on the environment. Principles Section 6 sets out a number of matters of national importance which need to be recognised and provided for. These include the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes, the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna, and the protection of historic heritage.
Section 7 identifies a number of “other matters” to be given particular regard by the council in considering an application for resource consent. These include the efficient use of natural and physical resources, and the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values.
Section 8 requires the council to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Assessment The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed (in the R J Davidson Family Trust v Marlborough District Council decision) that when undertaking the section 104 evaluation the Council “must have regard to the provisions of Part 2 when it is appropriate to do so”. In this situation, given that the Unitary Plan has only recently been made operative (so it contains provisions prepared having regard to Part 2 and a coherent set of policies to achieve clear environmental outcomes) and does not add anything to the evaluative exercise, it is not considered necessary to undertake an assessment of the proposal against Part 2.
However, for completeness, this report provides a brief assessment which concludes that the application will be consistent with the purpose of the RMA, this being to ‘promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources’.
Part 2 of the RMA contains the purpose and principles. Consideration of applications for resource consent is subject to Part 2 of the RMA. The purpose of the RMA is set out in Section 5 as being to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. 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 well-being 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
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
33 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.
It is considered that the proposal is consistent with Section 5 of the RMA.
Based on the foregoing assessment, it is considered that subject to conditions, the proposal will provide suitable recognition to the relevant matters of national importance set out under Section 6.
The proposal is considered to represent development which is appropriate in this location, while at the same time managing effects on amenity as required by Section 7.
It is considered that there are no matters relating to the Treaty of Waitangi relevant to this application.
Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposal is consistent with the purpose of the RMA in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources.
13. Recommendation Recommendation on the application for resource consent
Subject to new or contrary evidence being presented at the hearing, I recommend that under sections 104C, 104, and 108, consent is granted to the proposal for a one off T20 cricket match to take place on Sunday 26 January 2020 with a scheduled time finish of 11.00pm.
The reasons for this recommendation are:
Overall, the proposal will not be contrary to the relevant objectives and policies and will any actual or potential adverse effects will not be significant, subject to consent conditions. The following is also noted:
1. This application is for restricted discretionary activity resource consent, and as such under s104C only those matters over which council has restricted its discretion have been considered.
2. The granting of this resource consent is considered to be generally consistent with the expected environmental outcomes for the Eden Park Precinct Plan as expressed through the relevant Assessment Criteria, Objectives and Policies of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
3. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(a) of the RMA the actual and potential effects from the proposal will be acceptable as:
• Following an assessment of the actual and potential adverse amenity effects on the surrounding residential sites, it is considered that the proposal will be acceptable. The proposal will provide for a one off T20 cricket event while at the same time, conditions of consent will avoid remedy or mitigate the effects of the proposal;
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
34
• A technical review of the noise and traffic effects of this proposal has been undertaken on behalf of the Council. That review has confirmed that the proposal is acceptable, subject to conditions;
• In terms of positive effects, the proposal will provide for the operation of Eden Park, which is a nationally significant venue and enables people and communities to provide for their social wellbeing and their economic needs;
4. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(b) of the RMA the proposal is consistent with the relevant statutory documents. In particular, the proposal will meet the relevant objectives, policies and assessment criteria of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
5. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(c) of the RMA, the following other matters are considered appropriate:
• The site will be subject to monitoring to ensure activities are carried out in accordance with the approved plans and conditions; • The application will include a suite of conditions as offered by the applicant or suggested by the specialists reviewing the application, that will serve to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects of the proposal; • Having regard to the matters raised by submitters, it is considered that consent can be granted to the proposal.
14. Conditions Under section 108, I recommend any grant of this resource consent is subject to the following conditions:
1. The restricted discretionary activity shall be carried out in accordance with all information submitted with the application, detailed below, and all referenced by the council as LUC60338953.
• Application Form, and Assessment of Environmental Effects prepared by Tattico dated May 2019 and all referenced by the Council as consent number LUC60338953, including the following:
Report title and reference Author Rev Dated Eden Park Operating Management Plan Eden Park - Dec 2016 Traffic Assessment TPC C 15 May 2019 Acoustic Assessment Marshall Day - 13 May 2019
Other additional information Author Rev Dated Letter from Tattico Tattico - 14 Aug 2019 Letter from NZ Cricket NZ Cricket - 9 Aug 2019 Marshall Day Section 92 Response Marshall Day - 21 Aug 2019 Email from Tattico Tattico - 6 Sept 2019
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
35 2. The consent holder shall pay the council an initial consent compliance monitoring charge of $990 inclusive of GST), plus any further monitoring charge or charges to recover the actual and reasonable costs incurred to ensure compliance with the conditions attached to this consent/s.
Advice note: The initial monitoring deposit is to cover the cost of inspecting the site, carrying out tests, reviewing conditions, updating files, etc., all being work to ensure compliance with the resource consent. In order to recover actual and reasonable costs, monitoring of conditions, in excess of those covered by the deposit, shall be charged at the relevant hourly rate applicable at the time. The consent holder will be advised of the further monitoring charge. Only after all conditions of the resource consent have been met, will the council issue a letter confirming compliance on request of the consent holder.
3. This consent shall be limited to a T20 cricket match to be held on Sunday 26 January 2020. There shall be no night match held on Saturday 25 January 2020 at Eden Park.
4. The consent holder shall operate the event in accordance with all existing consent conditions and in accordance with the Eden Park Operational Management Plan authorised under LUC60300178 (OMP) as part of this resource consent (except where altered by new conditions imposed under this consent).
Transport
5. The consent holder shall continue to implement an appropriate transport management plan (TMP) around the stadium, to TMP level 5 for the event, and a communications strategy in accordance with the Eden Park Operational Management Plan (OMP) authorised under LUC60300178 for the match approved by this consent. The updated or supplementary TMP shall include provision for liaison with Auckland Transport regarding additional train services and carriages on the Western Line and special event bus services on Sunday 26 January 2020. The updated or supplementary TMP and communications strategy shall be submitted for certification by the Team Leader Central Monitoring three months prior to the event enabled by this consent and shall be implemented for the event, unless altered with the agreement of the Team Leader Central Monitoring.
Acoustic
6. The OMP shall be updated in respect of events enabled by this consent to include provisions requiring all noise sources controlled by the consent holder to be promptly shut down upon cessation of the events enabled by this consent. The OMP shall also be updated to give surrounding residents advanced warning that the match is scheduled to finish at 11pm. The updated (or supplementary) OMP shall be submitted for certification by the Team Leader Central Monitoring three months prior to the first event enabled by this consent and shall be implemented for each event, unless altered with the agreement of the Team Leader Central Monitoring.
Advice notes 1. Any reference to number of days within this decision refers to working days as defined in s2 of the RMA.
2. For the purpose of compliance with the conditions of consent, “the council” refers to the council’s monitoring inspector unless otherwise specified. Please email [email protected] to identify your allocated officer.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
36 3. For more information on the resource consent process with Auckland Council see the council’s website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz. General information on resource consents, including making an application to vary or cancel consent conditions can be found on the Ministry for the Environment’s website: www.mfe.govt.nz.
Planner’s Section 42a report to the Independent Hearing Commissioners Application No: LUC60338953
37
ATTACHMENT 1
SECTION 92 REQUEST AND RESPONSE
39 40 From: Michael Campbell To: Fennel Mason Subject: FW: Eden Park Trust Notified T20 - Acoustic Peer Review Date: Monday, 9 September 2019 3:27:16 PM
Hi Fennel
This is Mark’s email below.
Kind regards
Michael Campbell | Director | BREP (Hons) | MNZPI
Campbell Brown Planning Limited Level 1, 56 Brown Street, Ponsonby | PO Box 147001, Ponsonby, Auckland 1144 Cell 021 278 9018 | DDI - Ph 09 394 1696| Ph 09 378 4936 | [email protected] | www.campbellbrown.co.nz
DISCLAIMER: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, do not copy, disclose or use the contents in any way. Please also advise us by return e-mail that you have received the message and then please destroy. We are not responsible for any changes made to this message and/or any attachments after sending. We use virus scanning software but exclude all liability for viruses or anything similar in this email or any attachment. Views expressed in this email may not be those of Campbell Brown Planning Limited
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
From: Mark Vinall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, 6 September 2019 3:45 PM To: Michael Campbell
Hi Michael,
Thanks for sending through a copy of the specialists reports.
We note in the transport report that the author suggests imposing conditions to require the consent holder to implement additional transport services and that TMP 5 should be explicitly required for the event. We do not consider that the imposition of the conditions suggested is necessary.
The event will be held under the current operational traffic management plans approved by Auckland Transport to manage traffic and pedestrians. The traffic management response around
41 the Eden Park environs is designed to mitigate the effects of traffic and ensure pedestrian safety while minimising the impact traffic management has on the residential amenity. The traffic management plans are tailored to include traffic management measures relative to crowd sizes under the direction of Auckland Transport.
We also make the following observations: PT is not the only option for travel to and from Eden Park, and the traffic management plan is a proven method to minimise effects on the network and neighbours. We are not aware that any other venues are subject to the suggested conditions and expectations around public transport, yet the risk is the same of an event finishing later than scheduled.
Kind regards,
Mark
Tattico Limited Mobile: 027 280 8281
From: Michael Campbell [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2019 9:15 AM To: Quentin Budd
Hi Mark
I also attach the transport peer review from Flow.
Once you have reviewed both reports, please let me know if you wish to offer any supplementary comments or consent conditions.
Otherwise, I will now proceed to complete my section 42a report.
Kind regards
Michael Campbell | Director | BREP (Hons) | MNZPI
Campbell Brown Planning Limited Level 1, 56 Brown Street, Ponsonby | PO Box 147001, Ponsonby, Auckland 1144 Cell 021 278 9018 | DDI - Ph 09 394 1696| Ph 09 378 4936 | [email protected] | www.campbellbrown.co.nz
42
DISCLAIMER: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, do not copy, disclose or use the contents in any way. Please also advise us by return e-mail that you have received the message and then please destroy. We are not responsible for any changes made to this message and/or any attachments after sending. We use virus scanning software but exclude all liability for viruses or anything similar in this email or any attachment. Views expressed in this email may not be those of Campbell Brown Planning Limited
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
From: Quentin Budd [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 27 August 2019 8:55 AM To: Mark Vinall
Hi Mark,
We have received the final acoustic peer review of the application, which I have attached.
Regards,
Quentin Budd Principal Project Lead Premium Resource Consents Auckland Council Phone: 021 992 052 Email: [email protected]
CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. We do not accept responsibility for any viruses or similar carried with our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in this email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.
This email contains confidential information and may be legally privileged. The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only. Any review, re- transmission, disclosure or dissemination of this material by persons other than the intended recipient is prohibited. While we use standard virus checking software, we accept no responsibility for viruses or anything similar in this email or any attachment after it
43 leaves our information systems. This email contains confidential information and may be legally privileged. The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only. Any review, re- transmission, disclosure or dissemination of this material by persons other than the intended recipient is prohibited. While we use standard virus checking software, we accept no responsibility for viruses or anything similar in this email or any attachment after it leaves our information systems.
44
84 Symonds Street PO Box 5811 Wellesley Street Auckland 1141 New Zealand T: +64 9 379 7822 F: +64 9 309 3540 21 August 2019 www.marshallday.com
Eden Park Trust Board c/o Tattico Limited PO Box 91562 Victoria Street Auckland 1142
Attention: Mark Vinall
Dear Mark ONE-OFF T20 CRICKET FIXTURE AT EDEN PARK – S92 RESPONSE The previous Marshall Day Acoustics report (13 May 2019) considered the noise effects of the proposal to hold a one-off T20 International Cricket Match (T20) at Eden Park on a Sunday of a holiday weekend. The report discussed the noise effects associated with a one-off T20 match with a scheduled finish time of 11pm. This report addresses the Council s92 request which asks about the likelihood of games running past the scheduled finish time of 11pm and the potential noise effects if games run past 11pm. The Tattico response (14 August 2019) regarding finish times associated with previous T20 and ODI matches held at Eden Park, shows that 42% of games (5 out of 12) finished before the scheduled finish time and 48% (7) finished after. In terms of the total time finished early, versus time finished late, the ‘early games’ finished a total of 257 minutes before the scheduled time and the ‘late games’ finished 153 minutes after the scheduled finish time. For a one-off match, there is thus a statistical probability that the game will go longer or shorter than the scheduled finish time. The noise effects for the one-off match were originally assessed on the scheduled finish time of 11pm and thus the actual noise effects will be slightly less or slightly more than those assessed depending on that probability. It is submitted that in terms of noise effects, the duration of the noise is the more important of the statistics quoted above and thus the noise effects are in practice more likely to be less than the 11pm cut-off assessed, as the ‘early time’ (257 mins) is longer than the ‘late time’ (153 mins). In our opinion this statistical approach is appropriate for the assessment of noise effects. However, if a ‘worse case’ basis (statistically less likely) was decided to be used for the assessment then the largest overrun was 38 minutes. There is thus a chance that a game could run through to approximately 11:40pm. As discussed in the original report, the noise level from the PA system is restricted 55 dB at the residential interface (with 10 min samples up to 60 dB) and the crowd noise could go up to 65 to 68 dB if there is a large crowd. While this noise will be noticeable during this time and it is the time some people are trying to commence sleep, the external level of 60 dB would equate to an indoor level (windows closed) of 35 dB LA10 which is less than the Unitary Plan design noise level for bedrooms of 35 dB LAeq in E25 6.10. An external level of 65 to 68 dB, due to crowd noise, would just exceed the Unitary Plan internal design level which applies to noise that occurs every day of the year. Other mitigating influences; The historic data shows that the two games that had the longest overruns were both affected by rain delays. Rain delays often cause spectators to leave thus the crowd noise is likely to be lower during rain delayed overruns. The proposed event is during the daylight saving period where the evenings are longer and the impact on work/school the next day is not a significant issue due to the holiday.
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 03 r02 20180763 cwd 20190820 T20 s92.docx 45 1
Summary A previous assessment held the noise effects from the proposed T20 match with a scheduled finish time of 11pm to be reasonable considering its short duration and the one-off occurrence. There is a statistical possibility that some residents could be disturbed by crowd noise during matches overruning up to 11:40pm. However, the historic data suggests that the residents are statistically likely to experience less effects than for an 11pm finish (assessed in previous report). The noise effects in general are mitigated by the one-off occurrence of the event and the public holiday occurring the next day.
Yours faithfully MARSHALL DAY ACOUSTICS LTD
Christopher Day
This document may not be reproduced in full or in part without the written consent of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited Rp 03 r02 20180763 cwd 20190820 T20 s92.docx 46 2
14 August 2019
Auckland Council Private Bag 92300 Victoria Street West Auckland 1142
For Michael Campbell (Campbell Brown)
Dear Michael
Resource Consent LUC60338953 – Request for Further Information
Thank you for the further information request dated 1 August 2019 for the above mentioned resource consent application.
You have specifically requested that we provide further information relating to the proposed hours of the match, particularly in relation to the finish time as follows:
a) Is there the potential for the proposed match to overrun past 11pm? b) What steps or contingencies will be put in place by the event organisers to ensure that the proposed event will finish by the scheduled 11pm finish time. Does the 11pm time include any game overrun contingencies? c) Based on past events held at Eden Park, how many previous events have run past the scheduled finish time, and by how long? If there were such occurrences, what were the reasons? d) Please provide an assessment of the potential noise and amenity effects associated with activities that run over the scheduled finish time, and an absolute latest finish time that could be complied with.
This application (as with every previous sporting match held at Eden Park) is based on a scheduled finish time for the completion of the game. The scheduled finish time is the official time that a game is scheduled to be completed within the rules of the sporting code. This is no different to any other venue in New Zealand.
As with any other event, there is the potential for the match to run past the scheduled finish time due to unforeseen stoppages such as injury time, bad light or rain. In the event of a tied match, a super over for
47 each team is held to determine a winner. In accordance with the rules of the International Cricket Committee, the conduct and timing of the match on the day is determined by the match officials and referee and is outside the control of Eden Park and New Zealand Cricket.
Notwithstanding this, New Zealand Cricket is committed to using its best endeavours to ensure that all matches run to schedule as set out in the attached letter from David White.
We have reviewed the ODI and T20 matches held at Eden Park from 2016-2019 and set these out in the table below.
Of the 12 matched played, five matches finished earlier and seven matches concluded later than the schedule finish time. Two of these related to rain (with the Australia T20 match in 2018 being abandoned), the remainder to on-field stoppages. The duration of match time after the scheduled finish time ranges from 7 minutes to 38 minutes (rain delay).
We consider that an absolute latest finish time for this fixture is completely unworkable, as well as being a significant departure from long accepted practice in respect of events held in New Zealand (including at Eden Park) and internationally. As you are of course aware, finish times are dependent on variables outside the control of Eden Park or NZC and in our view would not be enforceable other than by calling off the game before a result has been reached. Aside from the risk of serious reputational damage to the host association, host venue, host city and to the Eden Park Trust Board, NZC have indicated that it would not hold any fixture at a venue where there was a possibility of play being halted for any reason other than as permitted by the Laws of Cricket.
We provide below a further assessment of the potential noise and amenity effects associated with activities that run over the scheduled finish time.
48
As shown in the table above, the average length of time that a T20 match generally runs over the scheduled finish time is 11 minutes (discounting the game abandoned by rain). While the noise will be noticeable during the period of the match over run, it is limited in duration. In addition, the implementation of EPTB’s crowd management processes as part of its Operative Management Plan around the stadium following the completion of the match ensures that the crowd disperses quickly from Eden Park, thus limiting the impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood. The Eden Park Operating Management Plan combines the Community Consultation and Community Management Plan, and a suite of Event Management and Transport and Traffic Management Plans.
Further it is important to note that the match is proposed to take place on a Sunday preceding a public holiday during the summer and daylight savings where there are longer evening hours. This is traditionally when people are away on holiday or when people are generally more social and active than during week nights and the impact on work/school the next day is not an issue.
We can address this matter more fully at the hearing if the issue remains of concern to any submitter or the Council.
Yours faithfully
Mark Vinall Director TATTICO LIMITED
49
9 August 2019
Nick Sauntner Chief Executive Officer The Eden Park Trust Private Bag 56-906 Dominion Road Auckland 1446
Dear Nick
New Zealand Cricket acknowledges and supports the Eden Park Trust’s resource consent application for the proposed T20 International at Eden Park on the evening of Sunday, January 26, 2020.
We are aware of a heightened focus on time management for this particular event and wish to place on record our commitment towards taking all possible steps to complete the match in the scheduled time.
This will include working closely with commercial partners, venue operators, the International Cricket Council, teams, players and match officials, in order to deliver the three-hour long cricket match in a timely fashion.
Please accept this as an assurance we take the time management of this event very seriously.
Yours sincerely
David White Chief Executive Officer New Zealand Cricket Inc.
50 ATTACHMENT 2
COUNCIL PEER REVIEWS (TRAFFIC AND NOISE)
51 52
27 August 2019
Auckland Council C/- Michael Campbell Campbell Brown Planning
By email: [email protected]
Dear Michael,
Eden Park Anniversary Day Match – Review of Noise Effects
Styles Group has been engaged by the Auckland Council to undertake a review of the proposal by the Eden Park Trust Board to hold a one-off international T20 cricket event on Sunday 26 January 2020 (Auckland Anniversary weekend).
I understand that the application is to allow a single T20 match between India and New Zealand, starting at 8pm and finishing at 11.00pm. The event is proposed to be counted as one of the allowable 25 events per annum permitted to run into the evening / night time period.
26 January 2020 is a Sunday that precedes Auckland Anniversary day – a public holiday in the Auckland region. The application has been prepared on the assumption that anniversary day is not a normal working day, which I generally agree with.
This review has been completed following a review of the relevant parts of the AEE1, the accompanying acoustic assessment prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics2 (the MDA Report), and the s92 response from MDA dated 21 August 2019 (the MDA Response).
Styles Group has considerable experience in the assessment of noise effects arising from events and activities at Eden Park, having been involved in numerous resource consent applications, compliance monitoring and the development of the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) provisions for Eden Park as an expert advising the Auckland Council and the Independent Hearings Panel in that process.
1.0 Reasons for Consent
As set out in the AEE, the principal reasons for consent (from a noise perspective) are the infringement of Rules I310.6.1 (noise limits) and I310.6.11(5) (no night games on Sundays) of the AUP:
1) Rule I310.6.1 requires compliance with noise limits of 40dB LA10 and 75dB LAmax beyond 10.30pm. The proposal is to infringe this rule by up to 20dB (inclusive of the adjustment
1 Eden Park India v NZ T20 Cricket Match 26 January 2020 Application for Resource Consent and Assessment of Environmental Effects, May 2019, Tattico Limited 2 Eden Park T20 Cricket Fixture – 26 January 2020 Acoustic Assessment 13 May 2019, Marshall Day Acoustics
53
for Duration Correction, which does not normally apply at ‘night time’ when sleep disturbance is an issue) for up to 30 minutes on the Sunday night; and
2) Rule I310.6.11(5) states that “These activities (night games) must not be undertaken on a Sunday”. The proposal is to infringe this rule by allowing the match to be undertaken on a Sunday.
2.0 Assessment of noise effects
Based on the assessment in the AEE, the proposal is essentially to carry the ‘day time’ noise limit of LA10 55dB onwards to the scheduled finished time of 11pm for the match, although the match may finish earlier or later. The proposal is also to allow the match on a Sunday night preceding a public holiday.
The MDA advice is focussed primarily on the effect of having the event on a Sunday, compared to any other day. The MDA advice does not provide an assessment of effects arising from the additional half hour of noise beyond 10.30pm up to 20dB above the levels permitted by the AUP. However, the AEE sets out the reasons for consent clearly at section 6 and notes correctly that the noise limits will be infringed for the last half hour of the match.
Following the Council’s request for further information on the meaning of ‘scheduled’ finish time of 11pm and whether or not it is sought to allow matches to go beyond 11pm, the applicant has advised that based on historical T20 matches, it is possible for a match to finish up to around 40 minutes later than the scheduled finish time, although many finish earlier. The applicant has advised that it cannot accept a condition requiring a fixed finish time, which would be desirable for providing certainty on the effects that this consent might authorise.
Overall, the effect of the infringement of I310.6.1 as sought by the proposal will result in noise levels that are 20-25dB higher than what is normally permitted between 10.30pm and 11pm, with the possibility of those effects extending until approximately 11.40pm.
2.1 Rule I310.6.1 – Infringement of the noise limits
As set out in section 6 of the AEE, the proposal seeks consent to infringe the 40dB LA10 noise limit applying after 10.30pm in Rule I310.6.1, and to permit noise levels up to 60dB LA10(10min) as a continuation of the daytime noise limits for 30 minutes until the scheduled finish time of 11pm, or for an unspecified period afterwards, which would be unlikely to be beyond 11.40pm. This represents a 20dB relaxation of the noise limit applying to the sound system, vendors, generators and traffic noise on the site itself for the extra match time. A difference of 20dB would be perceived as a significant change – much louder than the permitted limit.
In addition, the proposal would permit crowd noise to be generated inside the stadium for the extra match time. As set out at the bottom of page 2 of the MDA Report, crowd noise could be as loud as 65-68dB LAeq during periods when the crowd is cheering. I agree with the estimate of crowd noise based on a capacity of around 36-37,000 people.
If the effects of the increase in the noise limit and the extension of hours that would permit crowd noise to 11pm or later, the change in noise level in the community is likely to be
54
approximately 20-25dB compared to what is permitted by the AUP beyond 10.30pm. This is a significant difference in the noise environment.
The noise of spectators leaving the venue (not controlled by the noise limits) would also be audible for many receivers, and at levels above 40dB LA10, from the match finish time, until the stadium and community is mostly clear. We understand this to be typically 20-40 minutes after the finishing time. If the later finishing time of 11.40pm is considered, this could mean that noise levels in the community do not drop appreciably until around 12.30am.
I note that in the bullet point list item at the top of page 4 of the MDA letter, it is stated that the event is within the “noise daytime” (emphasis carried). Whilst this is partially correct, the MDA letter fails to acknowledge that the last scheduled half hour of the match will be in the ‘noise night time’ where the AUP provides much lower noise limits for the protection of sleep. In fact, paragraph 4 of the conclusion in the MDA report states that “...it [the T20 match] can comply with the Eden Park noise limits...”. This is clearly incorrect. I consider that the failure to acknowledge the proposed 20dB infringement of the night time noise limits is a significant omission. This omission is dealt with in the MDA Response.
2.2 Noise levels inside houses
Given the late finishing time of the event, it is important to understand the likely level of noise within houses and bedrooms surrounding Eden Park. The bullet point paragraph at the top of page 4 of the MDA report states:
During the event (which is during the noise daytime), the sound level from the sound
system inside a dwelling would be no more than 40 dB LA10, even with windows
open. 40 dB LA10 is the night-time upper limit of acceptability for living areas for residential dwellings in suburban areas stated in AS/NZS2107:2016 “Acoustics— Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors”.
The MDA Response states that the internal noise level will be even lower at approximately
35dB LA10 inside bedrooms with windows closed. I consider it unreasonable to assume that all bedroom windows would be closed in February in Auckland, in this receiving environment.
I consider the description of the effects is incorrect and should not be relied upon for several reasons:
1) The event extends beyond the noise ‘daytime’ and into the night time period according to I310.6.1 (the daytime period ends at 10.30pm, and the event could run until 11:40pm);
2) In order to achieve a level of 35dB or 40dB LA10 inside a dwelling with windows open, the
outdoor noise level would have to be no greater than approximately 50-55dB LA10;
3) The sound system noise is limited to an average noise limit of 55dB LA10. During a
cricket match, the sound system is permitted to generate a noise level of 60dB LA10(10min)
for up to the full 3 hour period. This is 20dB greater than the internal level of 40dB LA10 stated in the MDA report and requires a level of attenuation unachievable through a normal open window of a dwelling (15dB is typically regarded as the maximum attenuation practicably achievable);
55
4) The assessment in the MDA Report is based only on the noise from the sound system,
which is limited by the AUP (and the proposed conditions) to 55dB LA10 as an average over 13 hours during the day as it is received in the community. When there is an event on at Eden Park, the sound received in the community is made up of several sources,
including the crowd noise. As set out above, crowd noise can reach 65-68dB LAeq for a crowd of the size expected for this match. The outdoor noise level from all sources is
therefore likely to be considerably greater than 55dB LA10, and likely to be up to
approximately 62-65dB LA10 during the match (60dB LA10 from the sound system, plus crowd noise over the period of the match);
5) Based on the four factors above, the noise level inside a bedroom with an open window
is more likely to be approximately 50dB LA10 if windows are required to be slightly open for ventilation and cooling, (especially likely in February);
6) The paragraph refers to NZS2107:2016 Acoustics—Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors. Section 2.2 Limitations of this standard states:
This Standard is not intended for -
...
(b) application to sounds which are not categorised as steady-state or quasi- steady-state;
(c) either the assessment or prescription of acceptable recommended noise levels from transient or variable noises outside of the building such as –
...
(v) crowd noise, e.g. from parades and sporting events; The noise from Eden Park is not steady-state or quasi-steady-state. It is highly variable and fits the exclusion in (v). Based on this, it is my view that quoting any part of AS/NZS2170:2016 in this context is inappropriate.
In reality, if the occupants of a house or bedroom near to Eden Park require the windows to be open for ventilation and cooling, (which is likely) the noise levels inside are likely to be in the order of 50-55dB LA10 during the match. Such levels of noise would preclude sleep for most people and be intrusive in most residential settings. Such effects could extend to 11.40pm from the match itself, with post-event noise in the community until well after midnight depending on the crowd size.
2.3 Rule I310.6.11(5) – No events on Sundays
As set out in the AEE and the MDA letter, the proposal seeks consent to hold a night game on a Sunday. Night games on Sundays are not permitted by I310.6.11 of the AUP.
The MDA letter provides an assessment of the difference between Sundays and any other day of the week, and concludes with the opinion that “... the sensitivity to noise on a Sunday is no different to a weekday/Saturday. This approach is reinforced by the District Plan noise limits which are the same on Sundays as on other days”.
56 I agree that in this case, (and with reference to the noise limits in I310.6.1) there is no differentiation between noise levels on Sundays compared to any other day of the week. However, I310.6.11(5) specifically states that no night games are permitted on a Sunday. Although the noise limits are the same on Sundays, Rule I310.6.11(5) serves to avoid the effects of crowd noise and post-match noise effects of people leaving the site. This rule reduces the noise effects on a normal Sunday night from a night when night games are permitted, and by a considerable margin, (because there will be no crowd noise at 65-68dB and no post-match noise in the community).
In my view, the effects of a night game on a normal Sunday would be considerably greater than on any other day of the week, and in particular on a Friday or Saturday. Even though it is recognised that respite Sundays could be considered ‘old fashioned’, in my experience of dealing with a significant number of projects and hearings where noise on Sundays has been an issue, a large proportion of people still recognise Sundays as being a day when rest and respite is important.
However, this proposal is to hold the match on the Sunday before a Public Holiday. In my view, this mitigates the potential issues arising from having a late night game (including the 30-70min extension) on a night before a normal working day, and in particular a Sunday night.
Some people may expect a higher level of amenity over a long weekend, and some people may be working on the Monday (Auckland Anniversary Day). However, I agree with the AEE and the MDA letter that having this night game on a Sunday preceding a public holiday will generate a considerably lesser degree of adverse effect on most people compared to a normal Sunday night before a working day.
In my opinion, the potential exists for the adverse amenity effects of the late match on the Sunday night to be exacerbated if a night game was to be held on the Saturday evening prior. Although I understand that it would be unlikely for the EPTB to hold an additional night game the night before, I recommend that the possibility be precluded by a condition of consent.
Overall, I consider that having the extended night game on a Sunday preceding a public holiday will generate a lesser adverse noise effect than if it were a regular Sunday night. I expect that most people would find a swap from a Saturday evening to a Sunday evening before a public holiday to be acceptable. I recommend that the possibility of holding a night game on the Saturday before the Sunday match is precluded by a condition of consent on the basis that two night games in a row would exacerbate the effects of the extended Sunday night game proposed.
3.0 Submissions
I have read the submissions that oppose the application and which raise adverse noise effects as an issue. I consider that between the AEE, the MDA Report (and Response), and this review, most of the issues raised by submissions are dealt with or have been commented on. There are only two substantive issues raised that require further comment:
57
3.1 Finishing time
Several submissions raise the issue of the match finishing time being described as the ‘scheduled’ finishing time, and that T20 matches may run longer and could finish as late as 11.45pm.
Neither the AEE nor MDA report make any mention of the potential for the noise from the sound system or crowd inside Eden Park to be above the normal night time noise limit of 40dB LA10 beyond 11pm. In other words, the AEE and MDA report provide no indication that the higher noise level sought in the application could extend past 11pm, and there is no assessment of the noise effects of such.
The MDA Response has clarified the degree to which noise effects may extend beyond the scheduled finishing time. Based on that information, it is possible that the match may finish as late as approximately 11.40pm, but could also finish earlier than 11pm.
Given that under the AUP rules, the noise limit is 55dB LA10 until 10.30pm but the matches must finish earlier, it is not normally imperative that the noise sources on the site are shut down immediately at the end of a match in order to comply with the noise limits. Under this proposal however, if the match were to require the full extension of hours and finish on or after 11pm, the Operations Management Plan (OMP) would need to be clear that all operational noise sources, that have the potential to generate more than 40dB LA10 off the site (when assessed cumulatively) including the PA system, generators, food vendors, heavy traffic etc would likely need to be switched off immediately to ensure that the lower noise limit of 40dB LA10 (applying from the end of the match under the proposal) would be complied with.
Accordingly, I consider that the OMP should be evaluated for its effectiveness in ensuring that the noise levels from the site will comply with the limit of 40dB LA10 from the time that the match finishes.
3.2 The acoustic barrier
The absence of the proposed acoustic barrier on the east stand is mentioned in several of the submissions. I note that if the barrier was constructed, the noise levels of the sound system as received in the community would remain similar to the current level, as the barrier would permit an increase in the source levels to combat low intelligibility in some areas of the grandstands. However, the barrier would reduce crowd noise to some extent, so there would be some benefit to its construction. The applicant is best-placed to respond to this issue.
4.0 Conclusion
The MDA Report concludes that:
1) there will be no difference in noise output from a T20 match on a Sunday compared to any other day; 2) there is no difference in the community’s sensitivity to noise on a Sunday compared to any other day;
58 3) the T20 match can comply with the noise limits set out in the AUP for Eden Park; and 4) that the noise effects arising from having the proposed T20 match on a Sunday preceding a public holiday will be negligible compared to having the match on any other day. The MDA Response helpfully clears up a number of issues by clarifying the possible extent of the match finishing times and the potential noise levels outdoors (I do not agree with the assessment of indoor noise levels).
In response:
I agree with the first point that the noise output of the match will not change appreciably on a Sunday compared to if it was held on any other day of the week.
In my experience there is a considerable difference in the general sensitivity to noise late into a Sunday night (11pm and beyond) compared to a Friday or Saturday night. However, this general difference in sensitivity is mitigated by the fact that the proposed match precedes a public holiday, so may be similar in effect to a normal Friday or Saturday night.
The proposed T20 match will generate noise levels from the sound system that are 20dB above the noise limits for Eden Park as set out in the AUP from 10.30pm to the finish time. I therefore disagree with the MDA Report that the proposal will be compliant with the noise limits in the AUP for Eden Park.
I consider that the effects of the infringement to the noise limits will be significant to the surrounding community, with noise levels up to 20dB higher than what is permitted by the AUP between 10.30pm and 11pm or possibly later, and with the additional noise of spectators clearing the area for 20-40 minutes after the finishing time, up to as late as 12.30am.
I agree with the MDA Report that in this case, with a public holiday following the match day, the Sunday match is likely to be little different to most people than a Saturday night match, running to the same time.
The adverse noise effects are mitigated by the following factors:
1) The affected residents would be given advance warning of the match that might finish late so they can plan around it if desired; 2) The extra match time (30-70mins) of noise up to 20dB above the AUP limits is limited to 1 occasion; 3) The late finish will be on Sunday night which does not precede a normal working / school day; and 4) The effectiveness of the OMP. These effects must also be considered in conjunction with the activities permitted by the AUP as well as the 10pm finishing time on week nights that is permitted by land use consent LUC60301178, (compared to a 9.30pm finish time required by the AUP). I understand that LUC 60337912 has been granted recently, which permits up to 3 night games per annum with finish times as late as 11pm. The granting of this consent would permit four night games held in 2020
59 to run as late as 11pm, with the associated effects of clearing the venue and surrounding neighbourhood afterwards.
Overall, it is my view that:
1) The effects of having the night game on a Sunday preceding a public holiday would be little different for most people from a match on a normal Saturday night. I recommend that a condition of consent be imposed to preclude a night game occurring on the Saturday immediately before the proposed match to adequately mitigate the effects;
2) The effects of sound system and crowd noise from Eden Park up to 11pm and possibly as late as 11.40pm, with crowd noise in the community for some period afterwards is likely to preclude sleep for most people in the surrounding environment, especially those close to the venue. Given that the match is proposed to be held in February, most bedroom windows would be partially open for adequate cooling at this time of year.
Noise levels in bedrooms could be up to 50-55dB LA10 which would preclude sleep for most people. The noise from Eden Park would dominate the noise environment in the surrounding area for the entire match period, with levels up to 20dB higher than the AUP limits normally applying after 10.30pm.
Please contact me if you require any further information.
Yours sincerely,
Jon Styles, MASNZ Director and Principal
60 19 August 2019
Mr Q Budd Principal Project Lead Premium Resource Consents Auckland Council AUCKLAND 1142
Provided via email: [email protected]
Dear Quentin
EDEN PARK: INDIAN T20 CRICKET MATCH
At the request of Auckland Council (Council), Flow Transportation Specialists (Flow) has undertaken a review of a resource consent application by Eden Park Trust Board for a T20 cricket match which is to take place at Eden Park on Sunday 26 January 2020.
1 THE PROPOSAL
Flow has reviewed the following information associated with the proposal: Application for Resource Consent and Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) report, prepared by Tattico, dated May 2019 Transportation Assessment, prepared by Traffic Planning Consultants Ltd, dated 15 May 2019, provided as Attachment C of the AEE.
Following our review, the following points are noted: The application relates only to one specific match, which would take place on a Sunday evening The proposal would not increase the number of permitted night games per year The match would start at 8pm (instead of 7pm for “normal” T20 matches) and finish at 11pm (instead of 10pm).
2 TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT
Flow has reviewed the AEE and the Transportation Assessment (TPC) and we provide the following comments on the transport effects of the proposed concert.
61 2
2.1 Assessment of Environmental Effects
The AEE sets out the ODI and T20 international matches that have taken place at Eden Park since 2007. The report identifies the T20 matches that attracted the highest crowds, and the average crowd size for these matches1. With respect, the average is not particularly relevant, when the application relates solely to a match involving India, with the data indicating that the Indian team attracts higher than average crowds. On the other hand, the AEE states that the Assessment has taken a conservative assumption of a full stadium with 45,000 spectators2. This is overly conservative, as we understand that the capacity of Eden Park for cricket is about 37,000 people, due to the need to remove the front parts of the South and North Stands for the playing area, and to keep parts of those stands spectator free, to facilitate the sightscreens. As a result, it seems likely that the crowd for this fixture will be similar to that at the last match against India, in February 2019, which attracted around 36,500 people.
2.2 Transport Assessment
The AEE repeats the key points of the Transport Assessment, provided at Appendix C.
The transport effects of this proposal, at a macro level, can be described as very minor, as the total number of persons expected to visit Eden Park over the year will be unaffected by this proposal. There will be the same number of major events, the same capacity at the stadium, and the same number of games involving the India cricket team. Thus the effects relate to the event being held on a Sunday evening, and to the proposal for later start and finish times. To this end we note: The current limitations on Sunday events were set primarily due to potential community effects, and were not necessarily for traffic and transport reasons The change in event times (ie later start and finishing times) is proposed primarily for the benefit of television coverage and viewer numbers in India. In other words, the proposal is unlikely to lead to an increase in attendees The current limitations on event start times were set partly for traffic and transport reasons, in order to minimise the effects on the “conventional” weekday evening peak period. These reasons are not relevant for an event on a Sunday evening The current limitations on event finish times were set primarily for noise purposes and due to potential community effects, not necessarily for traffic and transport reasons. However, there are some subtleties associated with the proposed change to the scheduled finish times (see below).
2.2.1 Sunday Events
As noted above, the existing restrictions on Sunday events at Eden Park were not imposed to due traffic and transport issues, and demands on the transport networks are generally lower on Sundays compared to other days. Therefore the traffic implications of an event on a Sunday can generally be expected to be less than those for a similar event (attracting similar numbers of people) on another day of the week.
1 AEE, page 18 2 AEE, page 18
62 3
2.2.2 Change to start time
As noted above, it is proposed that the scheduled start time for the game will be 8pm (instead of 7pm which is normally the case for T20s).
The arrival profile for T20 can be described as similar to rugby or football, with all (or nearly all) spectators in place at the start of the game. The later start time for this T20 match can be described as being fairly neutral from a transport perspective, as mid Sunday evenings are not a critical time period for the operation of the transport networks.
2.2.3 Change to finish time
We accept that traffic conditions late on a Sunday evening are not critical, in terms of capacity on the road network.
For other events at Eden Park, a letter has been provided by Auckland Transport, indicating its approval in principle to service the event with the traffic management measures and additional public transport services that normally are provided for such events. This has not been provided on this occasion, and support from AT should be sought as a condition of consent.
We note that the emphasis in the application (and the existing consents) relates to scheduled finishing times. Actual finishing times for cricket matches cannot be guaranteed, with games finishing late, for example when there is rain (and if the umpires make only a partial adjustment regarding the overs to be bowled), and information on the actual timing of previous cricket matches at Eden Park has been provided within the Section 92 response.
The transport related issue here is that there cannot be a guarantee that the additional (special event) public transport services will be provided at the right time, if a game finishes at a non scheduled time.
It could be stated that this is not an issue that specifically relates to the proposal to play the game late on a Sunday evening, as it is an issue that relates to the existing consents. However, it is particularly an issue on Sunday evenings, as services run down earlier than on other days of the week. For example, the last train services to pass through Kingsland on a normal Sunday evening are at 2216 towards Britomart and 2230 toward Henderson. Some (but not all) bus services continue until after 2330, but several services are running down around that time. For example, the last Northern Express bus leaves Britomart at 2345 (while the last Devonport ferry leaves the Central City at 2200). So for an event at Eden Park finishing on time on a Sunday evening (around 2300), it will be “touch and go” for a person to catch the last Northern Express bus, and if the event finishes late, then getting home by public transport will be a greater challenge, unless services continue late on this specific one night.
The later finish time could also potentially lead to implications for the following morning services, due to limitations on drivers hours (i.e. the stand down period required between shifts). However, with the later event taking place on the Sunday evening just before a public holiday, these additional effects are likely to be minimal.
63 4
3 SUBMISSIONS CONCERNING TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT IMPACTS
In total, 14 of the opposing or neutral submissions list traffic and transport impacts. The following points raised are recurring: The most frequently listed issue is the failure to implement traffic management during past events, which resulted in severe congestion on the nearby roads. Respondents are concerned this could repeat during this event People criticise road closures that restrict access to their property, and raise general concerns relating to increased traffic in the area. Impacts of indiscriminate parking and waiting were also mentioned A number of respondents consider the assumptions regarding the duration of adverse effects unrealistic as cricket matches tend to overrun, and a substantial time will be required for the spectators to disperse after the event. The submissions claim that the supporting application documents do not satisfactorily consider this, and that a delayed end also means that regular public transport services will be no longer running.
The following paragraphs respond to each of these issues.
3.1 Failure of Eden Park to implement TMPs in the past, leading to concerns that the effects could be repeated
We are not clear why the approved TMPs have not been implemented for previous events. A TMP level 5 is required for events expected to attract more than 35,000 spectators, and as noted in Section 2.1 above, it would appear that this level TMP will be justified in this instance. We would recommend that this is required specifically as a condition for this application, to remove any ambiguity that may exist.
3.2 Road closures restricting access to respondents’ properties
We acknowledge that it is difficult to fully avoid all of the adverse issues relating to the implementation of the TMP, during a “level 5” event. We are aware that there is a Community Liaison Group and suggest that this is the correct way for individuals to raise concerns about the ways in which the TMPs actually operate, and to request modifications to those TMPs.
3.3 Generally increased traffic in the area
As noted within Section 2.2 above, this event will not increase the number of people wishing to access Eden Park over the course of a year. Thus while we recognise the concerns of local residents, the levels of traffic already approved for the Eden Park precinct will not be exceeded due to this proposal.
64 5
3.4 Unrealistic assumptions regarding the event end time and time required for the venue and surrounding area to clear
We accept the concerns relating to this issue, and have addressed them at Section 2.2.3 above.
It is indeed the case that an event finishing late on a Sunday evening has the potential to leave spectators without a realistic public transport trip home, and if people expect this to be the case, it could then lead to more people driving to the event, increasing pressure on on street parking, beyond the area of the TMP controls. As a result, a condition relating to the provision of an appropriate level of public transport after the event should be required.
3.5 Indiscriminate parking and waiting, and parking overspill outside zones of traffic management
We have addressed this issue at Section 3.2 above.
3.6 Lack of public transport options due to the event realistically ending later than suggested by the applicant
We have addressed this issue at Section 3.4 above.
4 SUMMARY
As a result, we consider that the transport effects of the proposed T20 cricket match on Sunday 26 January 2020 on public transport and the wider transport network will be very minor, as long as the following points are carried through: Implementation of the appropriate traffic and transport management plan around the stadium. This is required by the current consent, but it could be that a TMP level 5 should be explicitly require for this event, to avoid any ambiguity A condition requiring provision of additional train services and carriages on the Western Line and special event bus services, noting that Auckland Transport has not yet indicated support in principle A condition requiring provision of a range of later night Sunday evening public transport services than is normally provided on Sunday evenings, over a wide area, to ensure that event goers can be confident of getting home by public transport. We consider that this issue is one that is specific to the proposal to hold the event late on a Sunday evening Implementation of a communications strategy covering the event and travel planning and the wider community. This is required by the current consents, but will be specifically required in order to ensure that event goers are aware of the specific late night arrangements for public transport.
65
6
Yours sincerely
Ian Clark DIRECTOR
Reference: P:\ACXX\389 Eden Park T20 Sunday match\L1B190819 Eden Park cricket.docx - iclark
66 ATTACHMENT 3
PREVIOUS RESOURCE CONSENTS R/LUC/2006-4828 AND LUC60337912
67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 Decision on an application for resource consent under the Resource Management Act 1991 Restricted discretionary activity
Application number: LUC60337912 Applicant: Eden Park Trust Site address: 42 Reimers Avenue, Kingsland, Auckland Legal description: Pt Lot 56 DP4194 Lot 58 DP 4194 Proposal:
The Eden Park Trust Board (‘the applicant’) seek consent to amend the finishing times of One Day Internationals (ODI) and T20 cricket matches at Eden Park, for future tours by the India national team. The proposal seeks the following: that ODI’s start at 3:00pm and finish at 11:00pm (Friday and Saturday only); that T20’s start at 8:00pm and finish at 11:00pm (Friday and Saturday only); that the amended finishing times apply to ODI and T20 cricket matches involving the India men’s national team only; that such games involving the India national cricket team are limited to a maximum of three games per year within the existing 25 night-time games provided for (these are not additional games).
The resource consents required are:
Land use consents (s9) – LUC60337912 Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)
The following consents are required pursuant to the AUP (OIP):
Activity Table I310.4.1 (A4) states that organised sports and recreation undertaken during the night time require consent as a Controlled Activity.
Standard I310.6.1 (1) states that the noise level from any activity (as measured within the boundary of any site in a residential zoned property, not owned by the Eden Park Trust) must not be greater than the noise limits in Table I310.6.1.1 (below).
LUC60337912 Page 1 109
The noise limit for all days/times outside of 8.00am – 10.30pm is 40dB LA10.
Consent is required to infringe the 40dB LA10 by up to 20 dB (inclusive of the adjustment for duration correction, which does not normally apply at night time when sleep disturbance is an issue) for up to 30 mins (until 11pm) on Fridays and Saturdays only.
The infringement of standard I310.6.1 (1) requires resource consent pursuant to Rule C1.9 (3) as a Restricted Discretionary Activity.
I310.6.11 states that organised sports and recreation activities undertaken at night on Monday-Friday (inclusive) shall not commence before 7.30pm and be scheduled to finish no later than 9.30pm.
This application seeks consent to hold ODIs and T20 cricket matches (involving the Indian national team only) on a Friday and/or a Saturday with a scheduled finish time of 11pm. The infringement of I310.6.11 requires resource consent pursuant to Rule C1.9 (3) as a Restricted Discretionary Activity.
Decision I have read the application, supporting documents, and the report and recommendations on the application for resource consent. I am satisfied that I have adequate information to consider the matters required by the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and make a decision under delegated authority on the application.
Acting under delegated authority, under sections 104, 104C, and Part 2 of the RMA, the resource consent is GRANTED.
Reasons
The reasons for this decision are:
1. The application is for restricted discretionary activity resource consent, and as such under s104C only those matters over which council has restricted its discretion have been considered. Those matters are:
I310.7.1 Matters of Control:
Organised sports and recreation undertaken during the night time:
the effects of the proposed activity on the safety and efficiency of the transport network.
the effectiveness of any community liaison.
LUC60337912 Page 2 110 effects associated with any event management plan.
I310.8.1 Matters of Discretion
Any activity that does not comply with noise and/or lighting standards:
the effects of non-compliance with a noise and/or lighting standard on the amenity values of surrounding properties and safety of transport networks.
2. The granting of this resource consent is considered to be generally consistent with the expected environmental outcomes for the Eden Park Precinct Plan as expressed through the relevant Assessment Criteria Objectives and Policies of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
3. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(a) of the RMA the actual and potential effects from the proposal will be acceptable as:
Following an assessment of the actual and potential adverse amenity effects on the surrounding residential sites, it is considered that the proposal will be acceptable. The proposal will provide for the on-going use of the stadium by allowing the India National Cricket team to tour and broadcast this event, while at the same time, conditions of consent will avoid or mitigate the effects of the extension of the operating hours;
An extensive review of the traffic effects of this proposal has been undertaken on behalf of the Council. That review has confirmed that the proposal is acceptable, subject to conditions;
Any noise effects arising from the proposal will be suitably managed;
In terms of positive effects, the proposal will provide for the operation of Eden Park, which is a nationally significant venue and enable people and communities to provide for their social wellbeing and their economic needs;
4. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(b) of the RMA the proposal is generally consistent with the relevant statutory documents. In particular, the proposal will meet the relevant objectives, policies and assessment criteria Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).
5. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(c) of the RMA, the following other matters are considered appropriate:
The site will be subject to monitoring to ensure activities are carried out in accordance with the approved plans and conditions; The application will include a suite of conditions as offered by the applicant or suggested by the specialists reviewing the application, that will serve to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects of the proposal;
LUC60337912 Page 3 111 Conditions Under section 108 of the RMA, this consent is subject to the following conditions:
General conditions 1. The proposed activity shall be carried out in accordance with the documents and all supporting additional information submitted with the application, detailed below:
Application Form, and Assessment of Environmental Effects prepared by Tattico, dated April 2019, and all referenced by the Council as consent number LUC60337912 including the following:
Report/Plan title Author R Dated and reference e v Eden Park Operating Eden - Dec 2016 Management Plan Park Traffic Assessment TPC C 19 April 2019 Acoustic Assessment Marshall Day - 22 March 2019
2. Under section 125 of the RMA, this consent lapses five years after the date it is granted unless:
a. The consent is given effect to; or
b. The council extends the period after which the consent lapses.
3. The consent holder shall pay the council an initial consent compliance monitoring charge of $990.00 inclusive of GST), plus any further monitoring charge or charges to recover the actual and reasonable costs incurred to ensure compliance with the conditions attached to this consent/s.
Advice note:
The initial monitoring deposit is to cover the cost of inspecting the site, carrying out tests, reviewing conditions, updating files, etc., all being work to ensure compliance with the resource consent. In order to recover actual and reasonable costs, monitoring of conditions, in excess of those covered by the deposit, shall be charged at the relevant hourly rate applicable at the time. The consent holder will be advised of the further monitoring charge. Only after all conditions of the resource consent have been met, will the council issue a letter confirming compliance on request of the consent holder.
4. This consent shall be limited to cricket matches featuring the India National Men’s Cricket Team only with no more than three matches inclusive of the existing 25 night time activities provided for in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part). There shall be no more than two consecutive 12 month periods where such matches are held. If such matches are held in two consecutive 12-month periods, a 12-month gap must be provided before any further such matches are played.
5. The consent holder shall operate in accordance with all existing consent conditions in accordance with the Eden Park Operations Plan authorised under LUC60300178 (OMP) as
LUC60337912 Page 4 112 part of this resource consent (except where altered by new conditions imposed under this consent).
Transport
6. The consent holder shall continue to implement an appropriate traffic and transport management plan (TMP) around the stadium and a communications strategy in accordance with the Eden Park Operations Plan authorised under LUC60300178 (OMP) for matches featuring the India National Men’s Cricket Team. The updated TMP shall include provision for liaison with Auckland Transport regarding additional train services and carriages on the Western Line and special event bus services during ODIs and T20 matches when the India National Team is touring. The updated TMP and communications strategy shall be submitted for the certification of the Team Leader Central Monitoring three months prior to the first event enabled by this consent and shall be implemented for each event, unless altered with the agreement of the Team Leader Central Monitoring.
7. The consent holder shall update its communications management plan to provide for liaison with Kowhai Intermediate School around the afternoon pick up period for students, if that coincides with the scheduled start time of a Friday one day international match featuring the India National Men’s Cricket Team. The updated communications management plan shall be submitted for the certification of the Team Leader Central Monitoring three months prior to the first event enabled by this consent.
Acoustic
8. The OMP shall be updated in respect of events enabled by this consent to include provisions requiring all noise sources controlled by the consent holder to be promptly shut down upon cessation of the events enabled by this consent. The OMP shall also be updated to give surrounding residents advanced warning of the matches that will finish at 11pm. The updated OMP shall be submitted for the approval of the Team Leader Central Monitoring three months prior to the first event enabled by this consent and shall be implemented for each event, unless altered with the agreement of the Team Leader Central Monitoring.
Advice notes 1. Any reference to number of days within this decision refers to working days as defined in s2 of the RMA.
2. For the purpose of compliance with the conditions of consent, “the council” refers to the council’s monitoring inspector unless otherwise specified. Please contact XX [insert unit specific detail and/or general council #] on [insert phone number or email address or [email protected]] to identify your allocated officer.
3. For more information on the resource consent process with Auckland Council see the council’s website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz. General information on resource consents, including making an application to vary or cancel consent conditions can be found on the Ministry for the Environment’s website: www.mfe.govt.nz.
4. If you as the applicant disagree with any of the above conditions, or disagree with the additional charges relating to the processing of the application, you have a right of objection pursuant to sections 357A or 357B of the Resource Management Act 1991.
LUC60337912 Page 5 113 Any objection must be made in writing to the council within 15 working days of your receipt of this decision (for s357A) or receipt of the council invoice (for s357B).
5. The consent holder is responsible for obtaining all other necessary consents, permits, and licences, including those under the Building Act 2004, and the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014. This consent does not remove the need to comply with all other applicable Acts (including the Property Law Act 2007 and the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015), regulations, relevant Bylaws, and rules of law. This consent does not constitute building consent approval. Please check whether a building consent is required under the Building Act 2004.
Delegated decision maker: Name: Quentin Budd Title: Principal Project Lead, Premium Resource Consents Signed:
Date: 30th May 2019
LUC60337912 Page 6 114 ATTACHMENT 4
MAP OF SUBMITTERS’ LOCATIONS (LOCALS ONLY)
. 115 116 Auckland Council Map ´
LEGEND 0 50 100 150 Meters Supports the applica�on in whole or in part Scale @ A3 Neutral to the applica�on Local Submissions Eden Park - Indian Cricket Tour Hours = 1:5,000 Opposes the applica�on in whole or in part Date Printed: PO Box Submission 7/08/2019 117 118