CASTLE HILL WIND FARM
RESOURCE CONSENT APPLICATIONS
August 2011
APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT
UNDER SECTION 88 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991
TO: Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council
GENESIS POWER LIMITED (trading as “Genesis Energy”), applies for the following resource consents associated with the proposed Castle Hill Wind Farm (“CHWF”) as generally described below, subject to the component location descriptions shown in Schedule One:
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance (including 0.057 ha within rare, threatened or at-risk habitats), including in a Hill Country Erosion Management Area, associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads and construction of new roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance) as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures, in, on, under or over the streambed (including bridges, culverts and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of a combined total of up to 531 cubic metres per day of surface water as detailed in this application for construction activities from:
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) is less than the median flow but exceeds 2.04 cubic metres per second.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of surface water for construction activities as detailed in this application from:
ii
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N at a rate of up to 2074 cubic metres per day;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) exceeds the median flow.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and the concrete batching plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, within the CHWF Site as detailed in this application and as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate processing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
1. The names and addresses of the owners and occupiers of land to which the application relates are listed below:
The application involves a number of separate private landholdings and Council Road Reserve. The name, address and contact details of the owners/occupiers of land to which the resource consent applications relate are listed in Table A1.
2. The location to which these applications relate:
The general area within which the CHWF is located is shown in Figures A1 – 4 and is located approximately 20 kilometres (“km”) northeast of Masterton, 20 km east of Eketahuna and Pahiatua and 15 km west of the Wairarapa Coast north of Castlepoint.
In addition to wind farm activities within the CHWF Site, consent is also sought in relation to works on External Roads generally between Alfredton and the CHWF Site, particularly with respect to enabling over-weight and/or over-dimension vehicles (“OW/OD Vehicles”) to access the CHWF Site. Consent is also sought for water takes, Concrete Batching Plants and a quarry outside the CHWF Site.
iii
The locations to which these activities within the CHWF Site and on the External Roads relate are described in more detail in the Assessment of Environmental Effects (“AEE”) which accompanies this application.
3. A description of the activity to which these applications relate:
3.1 Genesis Energy is proposing to establish and operate the CHWF on privately owned rural land and some road reserve areas in northern Wairarapa. The proposed CHWF comprises up to 286 wind turbines. Development of the CHWF may progress in stages, with the first stage being in the order of up to half the total number of turbines.
3.2 The area within the broader CHWF Site within which wind turbines would be located is referred to as “the Turbine Corridor”. The Turbine Corridor is approximately 3,144 ha and is shown in Figures A1 – A4. The turbines have been grouped into seven “Turbine Clusters” (A to G) for ease of reference. The On-site Construction Footprint will be approximately 861 ha, while the On-site Operational Footprint of the CHWF will be approximately 226 ha.
3.3 Genesis Energy is seeking resource consents that enable a defined maximum size and number of turbines to be built within the Turbine Corridor. The final turbine model(s) to be used for the CHWF and the placement of these turbines within the Turbine Corridor will be confirmed during the detailed design phase of the project. However, they will not total more than 286, and will be no more than 155 m in height (as measured to the rotor tip). The consent sought provides flexibility as to the exact location of turbines and models to be used, while ensuring appropriate environmental outcomes are achieved. Some flexibility in the location of components (other than turbines) outside the Turbine Corridor is also being sought, as identified in Schedule One – Component Location Consenting Approach.
3.4 In defining the Turbine Corridor, and designing the overall CHWF, Genesis Energy has undertaken a comprehensive design and site layout analysis, integrating environmental and engineering considerations to ensure the proposal is appropriately located and that adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated as required by the Resource Management Act 1991.
3.5 The key components during the construction and operation of the CHWF project are outlined below and described in detail in the AEE accompanying this application. Key components include:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) within the Turbine Corridor to generate electricity.
Electrical Balance of Plant (“EBoP”) - Plant includes an Internal Transmission Line, 33kV overhead lines, 33kV underground cables, a Main Substation and Satellite Substation, an optional Switching Station and switch gear huts, along with other associated electrical equipment within the CHWF Site to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line.
Internal Roads constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting wind farm components, materials and personnel within Site and to
iv
allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
Permanent operations and maintenance facilities (“O&M facilities”), including site office, workshops, amenities, equipment storage and a wastewater treatment system.
Monitoring masts - up to 16 monitoring masts to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
External Roads, being public roads near the Site that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the construction and operation of the CHWF and by OW/OD Vehicles.
Temporary construction facilities during the construction phase of the CHWF, such as contractor compounds, offices and workshops, amenities and storage facilities.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities.
Quarries to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete batching plants during construction activities.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction.
The project will also involve the upgrading of External Roads (where necessary) on the local road network between the CHWF Site and Alfredton, particularly with respect to enabling OW/OD Vehicles to access the Site.
3.6 Resource Management Act 1991 approvals for the External Transmission Line to connect the CHWF to the national grid are not part of this application and will be sought separately. However, the connection to an External Transmission Line is provided for in this application.
4. The following other resource consents are needed for the proposed activity and have been applied for:
Tararua District Council
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
v
EBoP, including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, O&M facilities, and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1- A4.
Wellington Regional Council
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
vi
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance), as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed, (including bridges, culverts, cabling and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed in a manner that constitutes a permanent reclamation or occupation of the bed, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of up to 890 cubic metres per day of surface water from the Tinui River at Taipo, at or about NZTM map reference 1866476E 5477290N as detailed in this application for construction activities.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and Concrete Batching Plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, as detailed in this application and within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate crushing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Masterton District Council
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
vii
EBoP, including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, O&M facilities, and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
5. Lapse Period and Consent Duration
A lapse period of 10 years is requested to enable the development of the proposed CHWF. Accordingly, in terms of section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests the date on which the resource consents lapse be specified in any grant of consent as a date no earlier than 10 years from the date of commencement of the consents.
viii
An unlimited duration consent is sought for the District Council Land Use consents and for the Section 13 Regional Council reclamation consents sought.
A duration of 35 years is sought for all the regional resource consents. A duration of 20 years is sought for construction related consents to provide for the implementation of the CWHF through a staged approach.
6. Notification
In accordance with Section 95A(2)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests that the applications be publicly notified.
7. The details of the effects arising as a result of the applications, and other matters required to be addressed pursuant to the Fourth Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 are attached in accordance with section 88 of the Act.
8. No other information is required to be included in this application by a regional or district plan or regulation.
Dated: 1 August 2011
Genesis Power Limited By its solicitors and authorised agents
Signature: Paul F Majurey Address for Service: C/- Paul F Majurey / T L Hovell Atkins Holm Majurey Limited Level 19, 48 Emily Place PO Box 1585, Shortland Street AUCKLAND 1140
Telephone: (09) 304 0294 Facsimile: (09) 309 1821 Email: [email protected]
i
APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT
UNDER SECTION 88 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991
TO: Wellington Regional Council
GENESIS POWER LIMITED (trading as “Genesis Energy”), applies for the following resource consents associated with the proposed Castle Hill Wind Farm (“CHWF”) as generally described below, subject to the component location descriptions shown in Schedule One:
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance), as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed, (including bridges, culverts, cabling and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed in a manner that constitutes a permanent reclamation or occupation of the bed, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of up to 890 cubic metres per day of surface water from the Tinui River at Taipo, at or about NZTM map reference 1866476E 5477290N as detailed in this application for construction activities.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and Concrete Batching Plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4. ii
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, as detailed in this application and within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate crushing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
1. The names and addresses of the owners and occupiers of land to which the application relates:
The application involves a number of separate private landholdings and Council Road Reserve. The name, address and contact details of the owners/occupiers of land to which the resource consent applications relate are listed in Table A1.
2. The location to which these applications relate:
The general area within which the CHWF is located is shown in Figures A1 – A4 and is located approximately 20 kilometres (“km”) northeast of Masterton, 20 km east of Eketahuna and Pahiatua and 15 km west of the Wairarapa Coast north of Castlepoint.
In addition to wind farm activities within the CHWF Site, consent is also sought in relation to works on External Roads generally between Alfredton and the CHWF Site, particularly with respect to enabling over-weight and/or over-dimension vehicles (“OW/OD Vehicles”) to access the CHWF Site. Consent is also sought for water takes, Concrete Batching Plants and a quarry outside the CHWF Site.
The specific location of individual activities within the CHWF Site and on the External Roads is described in greater detail in the assessment of environmental effects (“AEE”) which accompanies this application.
3. A description of the activity to which these applications relate:
3.1 Genesis Energy is proposing to establish and operate the CHWF on privately owned rural land and road reserve areas in northern Wairarapa. The proposed CHWF comprises up to 286 wind turbines. Development of the CHWF may progress in stages, with the first stage being in the order of up to half the total number of turbines.
3.2 The area within the broader CHWF Site within which wind turbines would be located is referred to as “the Turbine Corridor”. The Turbine Corridor is approximately 3,144 ha and is shown in Figures A1 – A4. The turbines have been grouped into seven “Turbine Clusters” (A to G) for ease of reference. The On-site Construction Footprint will be approximately 861 ha, while the On-site Operational Footprint of the CHWF will be approximately 226 ha.
3.3 Genesis Energy is seeking resource consents that enable a defined maximum size and number of turbines to be built within the Turbine Corridor. iii
The final turbine model(s) to be used for the CHWF and the placement of these turbines within the Turbine Corridor will be confirmed during the detailed design phase of the project. However, they will not total more than 286, and will be no more than 155 m in height (as measured to the rotor tip). The consent sought provides flexibility as to the exact location of turbines and models to be used, while ensuring appropriate environmental outcomes are achieved. Some flexibility in the location of components (other than turbines) outside the Turbine Corridor is also being sought, as identified in Schedule One – Component Location Table.
3.4 In defining the Turbine Corridor, and designing the overall CHWF, Genesis Energy has undertaken a comprehensive design and site layout analysis, integrating environmental and engineering considerations to ensure the proposal is appropriately located and that adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated as required by the Resource Management Act 1991. . 3.5 The key components during the construction and operation of the CHWF project are outlined below and described in detail in the AEE accompanying this application. Key components include:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) within the Turbine Corridor to generate electricity.
Electrical Balance of Plant (“EBoP”) – Plant includes an Internal Transmission Line, 33kV overhead lines, 33kV underground cables, a Main Substation and Satellite Substation, an optional Switching Station and switch gear huts, along with other associated electrical equipment within the CHWF Site to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line.
Internal Roads constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting wind farm components, materials and personnel within Site and to allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
Permanent operations and maintenance facilities (“O&M facilities”), including site office, workshops, amenities, equipment storage and a wastewater treatment system.
Monitoring masts – up to 16 monitoring masts to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
External Roads, being public roads near the Site that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the construction and operation of the CHWF and by OW/OD Vehicles.
Temporary construction facilities during the construction phase of the CHWF, such as contractor compounds, offices and workshops, amenities and storage facilities.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities.
iv
Quarries to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete batching plants during construction activities.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction.
The project will also involve the upgrading of External Roads (where necessary) on the local road network between the CHWF Site and Alfredton, particularly with respect to enabling OW/OD Vehicles to access the Site.
3.6 Resource Management Act 1991 approvals for the External Transmission Line to connect the CHWF to the national grid are not part of this application and will be sought separately. However, the connection to an External Transmission Line is provided for in this application.
4. The following other resource consents are needed for the proposed activity and have been applied for:
Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance (including 0.057 ha within rare, threatened or at-risk habitats), including in a Hill Country Erosion Management Area, associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads and construction of new roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance) as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures, in, on, under or over the streambed (including bridges, culverts and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of a combined total of up to 531 cubic metres per day of surface water as detailed in this application for construction activities from:
v
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) is less than the median flow but exceeds 2.04 cubic metres per second.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of surface water for construction activities as detailed in this application from:
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N at a rate of up to 2074 cubic metres per day;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) exceeds the median flow.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and the concrete batching plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, within the CHWF Site as detailed in this application and as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate processing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Tararua District Council
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4. vi
Electrical Balance of Plant (“EBoP”), including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the national grid.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, O&M facilities, and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1- A4.
Masterton District Council
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
vii
EBoP, including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the national grid.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, O&M facilities, and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1- A4.
5. Lapse Period and Consent Duration
A lapse period of 10 years is requested to enable the development of the proposed CHWF. Accordingly, in terms of section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests the date on which the resource consents lapse be specified in any grant of consent as a date no earlier than 10 years from the date of commencement of the consents.
viii
An unlimited duration consent is sought for the District Council Land Use consents and for the Section 13 Regional Council reclamation consents sought.
A duration of 35 years is sought for all the regional resource consents. A duration of 20 years is sought for construction related consents to provide for the implementation of the CWHF through a staged approach.
6. Notification
In accordance with Section 95A(2)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests that the applications be publicly notified.
7. The details of the effects arising as a result of the applications, and other matters required to be addressed pursuant to the Fourth Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 are attached in accordance with section 88 of the Act.
8. No other information is required to be included in this application by a regional or district plan or regulation.
Dated: 1 August 2011
Genesis Power Limited By its solicitors and authorised agents
Signature: Paul F Majurey Address for Service: C/- Paul F Majurey / T L Hovell Atkins Holm Majurey Limited Level 19, 48 Emily Place PO Box 1585, Shortland Street AUCKLAND 1140
Telephone: (09) 304 0294 Facsimile: (09) 309 1821 Email: [email protected]
i
APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT
UNDER SECTION 88 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991
TO: Tararua District Council
GENESIS POWER LIMITED (trading as “Genesis Energy”), applies for the following resource consents associated with the proposed Castle Hill Wind Farm (“CHWF”) as generally described below, subject to the component location descriptions shown in Schedule One:
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Electrical Balance of Plant (“EBoP”), including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the national grid.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, operations and maintenance facilities (“O&M facilities”), and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
ii
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance (including in an area identified as “Significant groups of trees, vegetation and habitats”) associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
1. The names and addresses of the owners and occupiers of land to which the application relates:
The application involves a number of separate private landholdings and Council Road Reserve. The name, address and contact details of the owners/occupiers of land to which the resource consent applications relate are listed in Table A1.
2. The locations to which these applications relate:
The general area within which the CHWF is located is shown in Figures A1 – A4 and is located approximately 20 kilometres (“km”) northeast of Masterton, 20 km east of Eketahuna and Pahiatua, and 15 km west of the Wairarapa Coast north of Castlepoint.
In addition to wind farm activities within the CHWF Site, consent is also sought in relation to works on External Roads generally between Alfredton and the CHWF Site, particularly with respect to enabling over-weight and/or over-dimension vehicles (“OW/OD Vehicles”) to access the CHWF Site. Consent is also sought for water takes, Concrete Batching Plants and a quarry outside the CHWF Site.
The locations to which these activities within the CHWF Site and on the External Roads relate are described in more detail in the Assessment of Environmental Effects (“AEE”) which accompanies this application.
3. A description of the activity to which these applications relate:
3.1 Genesis Energy is proposing to establish and operate the CHWF on privately-owned rural land and some road reserve areas in northern Wairarapa. The proposed CHWF comprises up to 286 wind turbines. Development of the CHWF may progress in stages, with the first stage being in the order of up to half the total number of turbines.
3.2 The area within the broader CHWF Site within which wind turbines would be located is referred to as “the Turbine Corridor”. The Turbine Corridor is approximately 3,144 ha and is shown in Figures A1 – A4. The turbines have been grouped into seven “Turbine Clusters” (A to G) for ease of reference. iii
The On-site Construction Footprint will be approximately 861 ha, while the On-site Operational Footprint of the CHWF will be approximately 226 ha.
3.3 Genesis Energy is seeking resource consents that enable a defined maximum size and number of turbines to be built within the Turbine Corridor. The final turbine model(s) to be used for the CHWF and the placement of these turbines within the Turbine Corridor will be confirmed during the detailed design phase of the project. However, they will not total more than 286, and will be no more than 155 m in height (as measured to the rotor tip). The consent sought provides flexibility as to the exact location of turbines and models to be used, while ensuring appropriate environmental outcomes are achieved. Some flexibility in the location of components (other than turbines) outside the Turbine Corridor is also being sought, as identified in Schedule One – Component Location Consenting Approach.
3.4 In defining the Turbine Corridor, and designing the overall CHWF, Genesis Energy has undertaken a comprehensive design and site layout analysis, integrating environmental and engineering considerations to ensure the proposal is appropriately located and that adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated as required by the Resource Management Act 1991.
3.5 The key components during the construction and operation of the CHWF project are outlined below and described in detail in the AEE accompanying this application. Key components include:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) within the Turbine Corridor to generate electricity.
EBoP - Plant includes an Internal Transmission Line, 33kV overhead lines, 33kV underground cables, a Main Substation and Satellite Substation, an optional Switching Station and switch gear huts, along with other associated electrical equipment within the CHWF Site to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line.
Internal Roads constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting wind farm components, materials and personnel within Site and to allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities, equipment storage and a wastewater treatment system.
Monitoring masts - up to 16 monitoring masts to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
External Roads, being public roads near the Site that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the construction and operation of the CHWF and by OW/OD Vehicles.
Temporary construction facilities during the construction phase of the CHWF, such as contractor compounds, offices and workshops, amenities and storage facilities.
iv
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities.
Quarries to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction.
The project will also involve the upgrading of External Roads (where necessary) on the local road network between the CHWF Site and Alfredton, particularly with respect to enabling OW/OD Vehicles to access the Site.
3.6 Resource Management Act 1991 approvals for the External Transmission Line to connect the CHWF to the national grid are not part of this application and will be sought separately. However, the connection to an External Transmission Line is provided for in this application.
4. The following other resource consents are needed for the proposed activity and have been applied for:
Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance (including 0.057 ha within rare, threatened or at-risk habitats), including in a Hill Country Erosion Management Area, associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads and construction of new roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance) as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures, in, on, under or over the streambed (including bridges, culverts and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
v
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of a combined total of up to 531 cubic metres per day of surface water as detailed in this application for construction activities from:
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) is less than the median flow but exceeds 2.04 cubic metres per second.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of surface water for construction activities as detailed in this application from:
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N at a rate of up to 2074 cubic metres per day;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) exceeds the median flow.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and the concrete batching plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, within the CHWF Site as detailed in this application and as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate processing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Wellington Regional Council
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, vi
maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance), as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed, (including bridges, culverts, cabling and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed in a manner that constitutes a permanent reclamation or occupation of the bed, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of up to 890 cubic metres per day of surface water from the Tinui River at Taipo, at or about NZTM map reference 1866476E 5477290N as detailed in this application for construction activities.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and Concrete Batching Plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, as detailed in this application and within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate crushing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
vii
Masterton District Council
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
EBoP, including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the national grid.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, O&M facilities, and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
viii
5. Lapse Period, Consent Duration and Consent Holder
A lapse period of 10 years is requested to enable the development of the proposed CHWF. Accordingly, in terms of section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests the date on which the resource consents lapse be specified in any grant of consent as a date no earlier than 10 years from the date of commencement of the consents.
An unlimited duration consent is sought for the District Council Land Use consents and for the Section 13 Regional Council reclamation consents sought.
A duration of 35 years is sought for all the regional resource. A duration of 20 years is sought for construction related consents to provide for the implementation of the CWHF through a staged approach.
Genesis Energy also seeks that the land use consents be granted in the name of Genesis Energy in accordance with s134 of the RMA.
6. Notification
In accordance with Section 95A(2)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests that the applications be publicly notified.
7. The details of the effects arising as a result of the applications, and other matters required to be addressed pursuant to the Fourth Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 are attached in accordance with section 88 of the Act.
8. No other information is required to be included in this application by a regional or district plan or regulation.
Dated: 1 August 2011 Genesis Power Limited By its solicitors and authorised agents
Signature: Paul F Majurey Address for Service: C/- Paul F Majurey / T L Hovell Atkins Holm Majurey Limited Level 19, 48 Emily Place PO Box 1585, Shortland Street AUCKLAND 1140
Telephone: (09) 304 0294 Facsimile: (09) 309 1821 Email: [email protected] i
APPLICATION FOR RESOURCE CONSENT
UNDER SECTION 88 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991
TO: Masterton District Council
GENESIS POWER LIMITED (trading as “Genesis Energy”), applies for the following resource consents associated with the proposed Castle Hill Wind Farm (“CHWF”) as generally described below, subject to the component location descriptions shown in Schedule One:
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Electrical Balance of Plant (“EBoP”), including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the national grid.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, operations and maintenance facilities (“O&M facilities”), and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
ii
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1- A4.
1. The names and addresses of the owners and occupiers of land to which the application relates:
The application involves a number of separate private landholdings and Council Road Reserve. The name, address and contact details of the owners/occupiers of land to which the resource consent applications relate are listed in Table A1.
2. The locations to which these applications relate:
The general area within which the CHWF is located is shown in Figures A1 – A4 and is located approximately 20 kilometres (“km”) northeast of Masterton, 20 km east of Eketahuna and Pahiatua, and 15 km west of the Wairarapa Coast north of Castlepoint.
In addition to wind farm activities within the CHWF Site, consent is also sought in relation to works on External Roads generally between Alfredton and the CHWF Site, particularly with respect to enabling over-weight and/or over-dimension vehicles (“OW/OD Vehicles”) to access the CHWF Site. Consent is also sought for water takes, Concrete Batching Plants and a quarry outside the CHWF Site.
The locations to which these activities within the CHWF Site and on the External Roads relate are described in more detail in the Assessment of Environmental Effects (“AEE”) which accompanies this application.
3. A description of the activity to which these applications relate:
3.1 Genesis Energy is proposing to establish and operate the CHWF on privately owned rural land and some road reserve areas in northern Wairarapa. The CHWF comprises up to 286 wind turbines. Development of the CHWF may progress in stages, with the first stage being in the order of up to half the total number of turbines.
3.2 The area within the broader CHWF Site within which wind turbines would be located is referred to as “the Turbine Corridor”. The Turbine Corridor is approximately 3,144 ha and is shown in Figures A1 – A4. The turbines have been grouped into seven “Turbine Clusters” (A to G) for ease of reference. iii
The On-site Construction Footprint will be approximately 861 ha, while the On-site Operational Footprint of the CHWF will be approximately 226 ha.
3.3 Genesis Energy is seeking resource consents that enable a defined maximum size and number of turbines to be built within the Turbine Corridor. The final turbine model(s) to be used for the CHWF and the placement of these turbines within the Turbine Corridor will be confirmed during the detailed design phase of the project. However, they will not total more than 286, and will be no more than 155 m in height (as measured to the rotor tip). The consent sought provides flexibility as to the exact location of turbines and models to be used, while ensuring appropriate environmental outcomes are achieved. Some flexibility in the location of components (other than turbines) outside the Turbine Corridor is also being sought, as identified in Schedule One – Component Location Consenting Approach.
3.4 In defining the Turbine Corridor, and designing the overall CHWF, Genesis Energy has undertaken a comprehensive design and site layout analysis, integrating environmental and engineering considerations to ensure the proposal is appropriately located and that adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated as required by the Resource Management Act 1991.
3.5 The key components during the construction and operation of the CHWF project are outlined below and described in detail in the AEE accompanying this application. Key components include:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) within the Turbine Corridor to generate electricity.
EBoP - Plant includes an Internal Transmission Line, 33kV overhead lines, 33kV underground cables, a Main Substation and Satellite Substation, an optional Switching Station and switch gear huts, along with other associated electrical equipment within the CHWF Site to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line.
Internal Roads constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting wind farm components, materials and personnel within Site and to allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities, equipment storage and a wastewater treatment system.
Monitoring masts - up to 16 monitoring masts to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
External Roads, being public roads near the Site that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the construction and operation of the CHWF and by OW/OD Vehicles.
Temporary construction facilities during the construction phase of the CHWF, such as contractor compounds, offices and workshops, amenities and storage facilities.
iv
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities.
Quarries to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction.
The project will also involve the upgrading of External Roads (where necessary) on the local road network between the CHWF Site and Alfredton, particularly with respect to enabling OW/OD Vehicles to access the Site.
3.6 Resource Management Act 1991 approvals for the External Transmission Line to connect the CHWF to the national grid are not part of this application and will be sought separately. However, the connection to an External Transmission Line is provided for in this application.
4. The following other resource consents are needed for the proposed activity and have been applied for:
Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance (including 0.057 ha within rare, threatened or at-risk habitats), including in a Hill Country Erosion Management Area, associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads and construction of new roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance) as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures, in, on, under or over the streambed (including bridges, culverts and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
v
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of a combined total of up to 531 cubic metres per day of surface water as detailed in this application for construction activities from:
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) is less than the median flow but exceeds 2.04 cubic metres per second.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of surface water for construction activities as detailed in this application from:
a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N at a rate of up to 2074 cubic metres per day;
when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) exceeds the median flow.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and the concrete batching plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, within the CHWF Site as detailed in this application and as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate processing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
vi
Tararua District Council
Land use consent – To authorise the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated structures as detailed in this application and within the areas shown in Figures A1 – A4, including:
Wind turbines (and associated foundations, transformers and platforms) to generate electricity within the Turbine Corridor shown in Figures A1 – A4.
EBoP, including underground cables, overhead lines (33kV and 220kV), transformers, substations (main, satellite and switching station), switchgear and associated structures and equipment for the collection and reticulation of electricity within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4 to the point of connection to the national grid.
Internal Roads providing access to wind turbines, EBoP structures such as Substations, operations and maintenance facilities O&M facilities and connecting to External Roads, within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Permanent O&M facilities including site office, workshops, amenities and a wastewater treatment system within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Up to eight wind monitoring masts within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4 to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
Construction facilities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4, including O&M facilities, Contractor Compounds and Lay-bys.
Water abstraction and retention structures during construction activities at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Quarries at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4 to obtain aggregate material for road construction and during operation for on-going maintenance of roads and other engineering requirements.
Concrete Batching Plants during construction activities within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Excess Fill Areas for placement of excavated material not used in construction within the CHWF Site shown in Figures A1 – A4.
The upgrading, including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance, of External Roads (where necessary) between the CHWF Site and Alfredton as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as shown and described in Figures A1- A4.
vii
Wellington Regional Council
Land Use Consent – To authorise land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise the upgrade of existing External Roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance), as detailed in this application and identified in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed, (including bridges, culverts, cabling and structures) as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Land Use Consent – To authorise works in, and associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures in, on, under or over the streambed in a manner that constitutes a permanent reclamation or occupation of the bed, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the damming and diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) during construction and operational activities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Water Permit – To authorise the take and use of up to 890 cubic metres per day of surface water from the Tinui River at Taipo, at or about NZTM map reference 1866476E 5477290N as detailed in this application for construction activities.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water during the construction and operation of infrastructure and facilities, associated with the CHWF consent activities as detailed in this application and as shown and described in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and Concrete Batching Plant areas) to land, as detailed in this application and at the locations shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of Excess Fill to land, as detailed in this application and within the CHWF Site as shown in Figures A1 – A4.
Discharge Permit – To authorise the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the operation of Concrete Batching Plants and mobile aggregate crushing plants, as detailed in this application and within the area shown in Figures A1 – A4.
viii
5. Lapse Period, Consent Duration and Consent Holder
A lapse period of 10 years is requested to enable the development of the proposed CHWF. Accordingly, in terms of section 125 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests the date on which the resource consents lapse be specified in any grant of consent as a date no earlier than 10 years from the date of commencement of the consents.
An unlimited duration consent is sought for the District Council Land Use consents and for the Section 13 Regional Council reclamation consents sought.
A duration of 35 years is sought for all the regional resource. A duration of 20 years is sought for construction related consents to provide for the implementation of the CWHF through a staged approach.
Genesis Energy also seeks that the land use consents be granted in the name of Genesis Energy in accordance with s134 of the RMA.
6. Notification
In accordance with Section 95A(2)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991, Genesis Energy requests that the applications be publicly notified.
7. The details of the effects arising as a result of the applications, and other matters required to be addressed pursuant to the Fourth Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 are attached in accordance with section 88 of the Act.
8. No other information is required to be included in this application by a regional or district plan or regulation.
Dated: 1 August 2011
Genesis Power Limited By its solicitors and authorised agents
Signature: Paul F Majurey Address for Service: C/- Paul F Majurey / T L Hovell Atkins Holm Majurey Limited Level 19, 48 Emily Place PO Box 1585, Shortland Street AUCKLAND 1140
Telephone: (09) 304 0294 Facsimile: (09) 309 1821 Email: [email protected]
Schedule One – CWHF Component Location Consenting Approach
Component Rationale Location Description Turbines Siting refinement is important to allow for variation in spacing between Turbines to Turbines may not be sited anywhere other than maximise energy output. Spacing varies depending on the size of the Turbine rotor and in the Turbine Corridor. (including Turbine therefore, optimal spacing can only be determined once the final turbine model(s) are Foundations and selected after resource consent acquisition. Four Indicative Turbine Layouts have been Turbine Platforms) established to provide a basis for representative engineering and environmental assessments and to illustrate how different Turbine sizes may be placed within the Turbine Corridor. Turbine Corridor The Turbine Corridor incorporates all areas within the CHWF Site identified for turbine The area and location of the Turbine Corridor is placement. The development and refinement of the Turbine Corridor has incorporated located where indicated in Figures A1 - A4. representative environmental and engineering assessments to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse environmental effects. Internal Roads Internal Roads have been designed and associated earthworks volumes calculated and Internal Roads are likely to be located where will generally be located where indicated in Figures A1 - A4. However the scope sought indicated in Figures A1 - A4 but may be located (including Lay-bys) within the resource consent will enable the final location of the Internal Roads to be anywhere within the Site, subject to the limits confirmed during the detailed design phase. Further refinement may be required due to presented below: the following: (1) Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, Technological advances in transporters or components, or construction QEII), and ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at-risk’ techniques. This may enable a more efficient route to be taken which may reduce habitats identified under statutory plans will earthworks and/or ecological effects. not be disturbed. (2) Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined Unforeseen ground conditions or environmental constraints. in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Unidentified archaeological sites or features. Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the The Internal Road design approach is considered appropriate at this Site because of the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and large proportion of the Site consisting of low or negligible ecological value. The location of shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited the Internal Roads will be influenced by the fixed locations of key CHWF infrastructure amount of ‘high ecological value’ (Turbines within the Turbine Corridor and Substations) to which they will provide access. vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF. (3) Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be
Component Rationale Location Description minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66 ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded. (4) Watercourse crossings will not vary in location by more than 100 m each side of locations identified in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C. (5) Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor. (6) Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided. (7) Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded. Main Substation Two locations have been identified for the Main Substation. The key factors that will The Main Substation will be located at one of determine which location will be most appropriate will be the final size, location and order the two locations shown in Figures A1 - A4. of stages of construction, and the final location of the External Transmission Line. Two alternative locations also provide redundancy in the unlikely event that one location is found to be unsuitable during detailed design. Satellite Substation The location of the Satellite Substation was identified after a thorough assessment of the The location of the Satellite Substation is shown overall Site against a range of suitability criteria, such as area, topography, visibility, in Figures A1 - A4. distance from occupied dwellings, and potential for flood risk, accessibility and ecology. Switching Station The Switching Station location was identified after a thorough assessment of the overall The location of the Switching Station is shown in Site against a range of suitability criteria, such as area, topography, visibility, proximity to Figures A1 - A4. dwellings, potential for flood risk, accessibility, expected proximity to the External Transmission Line connection point and ecology.
Component Rationale Location Description Internal The Internal Transmission Line has been designed to a reasonably high level of certainty The location of the Internal Transmission Line Transmission Line and apart from micro-siting of towers is not expected to change. will be within 50 m of the location indicated in Figures A1 - A4. The location indicated in Figures A1 - A4 shows some alternative arrangements depending on the location of the Main Substation and whether the Switching Station is utilised. The location of the Internal Transmission towers will be within 50m of the locations indicated in Figures A1 - A4, and will be positioned to avoid clearance or trimming of indigenous vegetation to the extent practicable. 33kV overhead lines Wherever practical, the 33kV reticulation system will follow Internal Roads so the These components are likely to be located and underground requirement for variation from the routes indicated will match that of the Internal Roads. where indicated in Figures A1 - A4 but may be cables located anywhere within the Site, subject to the The opportunity arising from refinement, and the degree of constraint applied is as for the following limitations: Internal Roads. 1. Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, Other EBoP Other EBoP components such as switchgear huts will generally be located near previously QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ listed EBoP components (substations, overhead lines and underground cables) and will habitats identified under statutory plans will vary in their location as these other components do. not be disturbed. Excess Fill Areas On-site Excess Fill Areas have been identified as suitable from both an engineering and 2. Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in environmental perspective. They are located near or adjacent to Internal Roads to the Ecological Effects Assessment in minimise transport of Excess Fill and so may vary in location if Internal Roads relocations Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except are required. Other variations may be required to achieve engineering or environmental to the extent already outlined in the CHWF improvements and additional Excess Fill Areas may also be identified by the contractor. Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high Central Laydown Indicative Central Laydown Area locations have been identified to indicate suitable sites ecological value’ vegetation is described and Areas and demonstrate that the requirement to provide Central Laydown Areas can be achieved. this quantity will not be exceeded in Contractor The contractor will identify a suitable location for the Contractor Compound prior to construction of the CHWF. Compounds construction. 3. Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum Operations and The location of O&M facilities will be determined prior to construction depending on the quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance maintenance final size, location and order of stages of construction. of 66 ha described in the Ecological Effects facilities Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be Quarries Quarries will be established at the locations indicated or additional sites if identified during exceeded. construction.
Component Rationale Location Description Crushing Plant Crushing plant is likely to be located at or near the quarry sites. 4. Gullies with watercourses will be avoided Concrete Batching Concrete Batching Plants will be located either near current construction sites, or near unless it can be demonstrated that Plants material sources such as quarries or water abstraction sites. Indicative locations have downstream water quality effects are no been identified with specific locations to be determined prior to construction. The plants will more than minor. be re-locatable, with only one or two locations operating concurrently at any one time and sites being rehabilitated as soon as the Concrete Batching Plant is relocated. 5. Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided. 6. Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded. 7. Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
Water abstraction Water abstraction and storage locations have been identified. The location of water abstraction and storage and storage areas facilities is shown in Figures A1 - A4.
Note: Where a component is to be located at a different place from that indicated in Figures A1 - A4, an ecological assessment in accordance with the methodology undertaken for the CHWF Ecological Effects Assessment will be undertaken and information will be provided to Council to confirm that the ecological outcomes associated with the revised location are within the nature and scale of effects described in the AEE.
Route 52
A3
Indicative Internal Road Design Indicative External Road Upgrades Indicative Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construc r 80M Internal Road Significant External Road Works Substations !(L Central La t 90M Internal Road Possible External Road Works Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete B yout 100L Internal Road % Bridges on External Roads "J Electrical Switchgear Huts !(Q Quarry Loc yout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers Quarry and ayout Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fil ayout Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take _ Water Stor ! !! !! hiatua Road !! Pai Rimu Road !!! !!
!! !!
!
! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ^_ ! ! ! ! !! R !! imu Ro !! ! ! ad ! !!
! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!! ! !!! ! !! !
!! ! ! !
! !! !!
!!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ^_ W ! a a ihok !! i V a ! lle ! y R oad ! ! ! ! ! ^_ ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ^_ ! !! 52 ! ! te ! ! o u R !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!
!! !
A4
Indicative Internal Road Design Indicative External Road Upgrades Indicative Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construc r 80M Internal Road Significant External Road Works Substations !(L Central La t 90M Internal Road Possible External Road Works Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete B yout 100L Internal Road % Bridges on External Roads "J Electrical Switchgear Huts !(Q Quarry Loc yout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers Quarry and ayout Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fil ayout Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take _ Water Stor ! ! ! ! ! !!
! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!
! ! ! !
! !!! !! !! ! ! D ! ag ! !! gs ! ! R ! ! ! ! o ! ! ! a ! ! ! d !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! !! ! ^_ ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ^_ ! ! ! !!! ! ! ^_1 !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !!
! ! M ! a ! ri ngi Ro !! !! ad ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! W ! ! a ! ! ir ! ir i !!! R o !! ! a ! d ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Indicative Internal Road Design Indicative External Road Upgrades Indicative Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construc r 80M Internal Road Significant External Road Works Substations !(L Central La t 90M Internal Road Possible External Road Works Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete B yout 100L Internal Road % Bridges on External Roads "J Electrical Switchgear Huts !(Q Quarry Loc yout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers Quarry and ayout Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fil ayout Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take _ Water Stor ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !
!! !!
! ! !!
^_ ! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!
!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! d ! ! a ! ! !! o ! ! ! R !! !
a ! ! w
a ! !! n
a ! M ! ^_ ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ^_ !! !! !!
T inui
Indicative Internal Road Design Indicative External Road Upgrades Indicative Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construc r 80M Internal Road Significant External Road Works Substations !(L Central La t 90M Internal Road Possible External Road Works Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete B yout 100L Internal Road % Bridges on External Roads "J Electrical Switchgear Huts !(Q Quarry Loc yout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers Quarry and ayout Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fil ayout Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take _ Water Stor
TABLE A1: Castle Hill Wind Farm Landowner Titles and Road Reserves
TARARUA DISTRICT
LO NAMES ON TITLES TITLES TOTAL ID 3 Derek Montgomery Daniell 44D/778 39B/175 44A/466 3 Evelyn Christine Daniell Colin Anthony Garstang
4 Bruce Douglas McKenzie 306/196 44C/317 493/140 743/60 743/61 5 Ian Ronald McKenzie
5 Alan Graham Mitchell 40D/171 1 Wendy Waihuia Mitchell Michael Gordon Lawrence
6 Andrew Eric Falloon 223130 442/68 82281 67638 4 Simon Sinclair McKay
7 Daniel Bryan Edmonds 150214 35C/886 67637 3 Elizabeth June Edmonds Graeme Albert Bayliss
8 Lisa Jane Richardson B2/277 374651 2 Neil John Richardson Graeme Charles Richardson
10 Suzanne Mary Smith 39A/366 475/295 13D/1266 3 Frank Duncan John Smith
11 William Ross White 1 40A/934
12a Elizabeth Esther Billington 13D/1267 41B/226 812/29 3 Allen Charles Billington
12b Waterfall Farm Limited 812/28 13C/254 39A/89 22B/754 4
13 Cyril Graham Shaw 57C/750 1 Gabrielle Anne Sinclair
14 Jeane Louise Burns Fowler 107308 43D/975 528/214 596/111 4 James Fowler LCCA Trustees Limited
TARARUA DISTRICT (cont.)
LO NAMES ON TITLES TITLES TOTAL ID 16a Darztech Limited 37A/509 37A/510 779/75 3
16b Simon Peter France (1/4) 107307 24C/643 57C/749 3 Mark William Freeman (1/4) Darztech Limited (1/2)
17 James Ian Mason 11B/1180 1 Diane Elizabeth Mason Gawith Trustees 2009 Ltd
25 Waimapu Land Developments 673/1 1
29 Otapawa Station Limited 18B/1157 190/221 22C/677 22D/250 32 23C/125 23C/126 240154 248166 248169 248180 25A/289 25A/487 25A/645 25B/116 25C/18 26B/211 26B/899 276/203 29C/17 321/35 326/228 35A/385 39A/90 416/192 446/294 459/3 817/64 959/81 B3/102 E1/1095 E3/268 807/6
30a Michel George Hart 191/14 24C/774 24D/471 24D/472 277/280 322/247 327/214 578/149 616/14 9 Gaylene Ngaire Hart Thomas Joseph Anthony Fouhy
Michael Gorge Hart 223/119 646/91 2 Gaylene Ngaire Hart
31 Te Rimu Station Limited 19D/314 215/238 231/254 231/255 231/256 231/280 23B/766 24B/963 21C/38 25 24C/455 24D/779 24D/781 255/124 255/125 255/128 25A/642 284/85 28620 311/89 311/90 35B/485 35C/550 370/248 465/284 953/99
Legal Road Reserve vested in Tararua District Council: Pahiatua Road; Rimu Road; Route 52; Waihoki Valley Road, Rakaunui Road, Waitawhiti Road, Castle Hill Road, Ngarata Road, Puketawa Road.
MASTERTON DISTRICT
LO NAMES ON TITLES TITLES TOTAL ID 1 Alan John Barton 21D/959 21D/960 597/267 597/268 C2/1383 5 Sally Vivianne Barton
2 Robert Alexander Kyle 15A/1416 15A/1417 15A/205 16D/547 18D/692 5 Robson Blyth King
3 Derek Montgomery Daniell 13D/160 39B/175 44A/466 77/70 966/80 44D/778 6 Evelyn Christine Daniell Colin Anthony Garstang
4 Bruce Douglas McKenzie 743/61 44C/317 2 Ian Ronald McKenzie
5 Alan Graham Mitchell 40D/171 1 Wendy Waihuia Mitchell Michael Gordon Lawrence
6 Andrew Eric Falloon 67638 1 Simon Sinclair McKay
7 Daniel Bryan Edmonds 67637 150214 35C/886 3 Elizabeth June Edmonds Graeme Albert Bayliss
8 Lisa Jane Richardson 374651 B2/227 2 Neil John Richardson Graeme Charles Richardson
10 Suzanne Mary Smith 13D/1266 23A/395 23A/396 41B/334 B1/505 B2/146 39A/366 7 Frank Duncan John Smith
12a Elizabeth Esther Billington 13D/1267 1 Allen Charles Billington
14 Jeane Louise Burns Fowler 840/52 528/214 2 James Fowler LCCA Trustees Limited
24a Robert James Joblin Deborah Jane Joblin 44B/441 Gawith Trustees Limited
MASTERTON DISTRICT (cont.)
LO NAMES ON TITLES TITLES TOTAL ID 24b Deborah Jane Joblin 672/99 9B/1000 832/100 3 Gawith Trustees Limited Gawith Trustees Limited
25 Waimapu Land Developments 672/100 673/1 2
26 Tanglewood Forests Limited 3 15A/1418 15A/203 15A/204
34 Blair Douglas McPhail 40A/961 1 Joanne Ruth McPhail Simon Wellbourne Ogilvie
35 Tirohanga Land Limited 44A/204 1
36 John Robert Canning 490/212 605/255 2 Bridget Diana Canning John William Dalziell
37 Richard James Wylie 473/119 A4/1028 2 John William Kershaw Robert William Maunsell
39 Lindsay Boyd Gribben 16A/492 289/18 16A/379 3 Donald Bruce Todd
43a David William Dalziell 171587 1 Kerry Suzanne Dalziell Graeme Albert Bayliss
43b William David Dalziell 8B/173 8B/174 9D/176 3 Graeme Albert Bayliss David William Dalziell
44 Robert James Cresswell WN56B/481 1 Mangahao Trustees (2006) Limited
Legal Road Reserve vested in Masterton District Council: Alfredton – Tinui Road / Manawa Road, Maringi Road; Route 52; Daggs Road.
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 The Castle Hill Wind Farm Project 1 1.2 Introduction to Genesis Energy 9
1.2.1 Background 9 1.2.2 Approach to Environmental Issues 9
1.3 Resource Consent Requirements 10 1.4 Land Ownership 12 1.5 Written Approvals 12 1.6 Environmental Assessments Undertaken 12 1.7 Structure of this Report 14
2. PROJECT RATIONALE 15
2.1 Introduction 15 2.2 Overview of the New Zealand Electricity Situation 15
2.2.1 Electricity Supply and Demand in New Zealand 15 2.2.2 The Importance of a Secure Electricity Supply 16 2.2.3 Matters Affecting Future Supply Options 17
2.3 Development Approach 20
2.3.1 Wind Resource 20 2.3.2 Suitable Land Availability 21 2.3.3 Distance from Large Population Centres 21 2.3.4 Accessibility 21 2.3.5 Ability to Connect to the National Grid 22 2.3.6 Avoidance of Sensitive Environmental Areas 22
2.4 Summary 22
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 24
3.1 Social Setting 24 3.2 Cultural Setting 27
3.2.1 Historical Background 27 3.2.2 Archaeology and Heritage 29
3.3 Physical and Ecological Setting 32
3.3.1 General Site Characteristics 32 3.3.2 Landscape 35 3.3.3 Existing Noise Environment 38 3.3.4 Roading and Traffic 42 3.3.5 Surface Water Resources 48
Table of Contents page i
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
3.3.6 Groundwater Resources 63 3.3.7 Terrestrial Ecology 64
3.4 Summary 77
4. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 78
4.1 Introduction 78 4.2 CHWF Development Process 78
4.2.1 Introduction 78 4.2.2 Site Selection 78 4.2.3 Concept Studies 80 4.2.4 Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessments 80 4.2.5 Project Design and Assessment of Environmental Effects 81 4.2.6 Alternatives Considered 84
4.3 Project Components 85
4.3.1 Introduction 85 4.3.2 Turbines 86 4.3.3 Electrical Balance of Plant 94 4.3.4 Internal Roads 112 4.3.5 External Roads 118 4.3.6 Permanent Operation and Maintenance Facilities 127 4.3.7 Monitoring Masts 129 4.3.8 Temporary Construction Facilities 130
4.4 Construction Process 140
4.4.1 Construction Methodology 140 4.4.2 Construction Programme and Personnel 140 4.4.3 Construction Materials 141 4.4.4 On-Site Earthwork Activities 142 4.4.5 External Road Earthworks Requirements 146 4.4.6 Erosion and Sediment Control 151 4.4.7 Tree Clearance and Trimming 152 4.4.8 Bulk Fuel Storage and Refuelling 152 4.4.9 Delivery of Turbine Components 152
4.5 Consenting Approach for Location of CHWF Components 154 4.6 Site Reinstatement 159 4.7 Operation and Maintenance Activities 159 4.8 Management Plans 160
5. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 161
5.1 Introduction 161 5.2 Socio-economic Effects 161
5.2.1 Electricity-Related Effects 161
Table of Contents page ii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.2.2 Economic Effects 162 5.2.3 Recreation and Tourism 164 5.2.4 Summary 168
5.3 Landscape and Visual 169
5.3.1 Introduction 169 5.3.2 Wind Farm Visibility 170 5.3.3 Visibility from Public Viewpoints 175 5.3.4 Visibility from Rural Dwellings 180 5.3.5 Landscape and Visual Effects of the CHWF 182 5.3.6 Summary 193
5.4 Noise Effects 194
5.4.1 Introduction 194 5.4.2 Relevant Noise Standards 194 5.4.3 Construction Noise 196 5.4.4 Operational Noise 203 5.4.5 Summary 215
5.5 Traffic Effects 216
5.5.1 Introduction 216 5.5.2 Construction Traffic Effects 217 5.5.3 Traffic Management 227 5.5.4 Operational Traffic Effects 228 5.5.5 Cumulative Traffic Effects 229 5.5.6 Summary 229
5.6 Potential Effects on Water Resources 230
5.6.1 Introduction 230 5.6.2 Surface Water Effects 231 5.6.3 Groundwater Effects 251 5.6.4 Summary 254
5.7 Ecological Effects 255
5.7.1 Introduction 255 5.7.2 Ecological Vegetation Values 256 5.7.3 Vegetation and Habitat Cover at the CHWF Site 257 5.7.4 Potential Vegetation Clearance 257 5.7.5 Birds 265 5.7.6 Bats 266 5.7.7 Lizards and Frogs 266 5.7.8 Terrestrial Invertebrates 267 5.7.9 Summary 267
5.8 Cultural Effects 267 5.9 Archaeology and Heritage 269
5.9.1 Introduction 269
Table of Contents page iii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.9.2 Potential Effects on Archaeological and Heritage Sites 271 5.9.3 Summary 272
5.10 Shadow Flicker and Blade Glint 272
5.10.1 Introduction 272 5.10.2 Shadow Flicker Assessment 273 5.10.3 Effects of Shadow Flicker on External Dwellings 274 5.10.4 Risks to the Public 275 5.10.5 Summary 275
5.11 Radio-communication and Telecommunication Services 276
5.11.1 Introduction 276 5.11.2 Possible Interference Effects 276 5.11.3 Potential Radio Interference Effects of the CHWF 277 5.11.4 Summary 283
5.12 Aviation 284
5.12.1 Introduction 284 5.12.2 Potential Effects on Aviation 284 5.12.3 Summary 286
5.13 Electric and Magnetic Fields 286
5.13.1 Introduction 286 5.13.2 Electric and Magnetic Fields 286 5.13.3 Potential Health Effects of Electric Magnetic Fields 287 5.13.4 Summary 289
5.14 Summary of Environmental Effects 289
6. PROPOSED MONITORING AND MITIGATION 296
6.1 Introduction 296 6.2 Management Plans 296
6.2.1 Overview 296 6.2.2 Environmental Management Plan 296 6.2.3 Supplementary Environmental Management Plans 298
6.3 Construction Activities 299
6.3.1 Earthworks and Sedimentation 299 6.3.2 Construction Traffic 303 6.3.3 Cultural, Archaeological and Heritage 308 6.3.4 Surface and Groundwater Resources 309 6.3.5 Noise 311 6.3.6 Ecology 312
6.4 Operational Activities 315
Table of Contents page iv
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
6.4.1 Landscape and Amenity 315 6.4.2 Telecommunication and Radio-communication Services 316 6.4.3 Aviation 318 6.4.4 Operational Noise 319 6.4.5 Ecology 320
6.5 Proposed Monitoring 320 6.6 Summary 323
7. CONSULTATION 324
7.1 Introduction 324 7.2 The Consultation Process 324
7.2.1 Overview 324 7.2.2 Wider Community Consultation 325 7.2.3 CHWF Landowners 327 7.2.4 Neighbouring Landowners and Residents 328 7.2.5 Tangata Whenua 329 7.2.6 Local Authorities 332 7.2.7 Other Interested or Potentially Affected Parties 335
7.3 Issues Identified in Consultation 342 7.4 Summary 342
8. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK 343
8.1 Resource Management Act 1991 343
8.1.1 Fourth Schedule Requirements 343
8.2 Resource Consent Requirements and Activity Status 347
8.2.1 Introduction 347 8.2.2 Manawatu – Wanganui Regional Council 349 8.2.3 Tararua District Council 357 8.2.4 Wellington Regional Council 360 8.2.5 Masterton District Council 365
8.3 Statutory Planning Documents 369
8.3.1 National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 369 8.3.2 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2011 370 8.3.3 Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council Policy Statement and Plans 371 8.3.4 Tararua District Council Plans 384 8.3.5 Wellington Regional Council Policy Statement and Plans 388 8.3.6 Masterton District Council Plan 397
Table of Contents page v
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
8.4 Section 104 Assessment 401
8.4.1 Introduction 401 8.4.2 Actual and Potential Effects 402 8.4.3 Relevant Provisions of Statutory Planning Documents 404 8.4.4 Other Relevant Matters 407 8.4.5 RMA Part 2 407
9. CONCLUDING STATEMENT 409
10. REFERENCES 410
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1: Location of the CHWF Site. 2
1.2: Layout of the CHWF. 4
1.3(i): Component overview of the CHWF (A1). 5
1.3(ii): Component overview of the CHWF (A2). 6
1.3(iii): Component overview of the CHWF (A3). 7
1.3(iv): Component overview of the CHWF (A4). 8
2.1: Electricity consumption by sector and by region in 2010 (MED, 2011). 16
2.2: Total consumer energy in New Zealand (1990 – 2010) (MED, 2011). 17
3.1: Dwellings located within and near the CHWF Site. 26
3.2: Indicative map showing recorded archaeological sites around the CHWF Site. 30
3.3: Location of potential pa sites in or near the CHWF. 31
3.4: Location of historic woolsheds between Turbine Cluster E and F. 32
3.5: Location of background noise measurement sites. 39
3.6: Background noise at External Dwelling X397. 40
3.7: Background noise at External Dwelling X185. 40
3.8: Background noise at External Dwelling X377. 41
3.9: Background noise at 153 Wairiri Road. 41
Table of Contents page vi
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
3.10: Water quality and aquatic biology sampling sites. 53
3.11: Locations of five-minute bird count and flight path monitoring stations. 68
3.12(i): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster E at the CHWF Site. CHFP5B had the highest number of observed flight paths - all heights 69
3.12(ii): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster E at the CHWF Site. CHFP5B had the highest number of observed flight paths - within the potential rotor zone. 70
3.12(iii): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster D at the CHWF Site. CHFP4B had the lowest number of observed flight paths - all heights. 71
3.12(iv): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster D at the CHWF Site. CHFP4B had the lowest number of observed flight paths - within the potential rotor zone. 72
3.13: Locations of automated digital bat recorders and bat detections at the CHWF Site. 73
3.14: Location of Artificial Cover Objects (ACOs) and lizards found within the CHWF Site. 75
3.15: Sampling locations for invertebrates within the CHWF Site. 76
4.1: Schematic of Turbine components. 87
4.2: Unmodified Turbine Corridor (green) with four overlying Indicative Turbine Layouts. 88
4.3: Refined Turbine Corridor (green). 89
4.4: Relationship between numbers of Medium and Large Turbines in the Mixed Turbine Configuration. 90
4.5: Schematic Turbine Foundation cross-section. 92
4.6: Schematic layout of a Turbine Platform. 93
4.7: Electrical Balance of Plant Option 1. 97
4.8: Electrical Balance of Plant Option 2. 98
4.9: Schematic Main Substation layout. 101
4.10: Schematic Satellite Substation layout. 102
4.11: Schematic plan view of the optional Switching Station. 103
4.12: Schematic cross-sections for underground cable trench design. 104
Table of Contents page vii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.13: Schematic of overhead line to underground cable transition for Internal Road crossings. 105
4.14: Isometric view of multiple 33kV line arrangements. 106
4.15: Isometric view of alternative multiple 33kV line arrangement. 107
4.16: Schematic 33kV double circuit pole design. 107
4.17: Schematic 33kV double circuit pole design. 108
4.18: Schematic 33kV four circuit pole design. 109
4.19: Lattice and monopole 220kV tower structure options. 111
4.20: Representative external Turbine transformer kiosk design. 111
4.21: Representative switchgear hut design. 112
4.22: Schematic Internal Road cross-section design. 117
4.23: Proposed Internal Road water crossings. 119
4.24: Proposed OW/OD Route to the CHWF Site. 123
4.25: Road design on External Roads to Site. 125
4.26: Proposed work requirements and locations of External Road bridges. 126
4.27: Schematic O&M facility layout. 128
4.28: Schematic of Contractor Compound layout. 132
4.29: Location of key civil structures for the CHWF. 133
4.30: Conceptual intake design for the water take structures. 139
4.31: Schematic transport configuration for a nacelle. 153
5.1: Location of visitor settings within 15 km of the CHWF Site. 166
5.2: Modelled sound power level curves for the CHWF noise assessment. 204
5.3: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X185. 207
5.4: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X265. 208
5.5: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X396 and X407. 208
5.6: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X358. 210
5.7: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X362. 210
5.8: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X405. 211
Table of Contents page viii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.9: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X377. 212
5.10: Flow duration curve for Te Hoe Stream showing effect of proposed take on flow frequency. 239
5.11: Flow duration curve for the Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Rd showing effect of proposed take on flow frequency. 241
5.12: Flow duration curve for the Tiraumea River at its confluence with Ihuraua showing effect of proposed take on flow frequency. 243
5.13: Flow duration curve for the Tinui River at Taipo showing the effect of proposed take on flow frequency. 244
5.14: Schematic cross-section – reduced flow at mid-slope features. 253
5.15: All fixed radio linking services operating near the CHWF. 281
5.16: Protection of wide area coverage services. 282
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 3.1: Forestry block of Pinus radiata and pastoral grass in the CHWF Site. 25
Plate 3.2: Example of typical vegetation cover (pastoral grass) in the CHWF Site, with occasional stands of native vegetation and pine forest in the distance. 33
Plate 3.3: Elevated hill country with narrow steep gully slopes and grazed pasture across the CHWF Site from Rangitumau. 36
Plate 3.4: Grazed pasture on hilltops with remnants of indigenous vegetation in gullies (Waitawhiti Road). 36
Plate 3.5: Lowlands and valleys landscape type in the CHWF Site (Manawa Road). 38
Plate 3.6: Stock pond within the CHWF Site formed by blocking a small tributary in the headwaters of the Tiraumea Stream. 49
Plate 4.1: Indicative 80 m lattice wind monitoring mast. 130
Plate 4.2: Typical transporter for a Vestas V80 section of tower. 153
Plate 4.3: Indicative transporter for a Vestas V80 blade. 154
Table of Contents page ix
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
LIST OF TABLES
1.1: Summary of resource consents required from MWRC. 11
1.2: Summary of resource consents required from GWRC. 11
1.3: Summary of resource consents required from TDC. 11
1.4: Summary of resource consents required from MDC. 12
3.1: Radio-communication services operating in the CHWF area (Kordia, 2011). 27
3.2: External Road classifications. 43
3.3: External Road dimensions in the vicinity of the CHWF Site. 44
3.4: Current and forecasted traffic volumes for External Roads near the CHWF Site. 47
3.5: Physical characteristics of the watercourses sampled within and downstream of the CHWF Site (June 2010 and March 2011). 54
3.6: Water quality parameters in watercourses within and downstream of the CHWF Site (June 2010 and March 2011). 57
3.7: Interpretation of MCI, SQMCI and QMCI index values from Stark (1993) (Quality) and Stark and Maxted (2004) (Water Quality). 60
3.8: Vegetation types, relative ecological values, extent and distribution at the CHWF Site. 66
4.1: Outline of the CHWF development process. 79
4.2: Indicative Turbine Layouts. 91
4.3: Indicative Turbine Foundation parameters. 92
4.4: Estimated multiple line lengths. 106
4.5: Internal Road water crossings to access Turbines and substations. 120
4.6: Internal Road water crossings to access Internal Transmission Line towers. 121
4.7: Proposed water abstraction points. 138
4.8: Material requirements for Medium and Large Turbine Layouts. 141
4.9: Maximum earthwork volumes for the Medium Turbine Layout (based on 80M layout). 143
Table of Contents page x
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.10: Maximum earthwork volumes for the Large Turbine Layout (based on 100L layout). 144
4.11: Maximum earthwork area by type for the Large Turbine Layout (based on 100L layout). 144
4.12: OW/OD Route earthwork volumes between Alfredton and the CHWF Site. 148
4.13: External Road bridge work descriptions. 149
4.14: External Road bridge work requirements (SH2 to the CHWF Site). 150
4.15 Description of component location extent. 156
4.16: Proposed Site reinstatement. 159
5.1: Location key to 5.1. 165
5.2: Visibility (based on landform screening only) within 10 km of the nearest Turbine. 174
5.3: Public viewpoint visibility of the CHWF. 176
5.4: Rural dwellings located within 5 km of the nearest Turbine. 180
5.5: Rural dwelling visibility within 5 km of the nearest Turbine. 181
5.6: Potential visual effects on dwellings within 5 km of the nearest CHWF Turbine. 185
5.7: Recommended upper noise limits (dBA) for construction work noise received at dwellings in Rural Areas – long-term project duration (NZS6803). 195
5.8: Predicted Turbine Foundation and Platform construction noise levels at nearest External Dwellings. 197
5.9: Construction sound levels at External Dwellings near the Main Substation options. 198
5.10: Construction sound levels at External Dwellings near the Satellite Substation. 198
5.11: Predicted construction traffic noise levels. 200
5.12: Predicted Turbine noise levels at External Dwellings. 205
5.13: Wind farm noise assessment summary at External Dwellings. 206
5.14: Sound levels at External Dwellings near the Main Substation (both options). 213
5.15: Sound levels at External Dwellings near the Satellite Substation. 214
Table of Contents page xi
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.16: Forecast peak total contractor vehicle movements – daily, peak hour and mid-day. 222
5.17: Erosion and sediment control risk assessment by Turbine Cluster. 234
5.18: Sediment loads from high risk areas. 235
5.19: Proposed regime for taking water in the Tiraumea Catchment. 238
5.20: Proposed regime for taking water in the Tinui Catchment. 238
5.21: Effects of the proposed water abstraction on key values of Te Hoe Stream. 240
5.22: Effects of the proposed take on key values of Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Rd. 242
5.23: Effects of the proposed take on key values of Tiraumea River at its confluence with Ihuraua. 243
5.24: Effects of the proposed take on key values of the Tinui River at Taipo. 245
5.25: Vegetation and habitat classifications applied at the CHWF Site. 256
5.26: Classifications assigned to vegetation and habitat types at the CHWF Site. 258
5.27: Ecological classifications of vegetation and habitats associated with potential On-site*** total vegetation clearance and potential indigenous vegetation clearance. 260
5.28: Ecological classifications of vegetation and habitats associated with the potential Off-site total vegetation clearance and potential indigenous vegetation clearance at the CHWF Site. 260
5.29: Vegetation and habitat types potentially affected by On-site construction activities for the CHWF. 261
5.30: Vegetation and habitat types potentially affected by Off-site construction activities for the CHWF. 262
5.31: External Dwellings located within the zone of influence. 274
5.32: Exposure to shadow flicker at dwellings within the zone of influence. 274
5.33: Services likely to be interfered with and the level or risk that interference will occur due to the CHWF. 278
8.1: The relevant statutory planning documents for the CHWF. 348
8.2: Summary of resource consents required from MWRC. 349
8.3: Summary of resource consents required from TDC. 357
Table of Contents page xii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
8.4: Summary of resource consents required from GWRC. 360
8.5: Summary of resource consents required from MDC. 365
Table of Contents page xiii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
GLOSSARY
AEE Assessment of Environmental Effects
Areas On-site that may be used to store Turbine components for a sub-set of Turbine locations, or on which construction equipment and Central Laydown Area(s) materials can be placed. This is an alternative option to storing components Off-site or at individual Turbine Platforms.
CHWF Castle Hill Wind Farm.
Owners of the land on which the wind farm will be built. CHWF CHWF Landowners Landowners have signed agreements with Genesis Energy.
CHWF Site or Site The area of land defined by the land titles covered by agreements.
CHWF Landowner Dwellings within the CHWF Site. Dwellings
A facility required for making concrete. Likely to include a concrete Concrete Batching Plant mixer, cement silos, sand and aggregate stockpiles, water storage tanks and storage areas for equipment and tools.
Construction Traffic External Roads used for non-OW/OD construction traffic. Routes
Centre for construction management and workshop based activities Contractor Compound consisting of offices, workshops, storage, parking and amenities.
All electrical structures and equipment related to the collection and reticulation of electrical power around CHWF and required to connect Electrical Balance of Plant the CHWF to the External Transmission Line. Plant includes (EBoP) underground cables, overhead reticulation lines, transformers, substations and switchgear.
Excavated material (excluding top soil) that is incorporated into engineered earthworks such as road fills, Turbine Platforms and Engineered Fill Central Laydown Areas. Placement and treatment of the Engineered Fill is designed to meet construction requirements for such aspects as drainage, strength and stability.
Soil removed from the ground which is either not suitable or not Excess Fill needed as Engineered Fill.
Excess Fill Areas Areas for disposal of Excess Fill.
External Dwellings Dwellings external to the CHWF Site.
Public roads that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the External Roads construction and operation of the CHWF and including roads used by Over-weight and Over-dimension Vehicles.
Glossary page i
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
External Transmission The electricity transmission line which connects CHWF to the Line Transpower national grid.
Turbine layouts that have been created to represent the range of possible Turbine layouts:
80M – a Turbine layout consisting of 286 Medium Turbines based on a Turbine with an 80m rotor diameter.
90M – a Turbine layout consisting of 262 Medium Turbines based Indicative Turbine Layouts on a Turbine with a 90m rotor diameter.
100L – a Turbine layout consisting of 242 Large Turbines based on a Turbine with a 100m rotor diameter.
110L – a Turbine layout consisting of 186 Large Turbines based on a Turbine with a 110m rotor diameter.
Roads that will be constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting Internal Roads wind farm components and materials within the Site and to allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
Internal Transmission The 220kV electricity transmission line that is On-site and connects Line the Main Substation to the Satellite Substation.
Internal Transmission The deviation of the Internal Transmission Line to connect it to the Line Deviation Switching Station.
Large Turbine Any Turbine configuration that consists only of Large Turbines with a Configuration maximum quantity of 242 Turbines.
Turbines that have a maximum tip height greater than 135 m but no Large Turbines greater than 155 m.
A passing bay which provides a means for heavy vehicles to pass Lay-by each other in Internal Roads.
The larger of the two substations, located in the southern region of the Main Substation wind farm.
Medium Turbine Any Turbine configuration that consists only of Medium Turbines with Configuration a maximum quantity of 286 Turbines.
Medium Turbines Turbines that have a maximum tip height of 135 m.
Any Turbine configuration that consists of a mixture of Large Turbines Mixed Turbine and Medium Turbines with a maximum quantity of Turbines limited by Configuration the proportion of Medium and Large Turbines.
Off-site Anywhere outside the CHWF Site.
Glossary page ii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
On-site Anywhere within the CHWF Site.
The area of ground covered by all permanent and temporary wind On-Site Construction farm components. This includes extents of all cuts and fills during Footprint construction.
The area of ground covered by all permanent or semi-permanent On-Site Operational components. Semi-permanent are those components that are primarily Footprint used for construction, but may occasionally be used during operation of the wind farm. They will not be actively rehabilitated.
OW/OD Over-weight and/or over-dimension.
OW/OD Route External Roads used for OW/OD Vehicles.
Any vehicle with a gross mass in excess of 40 tonnes and/or over 20 OW/OD Vehicles metres in length, 2.5 m in width and 4.25 m in height.
The top layer of material on the Internal Road that forms a surface that Road Pavement is designed specifically for traffic to regularly pass over it.
The smaller of the two substations, located in the northern region of Satellite Substation the wind farm.
Provides an optional connection point for the External Transmission Switching Station Line to connect to the Internal Transmission Line as an alternative to connecting at the Main Substation.
Wind Turbine generators consisting of foundations, tower, nacelle and Turbines rotor, and including all equipment for, and associated with the generation of electricity from wind.
Turbine Clusters Grouping of Turbines for ease of reference.
Turbine Corridor The area of the CHWF Site in which wind Turbines can be located.
The underground foundation upon which each Turbine is based and Turbine Foundations which keeps the Turbine upright and stable.
An engineered flat area beside the Turbine that will be used for laying out and assembling Turbine components and as a hard standing area Turbine Platform for construction equipment and vehicles, particularly the construction crane.
Entrances to the CHWF Site where External Roads meet Internal Wind Farm Access Points Roads.
Glossary page iii
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Castle Hill Wind Farm Project
Genesis Power Limited (trading as “Genesis Energy”) is proposing to establish and operate the Castle Hill Wind Farm (“CHWF”) on privately1 owned rural land in northern Wairarapa. The CHWF involves up to 286 wind Turbines with a potential nominal capacity of up to 860MW of renewable electricity generation. The electricity produced is potentially equivalent to that consumed each year by up to 370,0002 average New Zealand households.
The CHWF Site (where agreements have been negotiated with landowners) covers some 30,000 ha and is located approximately 20 kilometres (“km”) northeast of Masterton, 20 km east of Eketahuna and Pahiatua and 15 km west of the Wairarapa Coast north of Castlepoint (see Figure 1.1). The CHWF Site is located in a remote area that is relatively sparsely populated. The closest settlements are Tiraumea, Alfredton, Bideford, Tinui, Pongaroa, Makuri and Mauriceville.
The area that has been selected for Turbine placement is referred to as the “Turbine Corridor”. The Turbine Corridor covers approximately 3,144 ha and is shown in Figure 1.2. The Turbines have been grouped into seven “Turbine Clusters” (A to G) for ease of reference. The On-site Construction Footprint will be approximately 861 ha, while the On-site Operational Footprint of the CHWF will be approximately 226 ha.
In designing the CHWF, Genesis Energy has undertaken a comprehensive design and site layout analysis, considering environmental values and engineering practicalities, to ensure the proposal is appropriately located and that it avoids, remedies or mitigates adverse effects as required by the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”).
The key project components and features of the CHWF are described in detail in Section 4 of this document, and include:
Turbines: Wind Turbine generators consisting of foundations, tower, nacelle and rotor, and including all equipment for, and associated with the generation of electricity from wind.
Turbine Corridor: 3,144 ha identified as suitable for Turbine placement. Turbines will be located within this corridor.
Turbines: Up to 286 Medium Turbines (maximum tip height 135 m) or up to 242 Large Turbines (maximum tip height greater than 135 m but no greater than 155 m) or a mixture of Medium and Large Turbines installed within the Turbine Corridor. The maximum number of Turbines for the CHWF is 286.
Internal Roads: roads constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting wind farm components, materials and personnel within the Site and to allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
1 Where External Roads dissect the CHWF Site, the road reserve only forms part of the CHWF Site where works are required in those areas. 2 Calculated on 3,000 GWh divided by the average annual residential consumer consumption of 8,100 kWh in 2010 (Concept Consulting, 2011).
Introduction Section 1 – page 1
Legend NAPIER HASTINGS " CHWF Site "
PalmerstonCouncil North Boundary City "WANGANUI
Pahiatua "MASTERTON
"WELLINGTON
Makuri Manawatu-Wanganui Region Tararua District Pongaroa
Tiraumea Eketahuna
Alfredton
Mauriceville
Mataikona
Masterton District Wellington Region Bideford
Tinui
Castlepoint
048122 W-CHL-GE-001 Kms
Figure 1.1: Location of the CHWF Site. Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Operations infrastructure e.g. operations and maintenance facilities (“O&M facilities”).
Electrical Balance of Plant (“EBoP”): all electrical structures and equipment related to the collection and reticulation of electrical power around the CHWF to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line. Plant includes an Internal Transmission Line, 33kV overhead lines, 33kV underground cables, a Main Substation and Satellite Substation, an optional Switching Station and switch gear huts, along with other associated electrical equipment.
Monitoring masts: up to 16 monitoring masts to collect on-going meteorological information during the operational life of the CHWF.
External Roads: public roads near the Site that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the construction and operation of the CHWF and by Over-weight and Over-dimension Vehicles (“OW/OD Vehicles”).
Temporary construction infrastructure: components required for construction of the CHWF, including Concrete Batching Plants, Central Laydown Areas, Excess Fill Areas, Contractor Compound, quarrying3 and crushing facilities, and water storage and abstraction facilities.
The layout of the CHWF is shown in Figure 1.2, and in more detail in Figures 1.3(i) to 1.3(iv).
Genesis Energy is in discussions with Transpower in respect to the External Transmission to connect the CHWF to the national grid. RMA approvals for the External Transmission Line are not part of this application and will be sought separately from these resource consent applications.
This document is an Assessment of Environmental Effects (“AEE”) supporting the resource consent applications for the construction, operation and maintenance of the CHWF as required under the RMA. It addresses all matters required by the Fourth Schedule of the RMA as summarised in Section 8 of this document. A glossary of specific terms used is provided at the beginning of this document. These terms are capitalised when used in the remainder of this document.
A Construction and Operations Management Report (“COMR”) has been prepared to support this application and is attached to this document in Appendix A (Volume 2).
3 Some quarry sites may remain in service during the operational phase of the CWHF.
Introduction Section 1 – page 3
Legend G Wind monitoring masts (existing) Turbine Corridor Turbine Cluster (A-G) CHWF Site Electrial Balance of Plant )"1 Main Substation option 1 )"2 Main Substation option 2 )"3 Satellite Substation )"4 Switching Station (optional) Internal Transmission Line (220kV) A Internal Transmission Line Deviation Internal Roads Turbine access Substation access Internal Transmission Line tower access
B
D C
E G
F
02461 W-CHL-LY-001 Kms
Figure 1.2: Layout of the CHWF. " P a Va l le y R o Valley Road a ne d
"
"
"
"
Route 52 "
" "
"
Alfr " e " d
t o n R o a d " "
"" " "" " "" " " "
egend
Council Boundary Indicative Turbine Layout Indicative Internal Road Design Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construction Areas CHWF Site ! 80M Turbine Layout 80M Internal Road Substations !(L Laydown Areas Turbine Corridor ! 90M Turbine Layout 90M Internal Road Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete Batching Plant Turbine Cluster (A-G) ! "J Electrical Switchgear Huts 100L Turbine Layout 100L Internal Road !(Q " Quarry Locations External Dwellings ! 110L Turbine Layout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers " Quarry and Crushing Fac CHWF Landowner Dwellings Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fill Areas Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take Points ^_ Internal Road Water Course Crossings 33kV Overhead Internal Electrical Lines Water Storage Areas Transport Route 33kV Underground Interal Electrical Cables NtAtiitA " " "
"
""
" " ! !! A " !! A !! PaihiatuaR Road imu Road !!! !! " !! A !! !
! ! ! !! !
! A !! ! " !! " ! !! ! ! ^_ ! ! ! ! !! R !! imu Ro !! ! ! ad ! !! " " " ! A ! ! ! ! ! " !! " " !! " !!! ! " " " !!! ! !! ! "
" " " !! " A " ! " ! " ! "
! !!
!! A
B
! " " !!! ! ! !! "" !! ! ! " ! ! B !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! B !! ! ! ^_ W ! a a ihok !! i V a ! " lle ! y R oad ! ! " ! ! ^_ " ! ! ! "
! !! "
! " ! B !! !! " " " ! ! " " " !! ! ! !! ! B ^_ ! ! 52 ! ! e t " ! ! " o u R !! ! ! ! ! ! " ! " !!!
!! B !
egend
Council Boundary Indicative Turbine Layout Indicative Internal Road Design Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construction Areas CHWF Site ! 80M Turbine Layout 80M Internal Road Substations !(L Laydown Areas Turbine Corridor ! 90M Turbine Layout 90M Internal Road Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete Batching Plant Turbine Cluster (A-G) ! "J Electrical Switchgear Huts 100L Turbine Layout 100L Internal Road !(Q " Quarry Locations External Dwellings ! 110L Turbine Layout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers " Quarry and Crushing Fac CHWF Landowner Dwellings Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fill Areas Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take Points ^_ Internal Road Water Course Crossings 33kV Overhead Internal Electrical Lines Water Storage Areas Transport Route 33kV Underground Interal Electrical Cables NtAtiitA " " "
" D
"
" " "
"
" D ! ! " ! ! " ! !! " " " ! " " " ! !! !! ! ! " !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!
G ! ! " D ! ! " " ! !!! " ! !!
! ! ! D Da ! !! gg ! ! s ! R ! ! ! ! o ! ! ! a ! ! ! d !! ! ! ! !! ! """ ! ! " G !! !! ! ^_ ! !! ! ^_ ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! E ! 1^_ !!
!! ! G !! !
! !
! !! D ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! "
! ! M ! ar ing E i R !! "o G !! " ad ! ! ! ! !! ! !
!! ! !!! G ! " !
! ! " ! E ! ! ! ! ! " ! ! ! " ! ! ! " "" !!! W ! ! a ! ! ir ! ir i !!! R o
!! ! a G ! d !
! ! ! G " ! ! ! " " "
" "" "
Glendonald Road """ " "" " "
egend
Council Boundary Indicative Turbine Layout Indicative Internal Road Design Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construction Areas CHWF Site ! 80M Turbine Layout 80M Internal Road Substations !(L Laydown Areas Turbine Corridor ! 90M Turbine Layout 90M Internal Road Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete Batching Plant Turbine Cluster (A-G) ! "J Electrical Switchgear Huts 100L Turbine Layout 100L Internal Road !(Q " Quarry Locations External Dwellings ! 110L Turbine Layout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers " Quarry and Crushing Fac CHWF Landowner Dwellings Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fill Areas Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take Points ^_ Internal Road Water Course Crossings 33kV Overhead Internal Electrical Lines Water Storage Areas Transport Route 33kV Underground Interal Electrical Cables NtAtiitA D C
! ! C ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! "
! ! ! ! !! C ! ! " " "
!! " !! " "
! ! !!
^_ ! C
! D C ! !! !!! ! !! !! !
! !!
!! " C
"
"
E "
!! !! " ! ! ! ! ! ! ! F ! ! ! ! "" ! " " ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! " F !! ! " " E ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! " ! ! ! ! ! ! " ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! !
d " ! !
a ! E ! ! ! o ! ! !
R " !! ! F a ! !
w F
a ! !! n
a ! M ! ^_ ! ! ! !!! " " ! " !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!
"" "^_ !! !! !!
" "
F F "
"
" " Tinui
" " "
" " " " "
egend
Council Boundary Indicative Turbine Layout Indicative Internal Road Design Electrical Balance of Plant Indicative Construction Areas CHWF Site ! 80M Turbine Layout 80M Internal Road Substations !(L Laydown Areas Turbine Corridor ! 90M Turbine Layout 90M Internal Road Optional Switching Station !(B Concrete Batching Plant Turbine Cluster (A-G) ! "J Electrical Switchgear Huts 100L Turbine Layout 100L Internal Road !(Q " Quarry Locations External Dwellings ! 110L Turbine Layout 110L Internal Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Towers " Quarry and Crushing Fac CHWF Landowner Dwellings Internal Substation Access Road 220kV Internal Transmission Line Excess Fill Areas Internal Transmission Line Access Road Optional Internal Transmission Line Deviation !(W Water Take Points ^_ Internal Road Water Course Crossings 33kV Overhead Internal Electrical Lines Water Storage Areas Transport Route 33kV Underground Interal Electrical Cables NtAtiitA Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
1.2 Introduction to Genesis Energy 1.2.1 Background Genesis Energy was established as a State Owned Enterprise on 1 April 1999, following the Government’s split of the Electricity Corporation of New Zealand. Genesis Energy has a diverse portfolio of renewable and thermal electricity generation assets including hydro, thermal and wind generation plants, and is one of the largest electricity generators in the country, supplying an average of approximately 20% of electricity generation per year over the last five years.
Genesis Energy has generation assets with a combined nominal generation capacity of approximately 2,140MW. The generation assets currently comprise:
The Huntly Power Station, which is the largest thermal generation asset base in New Zealand, incorporating four coal fired units, an open cycle gas Turbine and a combined cycle gas Turbine unit.
Three hydro generation schemes, being the Tongariro Power Scheme (central North Island), Waikaremoana Hydro Scheme (Hawke’s Bay), and Tekapo A and B Hydro Stations (Canterbury).
The Hau Nui Wind Farm in southern Wairarapa.
Genesis Energy generates electricity for sale to the wholesale market and to meet the needs of its retail customers. Genesis Energy, and its subsidiary Energy Online, combined hold the largest share of the retail market at 43% (MED, 2011), and has a retail customer base of approximately 655,000 electricity and gas customers. Genesis Energy is also an equity partner in the Kupe joint venture, which owns the Kupe Gas Project in Taranaki.
1.2.2 Approach to Environmental Issues Genesis Energy operates under the State Owned Enterprises Act 1986 that, amongst other things, requires Genesis Energy to operate its assets in the same manner as a commercial business, and act as a good corporate citizen. To achieve this, Genesis Energy seeks to make the best use of the resources available to it, while working alongside its communities and looking after the environment in which it operates.
Genesis Energy’s approach to environmental management is expressed in a suite of “Environmental Values”. These values state the company’s intention and principles in relation to its overall environmental performance. Genesis Energy’s Environmental Values state the company will:
Act with integrity at all times.
Foster close relationships with the community and stakeholders, so that their views can be incorporated into the environmental decision-making processes.
Acknowledge that our activities affect both the environment and the communities within which we operate.
Introduction Section 1 – page 9
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Respect the role of tangata whenua as kaitiaki of the natural resources and taonga within their rohe.
Investigate to better understand the nature of the environmental effects – and share this information with the community and stakeholders.
Seek environmental improvements in all aspects of our business.
Genesis Energy understands that all aspects of its business can impact on the environment, and that in order to reduce that impact it must:
Identify those who have responsibility for environmental management.
Identify and document all environmental effects associated with its activities.
Identify environmental objectives and develop associated work programmes to address the environmental effects of the activities undertaken.
Regularly review how well the company environmental values are being implemented, whether objectives are being met and which areas require corrective action.
Report publicly on environmental performance.
To achieve these objectives, Genesis Energy operates an Environmental Management System (“EMS”) which utilises a number of different business systems to manage the company’s effects and requirements for environmental management across all Genesis Energy projects and operational sites. The EMS provides the necessary controls and instructions to achieve the company’s commitment to environmental excellence and requirement to comply with all environmental legislation. The EMS applies to all activities involving the use of natural and physical resources and the environment, from the conceptual stage of any project through to normal operational activities of Genesis Energy.
Genesis Energy also has a comprehensive whole of company Climate Change Strategy to address the company’s impact on climate change, both through its activities and emissions, and through the activities of customers and stakeholders. As part of this strategy, Genesis Energy is committed to developing renewable energy in New Zealand while contributing to New Zealand’s long-term energy supply, and international and national climate change obligations.
1.3 Resource Consent Requirements
This application seeks all necessary resource consents required from the Manawatu- Wanganui Regional Council (“MWRC”), Greater Wellington Regional Council (“GWRC”), Tararua District Council (“TDC”) and Masterton District Council (“MDC”), for the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated infrastructure.
A full description of the resource consents required is provided in Part A of this document and a description of the relevant rules is provided in Section 8. Tables 1.1 to 1.4 summarise the resource consents sought from each council.
Introduction Section 1 – page 10
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 1.1: Summary of resource consents required from MWRC.
Consent Type Activity Activity Status Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation Land use Discretionary clearance Upgrade of existing External Roads and Land use Discretionary construction of new roads Land use Work in streambeds (structures) Discretionary Damming and diversion of surface water and Water permit Discretionary groundwater Water permit Water take and use Discretionary Discharge permit Disposal of excess fill to land Discretionary Discharge permit Discharge contaminants to air Discretionary Discharge permit Discharge stormwater to land and water Discretionary Discharge stormwater and wash water to Discharge permit Discretionary land
Table 1.2: Summary of resource consents required from GWRC.
Consent Type Activity Activity Status Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation Land use Restricted discretionary clearance Upgrade of existing External Roads and Land use Restricted discretionary construction of new roads Land use Work in streambeds (structures) Discretionary Land use Work in streambeds (reclamation) Discretionary Damming and diversion of surface water and Water permit Discretionary groundwater Water permit Water take and use Discretionary Discharge permit Disposal of excess fill to land Discretionary Discharge permit Discharge contaminants to air Discretionary Discharge permit Discharge stormwater to land and water Discretionary Discharge stormwater and wash water to Discharge permit Discretionary land
Table 1.3: Summary of resource consents required from TDC.
Consent Type Activity Activity Status Construction, operation, maintenance, Land use replacement and refurbishment of a wind Discretionary farm and associated structures*
* Genesis Energy was granted resource consent RM090034 in March 2009 for up to eight monitoring masts within the CHWF Site, and intends to relinquish this consent if these applications are granted.
Introduction Section 1 – page 11
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 1.4: Summary of resource consents required from MDC.
Consent Type Activity Activity Status Construction, operation, maintenance, Land use replacement and refurbishment of a wind Discretionary farm and associated structures.*
* Genesis Energy was granted resource consent 20090407 in April 2009 for up to eight monitoring masts within the CHWF Site and intends to relinquish this consent if these applications are granted.
Genesis Energy seeks resource consent for an unlimited period for all land use consents and for the Section 13 Regional Council reclamation consents. A duration of 35 years is sought for all other the regional council resource consents. A lapse period of 10 years is sought to enable the development of the CHWF, while a duration of 20 years is sought for construction related consents to provide for the implementation of the CWHF through a staged construction approach.
Genesis Energy also seeks that the land use consents be granted in the name of Genesis Energy in accordance with s134 of the RMA.
1.4 Land Ownership
The CHWF will be located on land covering a number of land titles under the ownership of various parties (referred to as “CHWF Landowners”) for which agreements have been entered into for the development of the CHWF, and Council Road Reserve. Table A1 of the resource consent applications provides the legal descriptions for the properties that comprise the CHWF Site. Copies of the relevant Certificates of Title are available upon request.
1.5 Written Approvals
Section 104(3)(a)(ii) of the RMA requires that when considering a resource consent application, a Consent Authority must not have regard to the effect on any person who has given RMA written approval to the application in accordance with section 95E of the RMA. For the CHWF resource consent applications RMA written approvals are being provided by CHWF Landowners and residents of all CHWF Landowner Dwellings, and by the owner and occupier of 161 Gandys Road (also known as Rakaunui Road). Effects on these properties are not considered further in this assessment.
1.6 Environmental Assessments Undertaken
A series of environmental assessments have been undertaken through the preliminary and project design phases of the CHWF development process. Through each phase, environmental values and engineering practicalities have been integrated to ensure that appropriate environmental outcomes are achieved.
The environmental assessments undertaken are provided in Volumes 3, 4 and 5 of this document, and include:
Introduction Section 1 – page 12
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Electricity-Related Effects Assessment, Concept Consulting Group Limited, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Economic Impact Assessment, BERL Economics, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment, Rob Greenway & Associates, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment, Boffa Miskell Ltd, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Noise Effects Assessment, Marshall Day Acoustics, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Transportation Effects Assessment, Traffic Design Group, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Shadow Flicker Effects Assessment, Boffa Miskell Ltd, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Water Supply Assessment, Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Hydrology Effects Assessment, Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Groundwater Effects Assessment, Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment, Ryder Consulting Limited, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Ecological Effects Assessment, Wildland Consultants, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Cultural Impact Assessment - Rangit ne o Wairarapa Inc, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Cultural Values Assessment - Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua, in preparation.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Cultural Impact Assessment - Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Cultural Impact Assessment - Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui a Rua, in preparation.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Archaeological Effects Assessment, Clough and Associates Ltd, July 2011.
Introduction Section 1 – page 13
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Radio Services Effects Assessment, Kordia, July 2011.
Castle Hill Wind Farm – Health Effects Assessment, Enviromedix Limited, June 2011.
1.7 Structure of this Report
This AEE comprises 10 sections (including this introduction) as follows:
Section 1 This introduction provides an overview of the CHWF project, introduces Genesis Energy (the applicant) and the company’s approach to environmental issues, outlines the resource consent requirements, land ownership, written approvals and sets out the structure of the report.
Section 2 Sets out the overall rationale for the project and outlines the development approach for selecting the CHWF Site.
Section 3 Provides a description of the environmental setting of the CHWF Site, including the social, cultural, physical and ecological setting.
Section 4 Describes the CHWF project in detail, including the CHWF development process, alternatives considered, key project components, construction process and site reinstatement. The approaches to be used for managing effects of the activity are also outlined.
Section 5 Provides an assessment of environmental effects associated with the CHWF, including socio-economic effects, and effects on landscape and visual, noise, traffic, surface water and groundwater resources, ecology, cultural effects, archaeology and heritage, shadow flicker and blade glint, radio-communication and telecommunications services, aviation and electric and magnetic fields.
Section 6 Sets out the proposed monitoring and mitigation that will be undertaken, and outlines the management plans for the project.
Section 7 Describes the consultation undertaken with relevant stakeholders, potentially affected parties and interest groups.
Section 8 Describes relevant RMA matters, and the district and regional planning framework for assessing the resource consent applications required for the CHWF.
Section 9 Provides a concluding statement in relation to the overall assessment of environmental effects.
Section 10 Provides a list of references.
Introduction Section 1 – page 14
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
2. PROJECT RATIONALE 2.1 Introduction
The provision of a secure and reliable electricity supply to New Zealanders is a constant challenge being faced by the electricity generation industry as a whole. Overall, as long-term demand for electricity continues to increase, additional electricity generation facilities need to be built. At the same time, there is a strong direction from central Government to provide more electricity generation from renewable sources. These key factors provide the overarching rationale for the CHWF.
2.2 Overview of the New Zealand Electricity Situation 2.2.1 Electricity Supply and Demand in New Zealand Electricity supply in New Zealand comes from both renewable and non-renewable sources. In 2010, renewable generation accounted for approximately 79% of total generation, and comprised: hydro (56%), geothermal (13%), wind (4%), and co- generation (6%) (MED, 2011). Non-renewable sources include gas (18%) and coal (3%), which make up the balance of electricity supply.
Residential electricity consumption accounts for approximately 34% of total demand, with commercial (24%) and basic metals (17%) being the other major consumers. The balance of electricity consumption in New Zealand is by primary industries, food processing, wood, pulp and paper processing/printing, and other industrial uses (25%). Almost 66% of electricity demand is based in the North Island, with Auckland and Northland consuming approximately 28% of the total electricity supplied. Figure 2.1 shows the breakdown of consumption by sector and by region in New Zealand in 2010.
Historically, electricity demand in New Zealand has generally increased by approximately 1.8% per annum over the last 15 years4 (MED, 2011), and despite trends towards more efficient use, electricity demand is forecast to continue growing, with up to 8,900 GWh per annum of new generation required by 2020.
Forecasting by the Electricity Authority and the Ministry of Economic Development (“MED”) predicts that demand for electricity will continue to grow, albeit at slightly lower rates than observed in the past, and that new sources of supply will be required (Concept Consulting, 2011). A number of new projects either are under construction or expected to commence construction soon. However, these projects are only expected to add around 230MW (capable of supplying approximately 1,700 GWh/year) of new generation by 2014. A range of other projects have resource consents, but no decisions to proceed have been made and many projects are on hold. There is a risk that many consented projects will not proceed at all as a result of economic factors or availability of fuel. There is a need for new generation projects to ensure that the combined supply meets the expectations for demand growth for this period and beyond.
4 Demand fell slightly in 2008 as a result of electricity savings (arising from a public conservation campaign during a period of extreme low hydro inflows) and fell again in 2009 following equipment failure at the Rio-Tinto Aluminum Smelter at Tiwai Point. However, demand rebounded relatively strongly in 2010.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 15
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 2.1: Electricity consumption by sector and by region in 2010 (MED, 2011).
The annual energy contribution of the CHWF is expected to be between 1,500 GWh and 3,000 GWh per annum. A project the size of the CHWF will provide a significant contribution to meeting the additional requirements for generation, and will make a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth.
Genesis Energy considers that it is critical that the supply of electricity matches demand, and given the steady increase in demand, and shortage of committed generation projects, there is a need for more generation.
2.2.2 The Importance of a Secure Electricity Supply Electricity is an essential input for modern lifestyles, and for commercial and industrial activity. As illustrated in Figure 2.2, electricity generally accounts for a quarter of annual end-use energy consumption in New Zealand, second only to oil (which includes transportation fuels) among sources of delivered energy. Industrial, commercial and domestic activities are all dependent on electricity, including manufacturing, retail, health services, transportation, lighting, water supply and wastewater treatment and disposal. Accordingly, electricity plays a vital role in New Zealand society. As is highlighted during power outages (for example, during storm
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 16
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects events, accidents, maintenance requirements, or other emergency situations), a secure supply of electricity is critical for economic and social well-being.
600
500
400
300 PJ per annum 200
100
0
Oil Gas Coal Geothermal Direct Use Other Renewables Electricity
Figure 2.2: Total consumer energy in New Zealand (1990 – 2010) (MED, 2011).
2.2.3 Matters Affecting Future Supply Options Overall Policy Framework
Reducing greenhouse gases and sustainably meeting energy needs through the increased use of renewable energy have been cornerstone priorities for central Government over a number of years. This commitment to renewable energy is clearly established through:
The National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011 which took effect in May 2011. The overarching objective of the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation is:5
“To recognise the national significance of renewable electricity generation activities by providing for the development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of new and existing renewable electricity generation activities, such that the proportion of New Zealand’s electricity generated from renewable energy sources increases to a level that meets or exceeds the New Zealand Government’s national target for renewable electricity generation.”
5 New Zealand Government National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011, pg 4.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 17
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The 2003 Sustainable Development Programme of Action, of which a principal component is the development of additional renewable generation capacity.
The Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Act (2004), which recognises the importance of renewable energy to New Zealand’s climate change response, and requires that particular regard be given to its importance when making decisions under the RMA.
New Zealand has signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (often referred to as the “Kyoto Protocol”) committing the country to reducing greenhouse gas emission levels. The Government has recently gazetted (31 March 2011) a 2050 target for greenhouse gas emissions to be 50% below the level they were at in 1990. This has implications for non-renewable electricity generation, particularly as the Emissions Trading Scheme (“ETS”) has increased the operating costs associated with thermal generation.
The Draft New Zealand Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (MED, 2010), which identifies increasing renewable generation capacity as being central to addressing New Zealand’s main energy challenges. These challenges include, responding to the risks of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and use of energy, and delivering clean, secure, affordable energy, while treating the environment responsibly. The 2010 draft is consistent with the Government's proposed primary statement of energy policy set out in the 2007 New Zealand Energy Strategy.
It is clear from this overall policy framework that a clear policy preference for renewable generation will remain in the foreseeable future. This is endorsed in the preamble to the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation, which states:6
“In considering the risks and opportunities associated with various electricity futures, central government has reaffirmed the strategic target that 90 per cent of electricity generated in New Zealand should be derived from renewable energy sources by 2025 (based on delivered electricity in an average hydrological year) providing this does not affect security of supply.”
Local authorities are required to give effect to provisions for renewable energy generation in regional policy statements, and regional and district plans made under the RMA. A number of regional and local authorities (including MWRC, GWRC, TDC and MDC) have provided for renewable energy development and use within their own planning provisions. Renewable energy policy at the regional and local level in respect to the CHWF is addressed in Section 8 of this AEE.
6 New Zealand Government National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011, pg 3.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 18
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Generation Options
There is a range of possible generation options available to increase future electricity supply, including wind, hydro, gas-fired, geothermal, coal, and new generation options such as solar, wave and tidal.
New Zealand is recognised as having a world class wind resource, because of the country’s geographic position spanning the “Roaring Forties” latitudes (Concept Consulting, 2011). While wind generation has grown substantially in the last 15 years, it is still relatively new to New Zealand and makes up a small proportion of total electricity supply (just under 4% in 2010) (MED, 2011).
Over the last 15 years larger scale electricity generation developments in New Zealand have typically been gas-fired, however the outlook for gas supply in New Zealand has changed significantly, especially since gas production from the Maui gas field has declined.
For other options, such as hydroelectricity generation which currently provides the majority of New Zealand’s electricity supply, there is potential for further development, however, the opportunity for new large scale hydroelectricity projects is limited.
Some options, such as geothermal generation, can only occur at a commercial scale where significant geothermal resources are located, such as in close proximity to the North Island’s central plateau.
The technical performance of all generation types has improved, particularly so for some technologies. Over the last 10-15 years there have been major advances in gas- fired Turbines and wind Turbines, with sizeable efficiency, reliability and cost improvements being achieved. Meanwhile, it will be some time before emerging renewable generation options, such as utility scale solar, are commercially viable in New Zealand. Technologies that may have greater commercial potential in future include wave and tidal power, with resource consents having recently been granted for a tidal project in the Kaipara Harbour.
The CHWF Project
Genesis Energy operates a diverse portfolio of renewable and non-renewable electricity generation assets. In terms of future planning, Genesis Energy considers both renewable and non-renewable generation options are required to meet the increasing demand for electricity while contributing to security of supply. Genesis Energy is also committed to contributing to New Zealand’s climate change obligations. Taking into account electricity supply and demand requirements, security of supply, overall policy framework and generation options for meeting future requirements, wind generation is likely to form a more significant part of future electricity generation in New Zealand than it does now.
While the other generation options outlined above will play a role in providing electricity in New Zealand, the CHWF as proposed by Genesis Energy, will make a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth and to enabling the generation of 90% of electricity needs from renewable sources. The CHWF is consistent with the Government’s overall policy framework to secure energy supply with the development
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 19
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects of renewable electricity generation projects, and aligns with the Government’s policy towards reducing climate changing greenhouse gas emissions.
Currently, wind generation contributes less than 4% of national electricity generation. The CHWF will help reduce security of supply risks by providing further diversification in electricity generation supply.
2.3 Development Approach
Genesis Energy has used both traditional methods and advanced modelling techniques to identify potential wind farms sites around New Zealand, and as a result identified the area to the east of Pahiatua and Eketahuna as being suitable for wind farm development.
In selecting any site for further investigation and the development of a wind farm, several technical matters need to be considered. While every potential location for a wind farm has its unique challenges, it is generally accepted that a site which has the following general attributes will be a suitable candidate for wind generation at a commercial scale:
Availability of a good wind resource (typically an average wind speed greater than 8 m/s, preferably with low turbulence);
Availability of land suitable for the construction of Turbines;
Distant from large population centres;
Practical access for transporting equipment and materials to the site;
Ability to connect to the national grid; and
Avoids sensitive environmental areas such as outstanding natural features and landscapes, and protected areas.
Genesis Energy considered each of these matters in selecting the CHWF Site and the development of the CHWF project. Each matter is described further below.
2.3.1 Wind Resource Areas with wind speeds sufficient for commercial wind farm projects in New Zealand are found in a number of locations, including the Wellington and Wairarapa Regions, although the air turbulence at some sites means that they are less suited to Turbines than others. The CHWF Site was first identified by Genesis Energy in early 2008 as a result of a national site screening assessment using spatial modelling tools to identify likely areas of higher wind speeds, and where turbulence factors also favoured wind generation.
In 2008, an initial assessment of the area identified by the wind modelling work was undertaken, incorporating more specific desktop studies of wind modelling and terrain, along with site visits to assess the potential for development of a wind farm in the area.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 20
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
This initial desktop study led to implementation of a more detailed wind monitoring assessment of the Site commencing in 2009.
The preliminary assessment for the CHWF project was supported by wind monitoring across the Site using data from six 80 m monitoring masts associated recording equipment installed across the Site by Genesis Energy in 2009 (see Figure 1.2) and Light Detection and Ranging (“LiDAR”) surveys (a ground based method of wind monitoring that can be correlated with the monitoring mast data). The wind measurements have been used to understand site specific wind conditions. Subsequent modeling and analysis has enabled identification of potential Turbine models and areas for Turbine placement, as well as an estimation of potential net energy production.
A large proportion of the proposed Turbine sites have an average wind speed of more than 9 m/s, and some over 10 m/s, meaning that the wind resource across the Site arguably represents one of the best wind energy resources in the world for wind energy generation. The wind speed and conditions at the CHWF Site predominantly fit within International Electrotechnical Commission (“IEC”) Class IA parameters7.
2.3.2 Suitable Land Availability The CHWF Site consists of a series of predominantly north-west facing ridgelines, suitably aligned to the wind resource. The landforms are elevated, but not dominant, over the surrounding area.
Overall, the topography of the area allows for practical access to be developed for construction purposes, and is suitable for Turbine placement. Some geotechnical features, such as localised land instability, were identified in preliminary assessment work and have been incorporated into technical studies and design work. These features of the Site can be readily managed through appropriate engineering design and construction techniques.
2.3.3 Distance from Large Population Centres The CHWF Site is located in a remote area that is relatively sparsely populated. The surrounding area is rural in nature, comprising land used for primary production. There are no large population centres located close to the Site. Masterton (population 18,000), Pahiatua (population 2,600) and Eketahuna (population 460) are the larger townships located within 30 km of the CHWF Site (see Figure 1.1). Six small rural settlements are located in or around the Site, including, Tinui, Pongaroa, Makuri, Alfredton, Tiraumea, and Bideford. Combined, these small rural settlements have a population base of approximately 500 people (Statistics New Zealand, 2006).
2.3.4 Accessibility The Turbine components to be used for the CHWF (i.e. blades, tower sections and nacelle) are currently manufactured overseas and will need to be shipped to New Zealand. A suitable OW/OD Route has been identified to transport these components from the Port of Napier, for the most part via a major arterial route (State Highway 2
7 The IEC identifies a range of wind Turbine classes based on the wind resource, with Class IA being the highest wind speed class.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 21
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
(“SH2”)) to the Site, while routes from other ports may also be suitable. Other External Roads in the vicinity of the CHWF are suitable for Site access for Heavy Commercial Vehicles (“HCV’s”) and other construction traffic, although may require some upgrading (such as curve straightening, widening or sealing).
Internal Roads on private land will also be required to access the Turbine locations within the Site. Where possible, existing farm access tracks will be used, although such tracks will need to be upgraded (including widening, sealing and/or strengthening in some places), to enable transportation of the Turbine components to the required locations within the Site.
Overall, appropriate access to the CHWF Site can be achieved in a relatively straightforward manner. Section 4.3.5 of this document provides specific detail relating to Site access.
2.3.5 Ability to Connect to the National Grid The electricity generated by the CHWF can be connected to the national grid at an appropriate location. A 220kV External Transmission Line, potentially up to 70 km long, is required for this connection. It is likely that the CHWF will connect to the national grid at the Transpower 220kV line near Bunnythorpe, although the details of the External Transmission Line have not yet been finalised and are subject to discussions with Transpower. This connection feeds electricity into the central North Island region.
2.3.6 Avoidance of Sensitive Environmental Areas The CHWF Site and immediate surrounds are not identified in the GWRC, MWRC, TDC or MDC planning documents as being within or part of an outstanding natural feature or landscape. The nearest identified outstanding natural feature or landscape to the Site is the Puketoi Range in the Tararua District. The skyline of the Puketoi Range when viewed from the west has been identified as the key visual/scenic characteristic of this range. Tinui Taipos, which is located some 7.5 km to the south of the CHWF Site, is also identified as an outstanding natural feature in the Combined Wairarapa District Plan 2011 (“Combined Plan”).
Most of the CHWF Site is covered with exotic pasture used for pastoral farming, although there is some remnant indigenous vegetation at the Site. There are five DOC (“DOC”) administered reserves located within 2 km of the CHWF Site, and 19 Queen Elizabeth II (“QEII”) Open Space covenants located within or close to the CHWF Site. These areas are not located within the construction area for the CHWF and will continue to be avoided through careful project design.8 Further description of the CHWF design process is provided in Section 4 of this document.
2.4 Summary
There is a clear need for additional generation capacity in New Zealand. The need is particularly acute for capacity of the kind that is renewable, not impacted by
8 A survey anomaly has been identified at QEII covenant (5/07/635) on Castle Hill Road. This is currently being resolved between Genesis Energy, QEII and MDC.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 22
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects hydrological conditions, is not dependent on the availability of additional gas supplies, does not have high greenhouse gas emissions, and contributes to a secure supply through diversification of generation plant. Development of wind generation options is ideally suited to meet these requirements. The CHWF clearly falls within this framework and will provide a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth.
The excellent wind resource available at the CHWF Site, in combination with suitable topography for access and construction purposes, location in a remote area that is relative sparsely populated, ability to connect to the national grid, and the relative scarcity of environmentally sensitive sites within, or in close proximity to the Site, means that the CHWF Site provides an appropriate opportunity for development of a wind farm. This is supported by environmental assessments indicating no significant impediments to the granting of resource consents (detailed in Section 5 of this document). Overall, the CHWF Site is an appropriate location for a wind farm.
Project Rationale Section 2 – page 23
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This section of the AEE sets out the background environmental setting of the CHWF. The local environment is outlined in terms of the social, cultural, physical and ecological characteristics of the area. This describes the environmental context in which the actual, potential and cumulative effects that may occur as a result of the CHWF can be assessed. These effects are discussed in detail in Section 5 of this document.
3.1 Social Setting
The CHWF is located in the south-east of the Tararua District and the north-east of the Masterton District in the northern Wairarapa, within the Manawatu-Wanganui and Greater Wellington Regions respectively (see Figure 1.1). Tararua District has a population of 17,344 and Masterton District has a population of 22,822 (BERL, 2011). Both districts have relatively static populations. Over the last 10 years (2000 to 2010) the population in Masterton District has grown at 0.1% per annum whereas, in Tararua District, the population has declined by 0.5% per annum.
Masterton District comprises one large town (Masterton, population 18,000) which is the largest town in the Wairarapa, and a large rural area which stretches from the Tararua Ranges in the west to the Pacific Ocean in the east. Masterton is a service centre for the District’s agricultural sector, although other business, retail and population services are prevalent within the town. Masterton is the largest township located within 30 km of the CHWF Site.
Tararua District comprises a number of small urban settlements with Dannevirke (population 5,500) the main centre for the District. Other urban centres include Norsewood, Woodville, Pahiatua and Eketahuna. Pahiatua (population 2,600) and Eketahuna (population 460) are nearest to the CHWF Site, located approximately 20 km to the west on SH2 (see Figure 1.1) (Statistics New Zealand, 2006). These settlements are considered to be service centres for the wider agricultural sector, and include businesses associated with primary production, schools, healthcare facilities and wholesale/retail activity.
Both the Masterton and Tararua Districts are characterised by agriculture-based primary production, with the Primary sector accounting for almost a quarter of total employment across both Districts combined. More than two thirds of workers in the primary sector come from the Tararua District. Masterton District has a more balanced economy, comprising employment from a range of sectors. About 95% of Tararua District’s 400,000 ha is farmed, with sheep, beef and dairy the main types of farming. These represent 90% of all holdings and account for 99% of total stock units. Forestry is a growing industry with more than 13,000 ha planted in Pinus radiata, however pastoral farming continues to be the main economic activity.
The second largest sector for employment in the combined Tararua and Masterton Districts is wholesale and retail sector (21% of employment) followed by the manufacturing sector (9% of employment) (BERL, 2011). Accommodation, cafes and restaurants account for 4% of total employment.
The CHWF Site is located in a remote and relatively sparsely populated area of the Tararua and Masterton Districts. The Site and surrounding area is rural in nature with
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 24
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects extensive pasture areas. The land has been significantly modified and is currently used for agricultural activities. The predominant land use is pastoral farming (sheep and cattle) while several forestry blocks (predominantly Pinus radiata) are located in the south of the Site (see Plate 3.1).
Plate 3.1: Forestry block of Pinus radiata and pastoral grass in the CHWF Site.
Farm dwellings and other associated farm buildings and structures are distributed within and around the CHWF Site (see Figure 3.1). Nearby rural settlements include Tiraumea (2 km to the north), Alfredton (9 km to the west), Bideford (5fivekm to the south), Tinui (9 km to the south-east), and Pongaroa (9 km to the north-east) (see Figure 1.2). These rural settlements mainly provide rural population-based services, including schools, community halls, public domains, churches, convenience stores and golf courses.
The coastline is located approximately 13 km to the east of the Site and includes a number of small settlements that comprise both permanent and holiday homes. The population in settlements such as Castlepoint and Akitio increase significantly over the summer holiday period due to holidaymakers.
The area surrounding the CHWF Site has relatively low use in respect to recreation and tourism activities, and is generally considered remote. A limited number of adventure operations have been established as destinations in themselves. The main tourism and recreational activities in the vicinity of the CHWF are small-scale, such as back-packers, gardens and motorcycle tours, and are often a diversification of farming activities.
Few destinations are associated with any specific landscape feature except Castlepoint, which is located over 15 km from the CHWF Site. There is no landscape setting that serves as a visitor attraction in itself.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 25
Legend CHWF Site " CHWF Landowner Dwellings " External Dwellings " """ " " Turbine Corridor "" "" " 2km from Turbine Corridor """ " " " " " " 5km from Turbine Corridor " "" "" " Indicative Internal Roads " " "" 209 " " "" " " " " " " 397 " " " " " "" " " " " " "" 249 247 "" " 252 248 "" """ " " 255 256 " " "" " "400 " 258 " " " " " " 190 " " " ""189 " 188 " " "" " " " " 396 " 263" 186 """ " "" "" "" " " " " 265 407 " " " " " " 402 " "" " " "" " "" " "" " " " "" 403 " " " " "" " 167 " " " "" 168 " " " " 170 171 " " " 409 408" " " 185 " " " " "" "" "" " " " " " " " " 380 "" " " "" " 391 " " " " " " 378 " " " "" 377 379 " " " " " 392 " " " " " " "" """ " "" " " "" " " " " " " " 321 "" " " " " " 361" """ 359" " " " " " " 358 360 """ 405 "" " " 362 " " " " " "" " " " " " " " " " "" " "" " "" " "" " " " " " " " "" " " " " """ " " "" " " " " " "" " " "" " " " " " " " """ "" " " " """ " " " " "
03691.5 km
Figure 3.1: Dwellings located within and near the CHWF Site. Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Radio-communication and Telecommunication
A number of radio-communication and telecommunication services operate in and around the CHWF Site, including broadcast analogue and digital television and radio, fixed radio linking, aeronautical RADAR, land mobile VHF, cellular services and licensed and unlicensed broadband wireless access services. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the types of services that operate in and around the CHWF Site.
Table 3.1: Radio-communication services operating in the CHWF area (Kordia, 2011).
Type of service Services present in and around the CHWF Site Analogue terrestrial Residential dwellings that may have analogue television are located television throughout, and in close proximity to, the Site. The total number of analogue television receptions is not known, and similar assessments have found that at least 50% of rural dwellings receive digital satellite services (e.g. Sky, Freeview or TiVO). Fixed radio linking There are numerous fixed radio link services operating within the general vicinity of the CHWF, although only four pass through the Site. Telecom New Zealand Ltd and Juken New Zealand Ltd hold licenses for links which pass through the Site. Wide area These include broadband wireless, cellular, and emergency services. coverage services Four licensed mobile repeater services are operating within the CHWF Site. RADAR and The nearest aeronautical radio service is 9 km southwest of the Site at Aeronautical Radio Rangitumau. The nearest aeronautical RADAR service is over 35 km northwest of the Site at Ballance. AM/FM broadcast AM/FM radio broadcasts are received throughout the Site and radio surrounding area.
Aviation
The nearest airports to the CHWF Site that provide scheduled international or domestic flight services are Palmerston North International Airport, located to the north of Palmerston North, and Masterton Airport (Hood Aerodrome) located to the south of Masterton. These airfields are located approximately 50 km and 25 km from the Site respectively.
Aerial topdressing is commonly used in the wider area for the application of fertiliser, given that the hilly terrain restricts the application by land-based methods to flatter areas. A number of private airstrips are scattered throughout the wider area, which are primarily used for topdressing operations.
3.2 Cultural Setting 3.2.1 Historical Background Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne are the two iwi who Genesis Energy understand hold mana whenua in the Wairarapa Region. In geographical terms, Ngati Kahungunu has the second largest tribal rohe in New Zealand, extending from the Wharerata Ranges
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 27
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects in northern Hawke’s Bay down to Cape Palliser (the southern-most tip of the North Island)9.
Ngati Kahungunu is organised into six taiwhenua groupings, namely: Wairoa; Whanganui a Orutu; Heretaunga; Tamatea; Tamaki Nui A Rua and Wairarapa. Each taiwhenua is governed by local elected marae / hapu representatives. The CHWF Site falls within the Wairarapa and Tamaki Nui A Rua taiwhenua areas.
For Rangit ne, the Wairarapa forms part of a wider homeland that includes the Manawatu and Horowhenua Regions. There are four takiwa (branches) of Rangitaane based in the Manawatu, Tararua, Wairau and Wairarapa areas. Although the four takiwa are representative of the same tribe they all remain autonomous in their own areas and are distinct in the development of their respective hapu and areas of mana whenua. The land blocks which cover the majority of the CHWF Site are known as the Castlepoint blocks, and were once covered in lowland forest stretching from the Mangamauku River (an upper tributary of the Tukituki) to Kopuaranga, just north of Masterton and east to the Puketoi Range. This forest was known as Te Tapere-nui-a- Whatonga (Forty and Seventy Mile Bush) and was important to Rangit ne for spiritual and physical sustenance (Rangit ne o Wairarapa Inc, 2011). Today there is a small remnant of this forest left approximately 20 km to the west of the CHWF Site, known as Pukaha (Mount Bruce).
Rangit ne consider the area of Te-Tapere-nui-a-Whatonga is considered to be a site of significance as it was utilised it as a pataka (food store) and therefore was a vital part of Rangit ne existence. Many waahi tapu sites have been found by local farmers and from the writings of Keith Cairns (Rangit ne o Wairarapa Inc, 2011). These sites have been listed with the New Zealand Archaeological Association (“NZAA”) and are not located within or near the CWHF Site.
Consultation with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne representatives has been undertaken by Genesis Energy (see Section 7.2.5), more specifically with the following:
Rangit ne o Wairarapa;
Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa;
Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua; and
Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua.
Cultural Impact Assessments (“CIA’s”) have been prepared by Rangit ne o Wairarapa and Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa, and is currently being prepared by Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua, while a Cultural Values Assessment (“CVA”) is being prepared by Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua. The two CIA’s and two letters provided by Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua and Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua in respect to the CIA and CVA they are preparing respectively, are provided in Volume 4 (Section 4) of this document.
9 http://www.kahungunu.iwi.nz/index2.html
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 28
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
3.2.2 Archaeology and Heritage Archaeological sites in the wider Wairarapa area are generally concentrated on the east coast, with small clusters of archaeological sites around the Akitio and Owahanga Rivers, and between the Mataikona River and Castlepoint, as shown in Figure 3.2.
Recorded archaeological sites are generally middens, earth ovens and potential habitation terraces, with a number of pa sites and occupation terraces located near river mouths. Other features that have historically been found in the coastal area include moa bones, charcoal, jewellery, fish hooks, stone tools and human remains, reflecting a mixture of permanent and seasonal settlement.
A detailed archaeological assessment of the CHWF Site has been undertaken by Clough and Associates (2011), including both a desktop analysis and field surveys. The Archaeological Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 5) of this document. The assessment did not purport to interpret the cultural significance of any sites; rather to identify the sites and describe their characteristics and features.
There is little recorded physical/archaeological evidence of Maori occupation inland (west) of the CHWF Site in the Wairarapa Valley between the Masterton and Pahiatua Basins, some 25 km from the CHWF Site. It is likely that the area was visited and used by Maori in the past to gather resources, or they may have travelled through the area en route to other areas, even though there is little surviving evidence of such activities. Evidence of late 19th century and early 20th century European logging and farming activities are more common elements in the inland hill country of the CHWF Site.
No known or recorded archaeological sites on the NZAA database are located within, or in the immediate vicinity of, the CHWF Site.
Clough and Associates (2011) reviewed background literature and archaeological reports relevant to the area, including a summary of the archaeology of the Wairarapa Region incorporating a number of unpublished sources (such as unconfirmed information obtained from landowners in the Wairarapa Valley in the 1960’s) (McFadgen, 2003). This unconfirmed information indicated two possible pa sites are located in and near the CHWF Site, as shown in Figure 3.3.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 29
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.2: Indicative map showing recorded archaeological sites around the CHWF Site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 30
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.3: Location of potential pa sites in or near the CHWF.
The northern possible pa site is located approximately 2 km west and north of Turbine Cluster B and C respectively, and outside the Site. The southern possible pa site is located in the middle of Turbine Cluster E. A ground search of both potential pa sites did not locate any evidence of these features. In consultation with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne (see Section 7.2.5), and as outlined in the two CIA’s completed, no evidence has been found in respect to these pa sites, or any other sites of cultural significance located within the CHWF Site. Most waahi tapu sites are situated close to sources of food along the coastline or beside rivers and streams (Rangit ne o Wairarapa Inc., 2011).
No other archaeological sites were identified during the field surveys.
Most heritage features in the area are located more than 5 km from the CHWF Site. Two historic woolsheds (Annedale Station Woolshed and the Manawa Station Woolshed) are identified as ‘Heritage Items’ in Appendix 1.7 of the Combined Plan. Annedale Station Woolshed is located on Annedale Road and Manawa Station Woolshed is on Manawa Road outside the south-eastern part of the CHWF Site (see Figure 3.4). Neither buildings are located near the Turbine Corridor or other CHWF infrastructure. Manawa Station Woolshed is on the OW/OD Route but will not be affected by OW/OD Vehicles during the construction of the CHWF. No other known historical features are located within or in close vicinity to the CHWF Site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 31
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.4: Location of historic woolsheds between Turbine Cluster E and F.
3.3 Physical and Ecological Setting 3.3.1 General Site Characteristics As outlined in Section 3.1, the CHWF Site is located in a rural area characterised by undulating hill country, steep hills predisposed to erosion and a distinctive valley network that extends throughout the wider area. The hills follow a pronounced north- east/south-west alignment running parallel to the Tararua Range which is located approximately 40 km to the west of the Site.
The distant Tararua Range to the west, which forms part of the North Island axial ranges, along with the Puketoi and Waewaepa Ranges to the east, dominate the wider landscape. These visually prominent ranges are characterised by high elevations (between 700 – 900 m above sea level (“asl”)) and are relatively unmodified. The elevation of the CHWF Site is less prominent, being between 400 – 500 m asl. To the east, the coast is approximately 13 km from the CHWF Site at its closest point. The topography of the CHWF Site varies from broad pasture dominated hilltops with occasional stands of pine trees (see Plate 3.2) to narrow steep gully systems that dissect the Site and contain patches of remnant or regenerating indigenous vegetation.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 32
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Plate 3.2: Example of typical vegetation cover (pastoral grass) in the CHWF Site, with occasional stands of native vegetation and pine forest in the distance.
The area experiences warm summers and moderate winters, and droughts may occur in spring and summer. Average annual rainfall is 1,137 mm at the Castle Hill Road gauge (located between Turbine Clusters D and F), and 1,263 mm at the Alfredton gauge (west of the CHWF Site). Regional hydrological monitoring sites are shown in Figure B1 of Appendix B (Volume 2).
Six wind anemometer monitoring masts were erected by Genesis Energy across the Site in 2009 to measure wind speed and other meteorological conditions. As outlined in Section 2.3.1, monitoring of the wind resource using masts and LiDAR has confirmed that there is an excellent wind resource in most parts of the Site. Air temperatures recorded at the top of the monitoring masts are mild, ranging from -1.1°C to 26°C.
Geology
The two main groups of geological units in the CHWF area, as shown on Figures B2 and B3 of Appendix B (Volume 2), are:
Generally weak (soft) Tertiary age mudstone, siltstone and sandstone – this unit varies from massive mudstone/siltstone to well bedded sandstone and siltstone, with more competent sandstone and some fossiliferous sandstone and shell limestone beds.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 33
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Stronger greywacke-type rocks – this unit comprises fractured sandstone and alternating sandstone and siltstone, with locally fossiliferous mudstone. This occurs along the main north-south ridgeline in the south-west of the CHWF Site.
Alluvial valley-floor and terrace deposits being gravel dominated with minor to interbedded sand and silt are present but comprise a minor part of the geology of the Site. Highly permeable limestone rock is present outside the CHWF Site to the north- west, but within the CHWF Site no limestone deposits have been recorded during site investigations by Pattle Delamore Partners (“PDP”) (2011b). Any limestone that may be present will occur as minor beds and fossiliferous/calcareous rock within mudstone and sandstone dominated units.
The main soil types (top 1 m of soil) within the CHWF Site include:
Brown soils – relatively stable with a well developed particle structure, located across most of the Site; and
Pallic soils – weak structure with low permeability, occurs in the southern part of Turbine Cluster A, most of Turbine Cluster B, and small parts of Turbine Clusters C and D. Pallic soils are susceptible to erosion because of their high potential for slaking and dispersion.
These hill and steepland soils vary in depth and drought properties according to the parent material. They have low to moderate natural fertility, variable water holding capacity and can be prone to erosion.
The typical grain size of soils (sand, silt, clay or loam – a mix of all three) across the Site is shown in Figure B4 of Appendix B (Volume 2). Soils across the Site include:
Silt, or silt over sand – Turbine Cluster A and parts of Turbine Clusters B, C, D, E and G.
Loam, loam over sand - Turbine Cluster F and parts of Turbine Clusters C, D, E and G.
Loam over clay – covering parts of Turbine Clusters B and C.
The dominant forms of erosion across the Site are soil slippage (Turbine Clusters A, B and G) and earth flows (Turbine Clusters B, C, D and E), and to a lesser extent slumping (Turbine Cluster F) and tunnel gully erosion (parts of Turbine Clusters D, E and G). Erosion severity is “slight” over much of Turbine Clusters B, D, E and G, while there are areas of “negligible”, “moderate” and “severe” erosion severity in Turbine Clusters A, C, E and F.
The CHWF Site is an agricultural setting, therefore there is the possibility of old offal pits, sheep dip sites, rubbish pits, metals and other contaminants from pesticide/fertiliser use, spills of fuel or other contaminants from storage tanks, effluent pits, and/or asbestos in buried building materials being located within the Site. However, during the various environmental assessments and consultation with CHWF Landowners undertaken for this application, no evidence of contaminated land was identified.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 34
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
3.3.2 Landscape Landscape Context
As noted previously, the CHWF Site and immediate surrounds are not identified in the GWRC, MWRC, TDC or MDC planning documents as being within, or part of, an outstanding natural feature or landscape. The nearest outstanding landscape is the Puketoi Range in the Tararua District, located to the north-west of the CHWF Site.
The CHWF is located in an area of extensively faulted, tilted and uplifted hill country, that extends along the east coast of the lower North Island, from Hawke’s Bay in the north to Cape Palliser in the south. This hill country follows a pronounced north-east, south-west axis that parallels the Tararua and the Rimutaka Ranges to the west. The combination of rapid uplift of the underlying materials and softer rocks has resulted in a landscape characterised by shattered and often steep hills.
The CHWF is located on a mix of elevated hill country dissected by narrow steep gully systems subject to erosion (see Plate 3.3). The slopes are dominated by grazed pasture, with hilltops relatively bare of woody vegetation, except for smaller areas of exotic plantation forestry and limited remnant or regenerating native vegetation, as shown in Plate 3.4. Some common pest plant species such as gorse are also present. The hills provide a distant landscape backdrop from low elevation positions in the surrounding valleys.
The open and expansive rural character of the landscape contains a series of smaller, well defined landscapes associated with the valley network that extends throughout the area. In terms of rural character, the CHWF Site is a well managed rural working landscape typical of the northern Wairarapa hill country.
In order to place the CHWF in its wider landscape setting, landscapes defined in the Wairarapa Landscape Study were used to interpolate and extend the character areas into the adjoining Tararua District (Boffa Miskell, 2011a). In the context of the wider landscape setting defined in the Wairarapa Landscape Study10 (Boffa Miskell, 2010), the CHWF is located within an area exhibiting four different and distinctive landscape types (see Figure B5, Appendix B, Volume 2), including:
Ranges.
Hill country.
Lowlands and valleys.
Coastal hill country.
These landscape types are detailed further below. The CHWF is confined and contained exclusively within the inland hill country.
10 Currently being undertaken by GWRC, MDC, Carterton District Council and South Wairarapa District Council.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 35
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Plate 3.3: Elevated hill country with narrow steep gully slopes and grazed pasture across the CHWF Site from Rangitumau.
Plate 3.4: Grazed pasture on hilltops with remnants of indigenous vegetation in gullies (Waitawhiti Road).
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 36
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Ranges
The Tararua Range is predominantly covered in native forest and forms part of the North Island axial ranges. Together with the Puketoi and Waewaepa Ranges to the east, these are distinctive and prominent landforms within the District. The ranges are relatively undeveloped or settled, with substantial areas of indigenous vegetation.
Hill Country
The hill country landscape type in which the CHWF is located, generally aligns north- east/south-west and extends 70 km from the northern end of the Puketoi Range to near Bideford in the south. The hills form the foothills of the Puketoi Range for about half their extent to the north. The southern end of the foothills separates the catchments of the Tararua and Masterton Districts. The hill country is higher in elevation than the adjoining valley and lowland hill systems to the north, west and east, ranging in height to between 200 m and 500 m asl. Hill country is characterised by a network of steep sided gullies and valleys, often containing remnant or regenerating native vegetation (see Plate 3.3). Pastoral farming is the dominant land use, although large areas of exotic forestry and smaller areas of regenerating native and exotic vegetation are also present in the southern part of the CHWF Site.
Lowlands and Valleys
This landscape type is characterised by flat valley floors enclosed by low hills. The elevation ranges between 150 m asl in the valley floors to 350 m asl at the hill tops. Grazed pasture dominates the slopes and hilltops that are relatively bare of trees (with the exception of woodlot and production forest areas). Within the flat valley floors pastoral activity is also evident as well as public roads, farmsteads, houses and small rural settlements (see Plate 3.5).
Coastal Hill Country
The steep, rugged, dissected coastal hills are a continuation of the coastal hills to the south on the Wairarapa coast, and run parallel to the coast separating the inland valley systems from the coast. Several inland catchments drain to the coast, via steep sided winding river valleys, with narrow river flood plains. Extensive grazing is the predominant land use within the coastal hill country, with some areas of exotic pine forest south of the TDC/MDC boundary.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 37
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Plate 3.5: Lowlands and valleys landscape type in the CHWF Site (Manawa Road).
3.3.3 Existing Noise Environment The CHWF Site is rural in character and does not have significant industrial noise sources. The noise environment is dominated by rural production activities and natural sounds typical of a rural environment, with some traffic noise from nearby roads.
The existing noise environment in the vicinity of the CHWF was established using the method recommended by New Zealand Standard 6808:2010 “Acoustics – Wind farm noise” (“NZS6808”), as detailed in the Noise Effects Assessment (Marshall Day Acoustics, 2011) provided in Volume 3 (Section 5) to this AEE. NZS6808 recognises that noise limits in respect to operational Turbines are dependent on the existing background noise environment, and therefore provides specific methods that reflect the ambient noise environment as a function of wind conditions.
In accordance with NZS6808, background sound level measurements were taken at “noise sensitive”11 locations where the sound level of the CHWF is predicted to exceed 35dBA sometimes under certain conditions. The locations where background noise measurements have been taken are shown on Figure 3.5. Noise predictions from several Turbine Layouts and associated Turbine models were used to define the 35dBA noise contour (discussed further in Section 5.4). Field measurements of background noise were taken at 10 minute intervals over several periods of two – three weeks each in 2010 (both day and night).
11 “Noise Sensitive Locations” are defined in NZS6808 as locations where noise sensitive activities occur, associated with a habitable space or education space in a building not on the wind farm site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 38
Legend CHWF Site Turbine Corridor " CHWF Landowner Dwellings " External Dwellings 397 "
258 "
190 "
265 "
403 "
171 " 185 "
377 379 " "
"1024 Manawa Road
"153 Wairiri Road
02461 km
Figure 3.5: Location of background noise measurement sites. Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The background noise data has been correlated with estimated wind speed for the same period at the nearest indicative Turbine location. Examples of background noise measurements from four representative sites are shown in Figures 3.6 to 3.9.
y = 0.00022973x4 0.01322014x3 + 0.20813030x2 + 0.86459842x + 18.20248885 60 R² = 0.78507141
50
40
30
20 Monitored LA90 (10min) (dB) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Figure 3.6: Background noise at External Dwelling X397.
The existing background noise level at higher wind speeds at residence X397 (see Figure 3.6) is dominated by wind noise in local and distant trees, and by occasional household activity and traffic on Rimu Road.
4 3 2 60 y = 0.00011118x 0.00309689x 0.07702823x + 3.70925894x + 10.00767257 R² = 0.74536235
50
40
30
20 Monitored LA90 (10min) (dB) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Figure 3.7: Background noise at External Dwelling X185.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 40
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
As shown on Figure 3.7, the existing background noise level at X185 is dominated by wind noise in local and distant trees. Little farming activity noise was observed.
60 y = 0.00055434x4 0.02894140x3 + 0.50300188x2 1.83272995x + 24.84146632 R² = 0.66007859 50
40
30
20 Monitored LA90 (10min) (dB) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Figure 3.8: Background noise at External Dwelling X377.
The existing background noise level at residence X377 (see Figure 3.8) is dominated by wind noise in local and distant trees at elevated wind speeds, and during daytime hours may include noise from farming activities. Logging operations in adjacent forestry land occurred during these measurements, and this activity commences early in the morning during the nominal night-time period.
60 y = 0.00037399x4 0.01994083x3 + 0.36383654x2 1.54656237x + 26.97650190 R² = 0.31759783 50
40
30
20 Monitored LA90 (10min) (dB) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Figure 3.9: Background noise at 153 Wairiri Road.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 41
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The existing background noise level at 153 Wairiri Road (see Figure 3.9) is dominated by wind noise in local and distant trees, and potentially a very low level contribution from distant watercourses during the winter month when measurements were taken. During daytime hours farm activity noise, including stock and dogs, as well as birds contributed to the noise environment. Logging operations in adjacent forestry land occurred during these measurements, and this activity commences early in the morning during the nominal night-time period.
Overall, the existing environment of the CHWF Site is rural in character, with small settlements and no significant industrial activity. The background noise levels measured indicate a typical rural environment, with relatively low traffic noise at night, but generally experiencing elevated noise levels during the day from rural farm activities (including stock and dogs), wind noise through local and distant trees, and birds. At all times wind speed influences noise levels, with no areas significantly shielded from wind noise.
3.3.4 Roading and Traffic The location of the CHWF Site in the road network, External Road classifications, and the existing traffic environment is outlined below, and described in more detail in the Transportation Effects Assessment (Traffic Design Group (“TDG”) (2011)) provided in Volume 3 (Section 6) of this document.
Location in the Road Network
Turbines and other imported equipment are proposed to be transported to the CHWF Site from the Port of Napier along the OW/OD Route detailed in Section 4.3.1, although other ports have been assessed and are suitable. Napier is the closest suitable port to the CHWF and is connected to the Site by a major arterial route (State Highway 50(A) and then State Highway 2). The OW/OD Route then uses local roads to the CHWF Site. Construction traffic (such as vehicles for transporting dump trucks, bulldozers, excavators, loaders, and construction personnel) will utilise the OW/OD Route as well as the Construction Traffic Route to access the Site.
External Road Classification
External Roads are classified in the TDC and MDC within the road heirachy defined in the relevant District plans as follows:
Strategic or Primary arterials – state highways and major bypass routes, the backbone of the network, linking the Wairarapa with the rest of the country.
District arterials (MDC) and Secondary (District) Arterials (TDC) – key District roads of considerable importance to the local economy, linking communities within and between parts of the Districts.
Collector roads – roads or routes within or between population centres and activity areas that collect traffic from local roads and feed through to arterial routes.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 42
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Local roads – predominantly provide access to properties.
External Roads that will provide access for construction and operational traffic from their origin to the CHWF are classified as District / Secondary (District) Arterial, Collector Roads or Local Roads, as outlined in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: External Road classifications.
District Road Name Classification Route 52 Secondary (District) Arterial Alfredton Road Secondary (District) Arterial Hamua Rongomai Road Local Pahiatua Road Secondary (District) Arterial Tararua Castle Hill Road Collector Kaitawa Road Collector Mangaone Valley Road Collector Waitawhiti Road Local Waihoki Valley Road Local Rakaunui Road / Gandys Road Local Rimu Road Local Ngarata Road Local Haunui Road Local Puketawa Road Local Daggs Road Local Wairiri Road Local Maringi Road Local Whangaehu Valley Road District Arterial Masterton Te Ore Ore Road District Arterial Te Ore Ore Bideford Road Collector Manawa Road Collector Masterton-Castle Point Road Secondary (District) Arterial Alfredton-Tinui Road Local
External Roads that will provide access to the CHWF Site have varying carriageway widths, as detailed in Table 3.3. The Secondary (District) Arterial and Collector roads are sealed two lane carriageways generally between 4 m to 6.5 m wide. Closer to the CHWF Site many of the External Roads become unsealed, more winding, with steeper grades and narrower carriageway widths.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 43
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.3: External Road dimensions in the vicinity of the CHWF Site.
Road Carriageway Widths (m) Length to External Road Name District Carriageway Site Typical Minimum Typical Access Maximum (km) Route 52 Tararua Sealed 26 (9.0) 4.2 6.6 5.7 - 5.8 Sealed / Rimu Road Tararua 4.3 3.0 4.5 3.0 – 3.5 Unsealed Pahiatua Road Tararua Sealed 1.0 5.1 7.5 5.1 – 7.0 Rakanui Road / Gandys Tararua Unsealed 1.35 3.0 3.9 3.0 – 3.2 Road Sealed / Castle Hill Road Tararua 14.5 3.3 6.0 4.0 - 5.0 Unsealed Sealed / Daggs Road Tararua 4.3 4.0 6.2 4.0 - 4.5 Unsealed Sealed / Daggs Road Masterton 2.0 4.0 4.4 4.0 - 4.4 Unsealed Alfredton Road Tararua Sealed 17.0 3.9 7.4 6.1 Sealed / Haunui Road Tararua 5.4 3.0 5.4 4.6 Unsealed Sealed / Waihoki Valley Road Tararua 2.0 3.2 5.4 3.2 Unsealed Sealed / Waitawhiti Road Tararua 11.6 3.6 6.0 4.8 Unsealed Kaitawa Road Tararua Sealed 5.3 5.1 6.6 5.7 Mangaone Valley Road Tararua Sealed 23.1 5.0 7.8 5.5 - 6.3 Ngarata Road Tararua Unsealed 2.8 4.0 6.0 4.0 – 5.0 Puketawa Road Tararua Unsealed 1.0 3.0 5.0 3.5 – 4.5 Sealed / Wairiri Road Masterton 8.6 4.0 4.5 4.0 Unsealed Maringi Road Masterton Unsealed 9.7 3.6 4.3 3.6 - 4.0 Whangaehu Valley Road Masterton Sealed 19.6 5.6 7.1 5.6 - 6.0 Sealed / Manawa Road Masterton 12.5 4.7 6.3 4.7 - 5.3 Unsealed Masterton-Castlepoint Masterton Sealed 41.6 4.0 7.3 6.5 Road Alfredton-Tinui Road Masterton Unsealed 12.5 4.0 4.8 4.0 Te Ore Ore Road Masterton Sealed 2.3 7.0 14.0 7.0 -14.0 Te Ore Ore Bideford Road Masterton Sealed 23.2 5.3 7.1 5.3 - 6.3
Traffic Activity External Roads
A range of uses and activities occur on External Roads, including:
Personal access and local resident travel;
School bus travel;
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 44
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Stock movement along or across the carriageway;
Recreational walking and exercise (due to no footpaths);
Emergency vehicle access to farm properties;
Logging truck movements;
Tourist, campervan and touring motorcycle movements, particularly on Route 52;
Equestrian movements;
Seasonal variations such as stock sales and fertiliser supplies to farms; and
Specific events such as motorsport rallies and cycle touring.
Some of these events and activities, such as specific events, are generally planned and co-ordinated with the relevant local authority, while other activities are recurring (school bus travel) or variable (for example, tourist and stock movements). Logging and forestry activities occur sporadically throughout the year, similarly school bus travel, road closures, events and cycle activities are important local activities and are described further below.
Logging Truck Movements
A considerable area of exotic forest is located to the south-east of the CHWF Site. Forest harvesting is a year round activity, with peak periods driven by export demand. Castle Hill Road is a key transportation route in relation to logging truck movements. While logging trucks are known to move in both directions along Castle Hill Road, the most common approach involves empty trucks entering the Site from the west, collecting a load and travelling east to Masterton via the Masterton-Castlepoint Road.
Forecasting of logging activity in the Wellington Region (predominantly the eastern areas) shows a predicted three to four fold increase over the next 10 years. Accordingly, the number of logging trucks using External Roads near the CHWF Site is expected to increase.
School Bus Travel
A small, but important component of the overall daily traffic volumes on External Roads (including SH2) is school bus traffic and local resident trips connecting with the school bus. Typical pick-up times are 7.30 am to 9.00 am and drop-off times are between 2.30 pm and 4.30 pm. Closer to the CHWF Site a school bus service operates from Alfredton, along Daggs Road, Castle Hill Road and Route 52, and occasionally along other External Roads.
In addition to the school bus movements, school children often wait at the side of the road, or are delivered to a common access point on the bus routes to be collected. At these collection points there is often a collection of parents with their children parked on the road side. This can at times constrain access for the short duration of their stay.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 45
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Road Closures, Events and Cyclic Activities
Road closures due to Council and community organised events, such as cycle races, occur periodically in the area. Events which occur on the External Roads to the CHWF Site include motor vehicle road races (the “Dunlop Targa” and the National Rally Championship “Rally Wairarapa”), and the “Trust House Cycle Classic”. The Dunlop Targa and Rally Wairarapa events involve road closures around the CHWF Site.
In addition to these main events, trail rides and horse treks occur on an ad hoc basis, and traffic control is limited to advance warning signage.
Other cyclic activities relate to the farming operations in the CHWF area, and add seasonal traffic (truck) demands onto External Roads, such as stock movement along or across roadways, ram sales and mustering (November), lamb sales (February), and fertilising activities (autumn and spring).
Traffic Volumes on External Roads
State Highway traffic volumes are detailed in the Transportation Effects Assessment provided in Volume 3 (Section 6) of this document, and External Road traffic volumes are summarised below.
Table 3.4 summarises current traffic volumes (vehicles per day (“vpd”) and vehicles per hour (“vph”)) on External Roads to the CHWF Site (sourced from TDC and MDC records), and forecast traffic volumes for 2021 (based on projected growth rates for traffic in the NZTA Economic Evaluation Manual (“EMM”). As shown in Table 3.4, District roads such as Route 52, Alfredton Road, Castle Hill Road, Kaitawa Road, Te Ore Ore Road, Te Ore Ore Bideford Road, Masterton-Castlepoint Road and Whangaehu Valley Road, have average daily traffic flows greater than 100 vpd on sections closest to the State Highway network. All other External Roads generally carry flows under 100 vpd, with some of these roads being less than an equivalent two- lane road. Peak hour traffic volumes account for approximately 10% of daily traffic.
Forecasted traffic growth rates to 2021 for External Roads are based on EEM annual percentage arithmetic traffic growth rates for the Manawatu-Wanganui and Wellington Regions of 2%. If traffic volumes increase at a rate equivalent to those on the more urbanised arterials and State Highways, some links such as Te Ore Ore Road show some potential for a significant increase. However, construction traffic associated with the CHWF will not use this section of External Road, therefore the potential effects of traffic growth on External Roads is not relevant to the CHWF.
Traffic stream compositions obtained from NZTA, TDC and MDC show compositions vary throughout the day. Cars typically make up 75 – 85% of vehicle composition, while light commercial vehicles make up another 10%. HCV’s generally account for between 5 – 10% of the traffic mix. This is typical of other similar rural environments.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 46
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.4: Current and forecasted traffic volumes for External Roads near the CHWF Site.
Traffic Volume 2021 Last Forecasted Peak District Road Daily Count Traffic Hour (vpd) Year Volumes (vph) (vpd) Alfredton Road 40 – 490 4 – 49 2009 58 - 619 Castle Hill Road 40 – 150 4 – 15 2007 55 - 188 Daggs Road 30 – 40 3 – 4 2005 36 - 50 Tararua Kaitawa Road 320 – 550 32 – 55 2008 435 - 692 Mangaone Valley Road 50 – 200 5 – 20 2010 58 - 297 Route 52 65 – 300 7 – 30 2010 88 - 368 Waihoki Valley Road 10 – 30 1 – 3 2001 9 - 41 Wairiri Road 15 – 50 2 – 5 2005 19 - 65 Maringi Road 30 3 2005 10 - 30 Alfredton-Tinui Road 20 2 2005 10 - 19 Manawa Road 60 – 120 6 – 12 2006 117 - 156 Masterton-Castlepoint Masterton 130 – 2,000 13 – 200 2007 173 - 2411 Road Te Ore Ore Bideford 120 – 7,500 12 – 75 2006 506 - 1422 Road Te Ore Ore Road 3,000 – 7,600 30 – 76 2006 3,600 – 9,120 Whangaehu Valley Road 100 – 200 10 – 20 2004 120 - 240
Local Road Safety Data
The NZTA Crash Analysis System was used to assess the road safety history for the likely transport routes to the CHWF Site. The spatial distribution of intersection and mid-block crashes between Pahiatua and Masterton shows that the Masterton- Castlepoint Road has had the highest number (24) of crashes in the last five years. Other roads with comparatively notable crash records are Whangaehu Valley Road (five) and Alfredton Road (four).
All 24 crashes on Masterton-Castlepoint Road occurred on mid-block (between intersections) sections between Te Ore Ore Road and Manawa Road, with the principal factor being speeds too high for the conditions. Road environment condition was also cited as a contributing factor for a high proportion of the crashes, with 88% of injury crashes being single vehicle crashes.
The five crashes on Whangaehu Valley Road occurred on mid-block sections and four of the five were associated with turning manoeuvres. This road is typically a higher speed section of road and is windy in some parts. All crashes on Alfredton Road were single vehicle crashes relating to the road environment condition.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 47
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Overall, the safety data shows that both individual driver behaviour and road environment conditions are contributing factors to accidents that have occurred on External Roads in the area.
3.3.5 Surface Water Resources The hydrology of the CHWF Site is detailed in the Water Supply Assessment (PDP 2011(c)) and the Hydrology Effects Assessment (PDP 2011(b)) (Volume 3, Sections 7 and 8 respectively). The aquatic environment is detailed in the Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment (Ryder Consulting 2011) provided in Volume 4 (Section 2) of this document. These assessments are summarised below.
Hydrology
The CHWF Site is primarily located within the Upper Tiraumea and Owahanga Catchments to the north, and the Tauweru and Whareama Catchments to the south, as shown in Figure B6 of Appendix B (Volume 2). A small part of the Site is located within the Mataikona Catchment in the east.
Watercourses generally begin as small intermittent streams in the upper portions of the CHWF Site and drain hill gullies. In valley floors and low-lying areas near the road network, smaller streams combine to form larger streams and rivers, which mostly have permanent flow. Three of the main rivers drain in an easterly direction (Owahanga River, Mataikona River and Whareama River), while the Tiraumea River and the Ihuraua River (including the Te Hoe Stream tributary) drain to the north and west (see Figure B1, Appendix B, Volume 2). The Tauweru River originates in the middle of the Site and drains to the south-west, eventually entering the Ruamahanga River upstream of Martinborough. The numerous small watercourses within the Site are mostly unfenced from stock, and some have been dammed or ponded to form stock water ponds and provide water in dry periods, as shown in Plate 3.6.
Natural wetlands at the Site are small and degraded, with little or no indigenous wetland vegetation. A total of five natural wetlands were observed at the Site, but none will be affected by the development and are therefore not discussed further in this document.
Stream flow gauging was undertaken by PDP (2011(c)) in December 2010 to obtain an indication of flow in different streams across the Site and to broadly identify potential water abstraction sites during the construction of the CHWF. Rainfall at the Castle Hill Rd gauge in the month preceding the gauging was low (second lowest rainfall for November on record). Stream flow gauging results found:
Flows of about 40 L/s in the Tiraumea River at Haunui Rd.
Flows in the Te Hoe Stream Catchment were less than 3 L/s at Ngarata Rd, but increased downstream as the catchment received more flow from tertiary sandstone/mudstone areas rather than greywacke.
Flows within the Whareama Catchment above Tinui township were greater in the Tinui River than the Whareama River.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 48
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Plate 3.6: Stock pond within the CHWF Site formed by blocking a small tributary in the headwaters of the Tiraumea Stream.
Further gauging was undertaken in March 2011. The flow at the Ngaturi gauge was approximately 2.6 m3/s during the gauging (compared to a Mean Annual Low Flow (“MALF”) of 2.38 m3/s). The second round of gauging identified the following:
About 90% of flow at Ngaturi during the gauging came from the Makuri sub- catchment (Makuri River was approximately 2.33 m3/s).
The upper Tiraumea had higher flow than the Ihuraua/Te Hoe (flows at the confluence of the Ihuraua and the Tiraumea were 11 L/s and 167 L/s respectively and flows further up the Tiraumea at Haunui Rd were about 30 L/s).
Flows within the Te Hoe Stream were small (negligible flow at Ngarata Rd, and 4 L/s at Route 52).
Flows in the upper part of the Tauweru were about 11 L/s, but were approximately the same downstream at Mangareia Rd.
There was no significant flow in the upper parts of the Ihuraua or Mangareia and a small amount of flow (approximately 5 - 10 L/s) in the Mangaiti Stream.
The 4 L/s flow at Te Hoe Stream at Route 52 is less than the calculated MALF of 8.9 L/s at Alfredton (and also the MALFs for the Tiraumea at Haunui Rd and Ihuraua confluence). Inspection of the Te Hoe synthetic flow record generated by MWRC indicated that there were a number of occasions when the estimated flow was less than the MALF - the second gauging is therefore consistent with the synthetic record. Review of the record also identified that the summer of 2007/2008 represented one of
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 49
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects the lowest – this is used as an example of potential effects of the proposed water abstraction discussed in Section 5.6.2.
A third round of gauging was undertaken in April 2011 (following rainfall of approximately 40 mm on the 22 and 23 March 2011). No rainfall had occurred for five days prior to the gauging. Flows at all sites had increased since the March 2011 gauging, with flows from tertiary mudstone catchments increasingly proportionally more.
Stream baseflows are limited by low seepage rates from groundwater resources. Specific discharge rates range from as low as 0.04 L/s/km2 (for the Te Hoe Stream) to 0.8 L/s/km2 (for the Tiraumea Stream just above the confluence with the Ihuraua River) in March 2011 (PDP, 2011b).
Information obtained from National Institute of Water and Atmosphere’s (“NIWA”) New Zealand wide GIS model of annual suspended sediment yields across the Site is summarised in Figure B7 of Appendix B (Volume 2). As shown in Figure B7, most of the Turbine Corridor within Turbine Clusters C, E, G and parts of Turbine Clusters D and A has suspended sediment yields of 10 – 500 t/km2/year. Most of Turbine Cluster B has yields of 500 – 2000 t/km2/year, while Turbine Cluster F and the northern part of Turbine Cluster D have yields of 2000 – 5000 t/km2/year. It is noted that the Wairarapa has some of the highest sediment yields in the country. As a comparison, the flatter parts of the Auckland Region have yields of 10 - 50 t/km2/year and the Hunua Ranges 200 – 500 t/km2/year.
Domestic water within the Site is generally sourced from rainwater tanks and springs, while stock water is supplied primarily from stock water ponds or the occasional stream take. No recorded consented surface water takes occur within 5 km of the Turbine Corridor in the MWRC area, while two consented water takes occur within about 12 km of the Site. Two consented takes occur approximately 3 km east of Cluster F in GWRC jurisdiction (PDP, 2011b).
The Operative and Proposed Tararua District Plan (“Operative TDP” and “Proposed TDP”) identify rivers as regionally significant natural features and/or are protected by water conservation notices. None of these rivers are located within the CHWF Site.
Appendix 1.9 of the Combined Plan identifies significant water bodies in the Masterton District that includes reaches of the Tauweru River (downstream of the Tauweru Bridge) and the Whareama River (seaward side of the Coastal Marine Area boundary). Both of these reaches are over 20 km downstream of the CHWF Site.
Appendix 1 of the Proposed Wellington Regional Policy Statement (“Proposed WRPS”) (2010) identifies the following rivers and lakes with reaches in the CHWF Site to have the following values requiring protection:
Ruamahanga River below, and including, the Kopuaranga confluence - habitat for six or more indigenous fish species.
Tauweru River - habitat for six or more12 indigenous fish species.
12 Records for only five indigenous fish species.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 50
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Whareama River Catchment - habitat for threatened indigenous fish species; habitat for six or more indigenous fish species; habitat for threatened indigenous fish species (one record of giant kokopu outside the CHWF Site); and inanga spawning habitat (outside of the CHWF Site).
Mataikona River - habitat for six or more indigenous fish species; and inanga spawning habitat (outside of the CHWF Site).
Rivers on the true left bank of the Mataikona River between the Pakowhai River and easting 2785345 and northing 6046718 - high percentage of indigenous vegetation cover (area of tidal influence outside the CHWF Site).
Rivers on the true right bank of the Mataikona River between easting 2784611 and northing 6046207 and the coast - high percentage of indigenous vegetation cover (area of tidal influence outside the CHWF Site).
While the Proposed WRPS identifies that the Tauweru, Whareama, and Mataikona Rivers meet one or more criteria relating to rivers with significant indigenous ecosystems, these features primarily relate to river reaches outside the CHWF Site.
The Regional Freshwater Plan for the Wellington Region (1999) (“Regional Freshwater Plan”) identifies:
Water Bodies with Nationally Threatened Indigenous Fish Recorded in the Catchment (Appendix 3).
Water Bodies with Important Trout Habitat (including spawning areas) - Water Quality to be Managed for Fishery and Fish Spawning Purposes (Appendix 4).
Water Bodies with Regionally Important Amenity and Recreational Values - Water Quality to be Managed for Contact Recreation Purposes (Appendix 5).
Water Bodies with Water Quality to be Managed for Water Supply Purposes (Appendix 6).
Water Bodies with Water Quality Identified as Needing Enhancement (Appendix 7).
No waterways within the CHWF Site are identified in the above appendices of the Regional Freshwater Plan.
Within MWRC jurisdiction, the northern part of the CHWF Site is located within the Owha 1 and Mana 7a Management Zones of the MWRC Proposed One Plan (“One Plan”). Schedule D lists the values associated with the various water management. All watercourses within the CHWF Site are identified as having the values listed in Schedule AB of the One Plan, including life-supporting capacity, aesthetics, contact recreation, mauri, industrial abstraction, irrigation, stockwater, existing infrastructure and capacity to assimilate pollution. One watercourse (Tiraumea River from Alfredton to its source) within the CHWF Site is identified as having site/reach specific recreational values (Other Trout Fishery). This value indicates that the trout fishery is neither outstanding nor regionally significant.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 51
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Water Quality
Water quality monitoring was undertaken in watercourses at 27 sites in winter (June 2010) and 32 sites in summer (March 2011) within and downstream of the CHWF Site at the locations shown in Figure 3.10. Flow in the Tauweru River during the June 2010 sampling ranged from 7 – 18 cumecs, while during the March 2011 sampling was 0.3 – 0.7 cumecs, and at times was below the ‘low flow’ warning level of 0.4 cumecs on the GWRC flow website13.
Sites were chosen to be representative of habitats throughout the CHWF, and included several sites within most of the Turbine Clusters (see Figure 3.10). Topographical maps and CHWF layouts were overlain with a river environment classification (“REC”) system to identify where Internal Roads may cross watercourses, as detailed further in the COMR (Volume 1, Appendix A) and the Hydrology Effects Assessment (Volume 3, Section 8). Sampling sites included proposed watercourse crossing points and downstream sites (including outside the CHWF Site), and covered the range of aquatic habitats, from headwaters with minimal depth and flow, to downstream rivers. Survey methods are described in detail in the Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment (Ryder Consulting 2011) provided in Volume 4 (Section 2) of this document.
The physical characteristics of the watercourses sampled are summarised in Table 3.5.
Fifteen sites were soft-bottomed streams, seven were hard-bottomed streams and 10 streams included sections of both soft and hard substrates. Overall, waterways were generally small and narrow, with width of streams ranging from 0.5 - 8 m (16 sites had a width of 3 m or less) during winter flows, and water depths ranging from <0.05 m (one site) to more than 1 m (nine sites had a water depth of <0.5 cm). During summer flows, some of the waterways that had been sampled during the winter were either completely dry, or consisted of disconnected pools. All other waterways had reduced flows.
Grass was the most commonly encountered riparian vegetation (17 sample sites), with ‘grass/indigenous trees’ (seven sites), ‘grass/exotic trees’ (three sites), ‘grass/indigenous trees/exotic trees’ (three sites), and ‘indigenous shrubs’ (two sites) also present. This reflects the predominantly pastoral land use in the area. Most (25) sites were unfenced. Slumping of the bank was noted for some of the waterways.
Survey sites in the Wellington Region were assessed against the relevant GWRC water quality guidelines. These guidelines are derived from the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (“ANZECC”), Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (“ARMCANZ”) default trigger values for aquatic ecosystems. The ‘trigger values’ are intended to be compared with median values at a site, rather than one-off measurements, however they still provide a useful indication of the existing water quality in the CHWF area. Water quality results for the relevant management zones in the MWRC Region were assessed against the targets for those zones set out in Schedule D of the One Plan for the MWRC Region.
Water quality parameters measured in watercourses within and downstream of the CHWF Site are presented in Table 3.6. Overall, water quality is generally good when sampled during winter flow conditions, although it was lower in some watercourses during reduced flows in summer. Most parameters measured were within the relevant
13 http://www.gw.govt.nz/rivers-and-streams-2/
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 52
Legend CHWF Site Turbine Cluster (A-G) Council Boundary Catchment Sampling Sites
3 A
4
5 6 1 29 2 B 28
8 30 9 7 10 11 14 13 2021 D C 32 31
15
2223
E F 2627 G 18 17 25 16 24
19
02461 km Figure 3.10: Water quality and aquatic biology sampling sites. Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.5: Physical characteristics of the watercourses sampled within and downstream of the CHWF Site (June 2010 and March 2011).
Sediment depth Dominant Elevation Width (m) Depth (cm) Site Catchment Watercourse Substrate (cm) riparian Fenced (m) June Mar June Mar June Mar vegetation 1 Owahanga River Waihoki Stream tributary 280 hard 0.5-1.5 0.1-1.0 5-50 1-50 8 1-17 grass/native trees no 2 Owahanga River Waihoki Stream 260 soft/hard 2-3 0.2-3 120 80 10 1-13 grass yes 3 Owahanga River Managatiti Stream 120 soft/hard 6-8 4-8 >100* 20->100* NM** 5->25* grass no 4 Tiraumea Stream Tiraumea Stream tributary one 300 soft 0.5-1 0.5-1 10-120 0-100 17 2-30 grass/native trees no 5 Tiraumea Stream Tiraumea Stream 194 soft 2-2.5 0.8-1.5 120 10-40 5 5-15 grass no 6 Tiraumea Stream Tiraumea Stream tributary two 270 soft/hard 1-2 20-2 15-100 5-80 5 5 grass no 7 Tiraumea Stream Waitawhiti Stream tributary one 272 soft 3-4 0 <5 0 5 grass no 8 Tiraumea Stream Waitawhiti Stream tributary two 260 soft 0.5-1.5 0.5-1.5 30->100 0->100 8 1-30 grass no 9 Tiraumea Stream Waitawhiti Stream 225 soft 1.5-4 0.5-4 60->100 20->100* 10 2-30 grass no 10 Ihuraua River Ponui Stream 160 soft/hard 3-4 1-4 50->100* 3-80 NM** 2-45 grass/exotic trees yes 11 Ihuraua River Te Hoe Stream tributary one 287 soft 0.5-1 0 20-30 0 15 grass no 12 Ihuraua River Te Hoe Stream tributary two 284 soft 0.5-1 0 10-40 0 5 grass no 13 Ihuraua River Te Hoe Stream tributary three 280 hard 2-4 0-2 10-50 3-40 4 9 grass/native trees no 14 Ihuraua River Te Hoe Stream 200 hard 3-4 0.2-3 10-40 3-44 4 4 grass no grass/native 15 Tauweru River Tauweru River middle 260 soft/hard 1.5-3.5 1-2.5 30->100* 7->100* 10 0-70 no trees/exotic trees 16 Tauweru River Tauweru River tributary 216 hard 0.5-1 0 5-20 0 8 grass/native trees no 17 Tauweru River Tauweru River downstream 200 hard 5-6 1.5-5 10-100 5-60 4 0-50 grass/native trees yes 18 Tauweru River Wainuiomapu Stream 180 hard 4-6 0.2-6 20-100 5-60 5 30 grass no 19 Tauweru River Managareia Stream 133 soft/hard 2-3 0.5-3 >100* >100* NM** 11 grass no
* Water depth exceeded 100cm and conditions did not allow maximum water depth to be measured safely. ** NM - not measured, the water depth was too great to allow sediment depth to be measured safely. *** Although not fenced stock access is limited by the steep sided banks. There is some evidence of stock access but is minimal.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 54
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.5: Physical characteristics of the watercourses sampled within and downstream of the CHWF Site (June 2010 and March 2011) (cont).
Sediment depth Elevation Width (m) Depth (cm) Dominant riparian Site Catchment Watercourse Substrate (cm) Fenced (m) vegetation June Mar June Mar June Mar 20 Whareama River Axehandle Stream tributary 277 soft 0.5-1.5 0 <5 0 20 grass no 21 Whareama River Axehandle Stream 222 hard 1-2 0 10-25 0 8 grass/exotic trees yes 22 Whareama River Whareama River tributary one 160 soft 1-1.5 0.1-1.5 15-50 1-31 15 20 grass/native trees no 23 Whareama River Whareama River tributary two 142 soft 0.5-1 0.2-1 5-20 1-40 10 30 grass/native trees no 24 Whareama River Whareama River tributary three 80 soft 1-3 1-3 50->100* 1->100* 5 10 grass yes 25 Whareama River Whareama River 79 soft/hard 3-5 1.5-4 >100* 7->100* 20 0-20 grass no 26 Whareama River Tinui River tributary 160 soft 1-3 1-3 20-200 0->100* 30 40 grass no 27 Whareama River Tinui River 140 soft 4-6 4-6 >100* >100* NM** 30 grass no Waitawhiti Stream tributary grass/native 28 Tiraumea Stream 327 soft - 0.1-1 - 1-20 - 0-70 no three shrub/exotic shrub grass/native 29 Tiraumea Stream Waitawhiti Stream upstream 331 soft - 0.1-1 - 1-120 - 0-25 no shrub/exotic shrub 30 Tiraumea Stream Waitawhiti Stream tributary four 226 soft/hard - 0.2-2 - 3-60 - 0-15 grass/exotic trees no 31 Tauweru River Tauweru River tributary two 271 soft/hard - 0.01-1 - 1-15 - 0-20 native shrub yes*** 32 Tauweru River Tauweru River upstream 270 soft/hard - 1-2 - 4-80 - 0-20 native shrub yes***
* Water depth exceeded 100cm and conditions did not allow maximum water depth to be measured safely. ** NM - not measured, the water depth was too great to allow sediment depth to be measured safely. *** Although not fenced stock access is limited by the steep sided banks. There is some evidence of stock access but is minimal.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 55
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
GWRC and MWRC water quality guidelines in winter however, guidelines were exceeded at some sites in summer.
In MWRC, water quality parameters in tributaries of the Owahanga River catchment were within the One Plan target levels in June 2010, with the exception of turbidity in the Mangatiti Stream. In March 2011, dissolved oxygen levels breached guideline levels at two sites. Clarity guidelines were not met at one of the three sites in March 2011. Dissolved oxygen saturation and pH levels at five sites in the Tiraumea Stream Catchment were all within the One Plan target levels in both June 2010 and March 2011. However, at one site in March 2011 dissolved oxygen levels were very low and breached guidelines. Clarity guidelines were not met at six of the eight sites sampled in March 2011. Streams in the Ihuraua River catchment were within the guidelines in June 2010, with the exception of the Te Hoe Stream tributary where pH levels were slightly outside the recommended range. This site and a second tributary site (site 12) were dry in March 2011. At the remaining three sites dissolved oxygen breached guideline levels.
Within GWRC, turbidity levels at all sites in the Tauweru River Catchment exceeded the guidance level of 5.6 NTU during the winter survey, however turbidity may have been elevated due to winter flow conditions at the time the samples were collected. During summer sampling, all sites but one (site 32), met the guideline turbidity level. Dissolved oxygen saturation and pH levels at all sites were within GWRC guideline levels in both June 2010 and March 2011, except at the Mangareia Stream (Site 19) where dissolved oxygen saturation was only 20% in March 2011. This low level was due to the minimal flow and the presence of aquatic plant mats, which can led to oxygen depletion. At all seven sites measured in the Whareama River Catchment, dissolved oxygen saturation and pH levels were within guideline levels in June 2010, however in March 2011, two sites were dry and dissolved oxygen was below guideline levels at all but one of the remaining sites. Conductivity measurements at most sites in the Whareama River were higher than those recorded in other catchments. Values at all sites exceeded 347μS/cm and ranged up to 877μS/cm in March 2011. High conductivity levels were also recorded for this catchment by GWRC in 2008 – 2009.
Aquatic Ecology at the Proposed Water Abstraction Points
As outlined in Section 1 and detailed further in Section 4.3.8, Genesis Energy proposes to abstract water during the construction period from four surface water abstraction points in reasonable proximity to the Site. The proposed water abstraction sites are Te Hoe Stream, Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Rd, Tiraumea River at the confluence with Ihuraua, and Tinui River at Taipo. The aquatic environment at each of these water take sites is outlined below.
Te Hoe Stream (WS1)
Te Hoe Stream is a tributary of Tiraumea Stream. The stream has unfenced grassed riparian areas at the proposed abstraction site. Aquatic communities were sampled in Te Hoe Stream approximately 1.5 km upstream of the proposed abstraction site in June 2010 and March 2011, and macroinvertebrate communities were found to be indicative of ‘fair’ to ‘excellent’ quality habitat. Water quality was good in June 2010, with high dissolved oxygen levels of 89%, and low conductivity (92S/cm), total suspended solids (<5g/m2) and turbidity levels (4.6NTU). In March 2001 there was.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 56
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.6: Water quality parameters in watercourses within and downstream of the CHWF Site (June 2010 and March 2011).
Total Temperature Dissolved Dissolved Conductivity Turbidity Clarity o suspended pH Site Catchment Watercourse ( C) oxygen (%) oxygen (mg/L) (S/cm) 2 (NTU) (m) solids (g/m ) June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar Mar Manawatu Wanganui Region 1 Owahanga River Waihoki Stream tributary 6.5 14.2 86.7 61.5 10.66 6.30 135.1 260.5 <10 4 7.1 1.94 7.5 7.19 2.6 2 Owahanga River Waihoki Stream 7.5 16.3 81.3 20.9 9.72 2.17 121.5 280.8 <5 <5 7.9 5.62 7.52 7.15 0.7 3 Owahanga River Managatiti Stream 7.2 20.6 93.2 116.0 11.26 10.41 167.3 328.8 56 <3 49.7 1.52 8.04 8.59 1.6 Tiraumea Stream tributary 4 Tiraumea Stream 6.5 16.1 91.6 73.9 11.25 7.26 63 210.2 <5 <5 4.2 6.58 7.88 7.55 0.8 one 5 Tiraumea Stream Tiraumea Stream 7.0 17.0 94.2 86.5 11.44 8.37 114.4 296.2 39 <4 24.7 4.87 7.78 7.80 1.4 Tiraumea Stream tributary 6 Tiraumea Stream 7.8 15.7 90.7 72.6 10.78 7.20 105.8 325.9 <5 <3 4.5 2.02 7.74 7.89 2.0 two Waitawhiti Stream tributary 7 Tiraumea Stream ------one Waitawhiti Stream tributary 8 Tiraumea Stream 6.5 14.8 89.9 73.9 11.05 7.14 110.1 296.2 6 <5 10.2 1.88 7.34 7.75 0.8 two 9 Tiraumea Stream Waitawhiti Stream 7.5 17.2 94.8 76.2 11.36 7.34 130 345.4 9 8 9.2 2.07 7.64 7.67 1.0 10 Ihuraua River Ponui Stream 7.7 15.8 83.6 58.8 9.96 5.82 147.1 333.3 7 <3 9.4 1.23 7.52 7.36 1.9 Te Hoe Stream tributary 11 Ihuraua River 9.0 - 74.4 - 8.6 - 98.9 - 12 - 13.5 - 6.90 - - one Te Hoe Stream tributary 12 Ihuraua River 9.6 - 90.1 - 10.27 - 78.1 - 6 - 6.1 - 7.22 - - two 13 Ihuraua River Te Hoe Stream tributary 8.5 15.4 90.3 65.4 10.54 6.54 89.5 164.8 <5 5 8.1 2.37 7.40 7.01 - three 14 Ihuraua River Te Hoe Stream 7.1 18.8 89.2 66.7 10.79 6.20 91.9 314.9 <5 <3 4.6 0.44 7.69 7.17 6.1 Wellington Region 15 Tauweru River Tauweru River upstream 7.8 16.8 90 97 10.85 9.39 107.7 256.0 5 5 7.6 2.35 7.63 7.98 1.8 16 Tauweru River Tauweru River tributary 8.1 - 94 - 11.13 - 87 - 6 - 9.7 - 7.90 - - Tauweru River 17 Tauweru River 8 17.5 95.5 96.7 11.3 9.25 118.9 281.8 7 <3 8.6 0.95 7.90 8.03 2.2 downstream 18 Tauweru River Wainuiomapu Stream 8.8 21.9 92.5 133.0 10.74 11.72 100.6 295.7 8 <3 9.01 0.54 7.87 8.98 4.2
- Site not sampled either due to insufficient water flow or was a new site in March 2011 -- Exceed Council water quality guidelines
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 57
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.6: Water quality parameters in watercourses within and downstream of the CHWF Site (June 2010 and March 2011) (cont.)
Total Temperature Dissolved Dissolved Conductivity Turbidity Clarity o suspended pH Site Catchment Watercourse ( C) oxygen (%) oxygen (mg/L) (S/cm) 2 (NTU) (m) solids (g/m ) June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar June Mar Mar 19 Tauweru River Managareia Stream 8.1 15.7 91.9 20.0 10.84 1.99 131.5 219.8 14 <3 12.1 1.97 7.90 7.15 - Axehandle Stream 20 Whareama River ------tributary 21 Whareama River Axehandle Stream 7.8 - 89.2 - 10.64 - 114.7 - 11 - 12.8 - 8.04 - - Whareama River tributary 22 Whareama River 8 15.3 90.6 65.7 10.72 6.55 141.8 488.1 6 7 12.2 4.13 7.48 7.91 1.1 one Whareama River tributary 23 Whareama River 8.2 15.1 88.3 76.3 10.35 7.52 210 533 11 17 12.9 12.5 7.75 8.04 0.5 two Whareama River tributary 24 Whareama River 9.2 16.2 91.9 17.7 10.55 1.71 369.5 535 56 10 48.3 3.08 7.94 7.59 1.3 three 25 Whareama River Whareama River 7.9 17.6 91.9 65.3 10.92 6.26 292 877 138 <5 122.0 2.56 8.01 7.76 1.3 26 Whareama River Tinui River tributary 6.4 19.3 86.2 127.6 10.63 11.41 231 352.9 9 <3 11.0 2.78 7.90 8.05 - 27 Whareama River Tinui River 7.1 16.4 83.2 64.1 10.06 6.28 193.5 347.3 10 <3 11.6 2.18 7.72 7.65 1.2 Manawatu Wanganui Region Waitawhiti Stream tributary 28 Tiraumea Stream - 13.4 - 13.5 - 1.39 - 171.0 - 14 - 4.25 - 7.21 0.5 three Waitawhiti Stream 29 Tiraumea Stream - 15.6 - 71.0 - 7.14 - 203.2 - <3 - 2.25 - 7.39 1.0 upstream Waitawhiti Stream tributary 30 Tiraumea Stream - 20.5 - 118.7 - 10.69 - 286.9 - 8 - 2.42 - 8.66 2.0 four Wellington Region Tauweru River tributary 31 Tauweru River - 13.5 - 85.7 - 8.90 - 227.4 - 5 - 5.05 - 7.66 - two
32 Tauweru River Tauweru River upstream - 13.4 - 83.9 - 8.75 - 230.2 - 10 - 6.13 - 7.81 1.3
- Site not sampled either due to insufficient water flow or was a new site in March 2011 -- Exceed Council water quality guidelines
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 58
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects minimal flow and dissolved oxygen saturation was lower (67%) and conductivity higher (315 S/cm). Cran’s and upland bully, shortfin eel, and freshwater crayfish have been recorded in the Te Hoe Stream Catchment
Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Road (WS3)
The proposed abstraction site is located in the upper reaches of Tiraumea Stream. Aquatic communities at this site were indicative of ‘poor’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat. The stream is not fenced and the dominant riparian vegetation is grass. Recent water quality monitoring in January 2011 indicates that Tiraumea Stream has high total suspended solids of 551 g/m2 and high turbidity levels of 280NTU. Shortfin eel, longfin eel and freshwater crayfish have been recorded at the proposed abstraction site, and Cran’s bully and brown trout have been recorded further downstream.
Tiraumea River at Confluence with Ihuraua (WSB)
At the proposed abstraction site, the Tiraumea River is soft-bottomed and the channel is unfenced, with exotic trees and grass dominating the riparian vegetation. In March 2011 the river had a low flow (167 L/s), however dissolved oxygen levels were good (87%). Water quality was similar to that at the Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Road site upstream, although conductivity was higher (370S/cm). At a higher flow (419 L/s) in April 2011 water quality was similar to March 2011, although water temperature had decreased (from 17 to 12oC) and turbidity increased (from 2.6 to 9.1NTU). Macroinvertebrate communities were not sampled at the site, however the habitat is similar to that at the Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Road site upstream and therefore are likely to be indicative of ‘poor’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat. Brown trout, Cran’s bully, longfin eel, shortfin eel, upland bully and freshwater crayfish have been recorded in the Tiraumea River Catchment.
Tinui River at Taipo (WS5)
The proposed abstraction site is located approximately 16 km upstream of the Whareama River confluence. The river at the site has a cobble and boulder dominated bed, although there are areas of fine sediment deposition within this. The river channel is unfenced with the dominant riparian vegetation composed of rank grass and exotic trees. Recent water quality monitoring in March 2011 indicated that the water temperature was moderately high (16ºC), dissolved oxygen levels were slightly low (70%), and conductivity was high (565 S/cm). Macroinvertebrate communities were sampled at the site in January 2011 and found to be indicative of ‘fair’ to ‘good’ habitat quality. In terms of other fauna, inanga, Cran’s bully, longfin and shortfin eel have been recorded in the vicinity of the proposed abstraction site.
Aquatic Ecology Within and Downstream of the CHWF Site
Periphyton
Many watercourses within the CHWF Site are soft-bottomed and not suitable for periphyton growth. Three of the four sites where periphyton biomass samples were taken had biomass less than the Ministry for the Environment (“MfE”) (2000)
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 59
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects guidelines. At the fourth site biomass exceeded the standard by a considerable margin in March 2011. At most sites diatom mat algae rather than filamentous algae were dominant. Although visible periphyton cover was present at a greater number of sites in March 2011 than June 2010, cover was generally low with the greatest cover occurring in pools with very little flow.
Macroinvertebrates
Macroinvertebrates were sampled at each site, taxonomic richness (number of species present) was calculated and community health was assessed by determining the presence and abundance of pollution sensitive taxa Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stone flies) and Trichoptera (caddis flies) (“EPT”). In addition, the Macroinvertebrate Community Index (“MCI”) (Stark 1985) and the Quantitative Macroinvertebrate Community Index (“QMCI”) (Stark 1993) or Semi-Quantitative Macroinvertebrate Community Index (“SQMCI”) values were calculated. The MCI, QMCI and SQMCI are biotic indices based on indicator scores assigned to each taxon that reflects their sensitivity to poor environmental conditions. The MCI is based on presence/absence data whilst the QMCI/SQMCI has an abundance component.
MCI scores range from 0 – 200, with low scores indicating poor water quality, while high scores indicate a healthy stream with excellent water quality. SQMCI and QMCI are variants of the MCI, with scores ranging from 1 – 10, where <4 indicates probable severe pollution, and >6 indicates clean water. The relationship of MCI, SQMCI and QMCI scores to water quality is shown in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7: Interpretation of MCI, SQMCI and QMCI index values from Stark (1993) (Quality) and Stark and Maxted (2004) (Water Quality).
Quality Water Quality MCI SQMCI/QMCI
Excellent Clean water >120 >6.0
Good Doubtful quality or possible mild pollution 100 – 119 5.0 – 6.0
Fair Probable moderate pollution 80 – 99 4.0 – 4.99
Poor Probable severe enrichment <80 <4.0
MWRC standards in the One Plan for macroinvertebrate communities in both the Owha 1 and Mana 7a Management Zones is an MCI score of greater than 100. There are no guidelines for the GWRC Region.
Macroinvertebrate community indices (SQMCI/QMCI) indicating ‘fair’ to ‘poor’ quality aquatic habitats were recorded at 19 sites sampled within or downstream of the CHWF during winter, and indices indicating ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ quality habitat at eight sites. Macroinvertebrate community indices were generally lower in summer, with most (73%) being indicative of ‘fair’ to ‘poor’ quality aquatic habitats.
Freshwater crayfish (koura) were detected in some of the streams draining the CHWF Site. Koura populations are regarded as undergoing gradual decline (Hitchmough et al. 2007).
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 60
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The macroinvertebrate community in streams draining the CHWF Site is summarised below:
Owahanga River Catchment – taxonomic richness ranged from 14 – 20 taxa, with 31 – 58% of these pollution-sensitive EPT taxa in June 2010, reducing to 7 - 50% EPT taxa in March 2011. Community indices ranged from ‘poor’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat at two sites and were below (site 2) and just above (site 3) the MWRC guideline of 100, to ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ at the hard- bottomed Waihoki Stream tributary. Macroinvertebrate communities at all sites were dominated by Potamopyrgus snails in June 2010.
Tiraumea Stream sub-catchment to the Tiraumea River – taxonomic richness ranged from 5 – 21 taxa, with low EPT scores recorded at all but two sites (< 44%). SQMCI scores at most sites were indicative of ‘poor’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat and below the MWRC MCI guideline. Macroinvertebrate communities were generally dominated by either Potamopyrgus snails or Oligochaeta worms, although two of the new sites sampled in March 2011 were dominated by mayfly species, and were indicative of ‘good’ quality habitat and met the MWRC MCI guideline.
Ihuraua River sub-catchment to the Tiraumea River – taxonomic richness ranged from 5 – 22 taxa, with the lowest taxa recorded in Te Hoe Stream Tributary 1 (where five taxa were collected and none were EPT taxa). SQMCI/QCMI scores were mostly indicative of ’poor’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat and below the MWRC MCI guideline, with the exception of the Te Hoe Stream site (site 14), which was indicative of ‘excellent’ quality habitat in June 2010, however this had declined to ‘fair’ in March 2011. Macroinvertebrate communities at all five sites in March 2011 were dominated by Potamopyrgus snails or Oligochaete worms.
Tauweru River Catchment – three of the five sites in June 2011 had macroinvertebrate communities dominated by Deleatidium mayflies, however in March 2011 habitat quality had declined and only one site continued to be dominated by mayflies. Taxonomic richness ranged from 11 – 24 taxa, of which 0 – 54% were EPT taxa. Community indices at the mayfly dominated sites declined from being indicative of ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ habitat quality in June 2011, to being indicative of ‘poor’ to ‘good’ habitat quality in March 2011. Two additional sites were sampled in the headwaters of the catchment in March 2011 (Sites 31 and 32). Both had macroinvertebrate communities dominated by mayflies, and were indicative of ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ habitat quality.
Whareama River Catchment – taxonomic richness ranged from 7 – 16 taxa. Two of the eight sites (sites 21 and 22), sampled in the Whareama River catchment were dominated by Deleatidium mayflies in June 2010 and community indices at these sites were indicative of ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ quality habitat. However, habitat quality had declined to ‘poor’ at site 22 in March 2011, and site 21 was dry, as was its tributary (site 20). Community indices were indicative of ‘good’ quality habitat in both June 2010 and March 2011 at the Whareama River tributary two site. The remaining five sites had communities dominated by Potamopyrgus snails or Oligochaete worms, with communities indicative of ‘poor’ or ‘fair’ quality habitat.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 61
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Fish
Freshwater fish communities recorded within and immediately downstream of the CHWF Site were not diverse, with only seven species recorded. Six of these species are native and one introduced (brown trout). Of the six native species, only four species (Cran’s bully, longfin eel, shortfin eel and upland bully) were commonly recorded throughout the CHWF Site. The other two native species, common bully and inanga, were recorded less frequently.
Longfin eel and inanga have a conservation ranking of ‘declining’ under the DOC’s threat ranking system, whilst the other species are not regarded as threatened (Allibone et al. 2010). Inanga are diadromous (requiring access to the sea to complete their life cycle) so are less likely to be found in those streams in the CHWF Site that are a long distance from the sea and at higher altitudes. Longfin eel and shortfin eel are also diadromous, however they have superior climbing abilities and are known to penetrate further inland.
Four additional diadromous fish species now classified as ‘declining (redfin, torrentfish,, lamprey (‘data poor’), and giant k kopu (‘partial decline’) have been identified in the downstream reaches of the Owahanga, Mataikona and Whareama River Catchments according to the New Zealand Freshwater Fish Database. All records of these species were within 20 km of the east coast and at elevations of 20 m asl or lower. Some of these species, such as redfin bully, torrentfish and lamprey, are known to penetrate inland and may be present in watercourses within the CHWF Site. However, none were found during sampling and habitat for redfin bully and torrentfish is limited so it is likely that only lamprey could be present within the Site.
Several existing road culverts and some natural waterfalls in the CHWF Site would present a barrier to the upstream passage of some fish species.
Summary
Most watercourses within and downstream of the CHWF Site have no special features with respect to water quality and aquatic communities. This is not unexpected given the over-riding pattern of agricultural land use, general lack of riparian protection, and the steep and erosion-prone, soft-sedimentary land type, which typically result in modified water quality environments, including high levels of sediment run-off.
No watercourses within the CHWF Site are identified as regionally significant natural features and/or are protected by water conservation notices in the Operative or Proposed TDP, or Appendices to the Regional Freshwater Plan for the GWRC. Some rivers and lakes with reaches in the CHWF Site are identified in the Proposed WRPS as having values requiring protection, although most identified values are outside the CHWF Site.
Most watercourses are soft-bottomed, with active slumping and erosion of banks and sediment deposition in beds. All of the watercourses surveyed were flowing when sampled in June 2010, however during the March 2011 sampling, some were ephemeral, having dry channels or consisting of a series of unconnected pools during summer. Water quality was generally good when sampled during winter flow conditions, although it was lower in most watercourses during reduced flows in
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 62
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects summer. Conductivity and turbidity levels were generally higher in larger, lower elevation watercourses than in smaller streams at higher elevations.
Macroinvertebrate communities were, in general, more diverse and of higher quality in the few hard-bottomed watercourses. Macroinvertebrate communities in soft-bottomed watercourses were generally indicative of ‘poor’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat. Fish communities were not diverse, with seven species recorded in the general area, and only four species commonly recorded. There is no angling opportunity in the headwaters of watercourses within the CHWF Site and relatively little opportunity in larger tributaries in the valley floors. Trout fishery in the general area has not been identified as either outstanding or regionally significant.
3.3.6 Groundwater Resources PDP (2011(a)) has assessed the groundwater resource in the CHWF area using stream baseflows and groundwater information (e.g. seepage distribution) obtained during a field survey in February 2011, shallow (<15 m deep) subsurface drilling (undertaken by Aurecon), and information received from CHWF Landowners on groundwater on their property (for example, spring locations and presence of bores). The Groundwater Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 1) of this document, and is summarised below and in Section 5.6.3.
There are no recorded drillholes or consented groundwater takes within 5 km of the Turbine Corridor in the MWRC Region. The nearest consented groundwater take in the GWRC Region is located approximately 3 km from the Turbine Corridor.
No CHWF Landowners have a functional groundwater bore on their property. A number of springs are located on CHWF Landowner properties throughout the CHWF Site (see Figure B2 of Appendix B, Volume 2) and some of these springs are used as a water supply source.
The springs are located in both Tertiary mudstone and sandstone, and greywacke rock types. Seepages are numerous, widespread and present at a full range of slope positions, from the ridge crest down to near the valley floor.
Most CHWF Landowners identified dams/ponds on their properties that provide water supply for stock drinking purposes. The dams/ponds are located in a variety of positions on the slope, ranging from near the ridge crest to near the valley bottom.
Depth to Groundwater
With the exception of one test-pit, no groundwater has been encountered in any of the subsurface drilling carried out by Aurecon. This is expected because the investigations have been relatively shallow (<20 m deep) and focussed on Turbine Foundations and aggregate resources which are typically in elevated locations, for example on ridgelines. The investigations have been located in both the Tertiary and greywacke rock types.
Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 2.5 m in silty sand in a test-pit in Turbine Cluster F, and probably indicates a perched aquifer at this location. The lack of measured groundwater level information available does not materially affect the findings of the PDP (2011(a)) assessment as the assessment focuses on the
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 63
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects groundwater-surface water interaction part of the groundwater system, therefore depth to groundwater information based on hydrogeological principals are sufficient.
Groundwater Recharge and Discharge
Stream baseflow rates (flow after a prolonged dry period) in the CHWF Site are very low and indicate groundwater recharge rates of approximately 0.1 – 2% of rainfall. These rates are low in the spectrum of recharge rates but are generally consistent with what would be expected for the rock types present in the CHWF Site. Only a very small proportion of rainfall recharges groundwater, the vast majority runs over the surface into streams or is lost due to evapo-transpiration.
Groundwater Flow and Groundwater – Surface Water Interactions
The main rock types in the CHWF Site are the Tertiary rocks and greywacke, both of which are sufficiently fine grained, consolidated or cemented, that groundwater flow through the rock is limited to open cracks (joints). The hydraulic conductivity of the rocks is typically low because joints are generally not open, particularly at depth. The low hydraulic conductivity for the rock types is consistent with the low groundwater recharge values outlined above.
Even though the overall rockmass has low hydraulic conductivity, subtle variations form zones of preferred groundwater flow and zones of negligible groundwater flow. Zones in the rock where there is preferred groundwater flow include jointed sandstone (Tertiary and greywacke) and closely fractured zones near faults. Zones with negligible groundwater flow include Tertiary mudstone, sparsely jointed areas and fault zone clays.
Multi-layered groundwater systems are typical because both preferred groundwater flow zones and negligible flow zones are present in the rockmass. In these groundwater systems:
Only a portion of rainfall recharge infiltrates through the multi-layered rockmass to reach deep groundwater which feeds stream baseflow;
The remaining portion of rainfall recharge is forced to flow at shallow depth eventually discharging to the surface at mid-slope positions (where it evaporates); and
Seepages occur at a range of slope positions.
Overall, the available information indicates that some form of the multi-layered/multi- zoned groundwater system applies to the majority of catchments in the Study Area. The uniform groundwater system may apply to parts of catchments but is unlikely to apply to whole catchments due to geological variability.
3.3.7 Terrestrial Ecology The baseline ecological values of the CHWF Site have been assessed by Wildland Consultants (2011), including both a desktop analysis and field surveys. The
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 64
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Ecological Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 3) of this document and is summarised below.
Ecological Context
The CHWF Site is located primarily within the Eastern Wairarapa Ecological District, which forms part of the Eastern Wairarapa Ecological Region. A small section in the north-west of the Site is located in the Puketoi Ecological District of the Pahiatua Ecological Region.
The Eastern Wairarapa Ecological District extends from the coastline to inland hill country that includes the steep-sided Taipo Hills. Most of the natural vegetation in the ecological district was cleared for farming in the 19th and early 20th Century. As a result, today most of the District is farmed with the other main land use being plantation forestry. Patches of remnant indigenous vegetation are dominated by manuka and/or kanuka cover. A small area of black beech forest is present. Hard beech occurs locally on Mt Rewa in Ngaumu Forest and at Castlepoint, small areas of podocarp forest, and more extensive areas of secondary forest without podocarps, beech species or tawa also occur within the District.
The Puketoi Ecological District is located inland and comprises low ranges and dissected hills mostly over 300 m asl. Most of this district is also farmed and hence vegetation is dominated by high-producing exotic grassland, with remnant indigenous vegetation comprising less than 10% cover in that district.
Vegetation and Habitat Types
Twenty-nine vegetation and habitat types have been identified at the Site (including External Roads). These include 19 indigenous habitat types and 10 exotic or human- made habitat types grouped within 12 broad vegetation and habitat structural classes as shown in Table 3.8. Small “natural wetlands with some indigenous vegetation” have been identified within the Site, but will not be affected by the development and are therefore not discussed further in this report. Vegetation types present within the Site and along External Roads are shown on the maps in the Ecology Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to this document.
Table 3.8 shows the relative extent and general distribution of each vegetation type. In relation to distribution within the Site, ‘widespread’ means that a type occurs widely throughout the Site (and/or in the vicinity of External Roads) while ‘local’ indicates that it occurs in only one or a few locations. Table 3.8 also shows the relative ecological value that has been assigned to each vegetation type.
Vascular Plant Species
A total of 209 vascular plant taxa - 141 indigenous and 68 exotic - have been recorded during the field surveys. The indigenous vascular plant assemblage recorded is not diverse, and is typical of the habitats surveyed, i.e. predominantly pasture with scattered grazed indigenous scrub and shrubland remnants. Most habitats are grazed by stock and browsing pest animals, which has degraded the indigenous vegetation remnants and reduced the diversity of indigenous plants.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 65
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 3.8: Vegetation types, relative ecological values, extent and distribution at the CHWF Site.
Vegetation Structural Class/ Ecological Indigeno Code Distribution Vegetation Type14 Value us Indigenous Forest High Yes Podocarp/broadleaved forest 1.2.1 High Local Yes Tawa forest 1.2.2 High Local Yes Kamahi forest 1.2.3 High Local Yes Mixed broadleaved forest 1.2.4 High Local Yes Manuka-kanuka forest 1.3 High Local Yes Indigenous Treeland High Yes Broadleaved treeland 2.2 High Local Yes Manuka-kanuka treeland 2.3 Moderate Local Yes Podocarp treeland 2.4 Moderate Local Yes Indigenous Scrub Moderate Yes Manuka-kanuka scrub 3.1 Moderate Widespread Yes Mixed broadleaved scrub 3.4 Moderate Widespread Yes Manuka-kanuka scrub mixed 3.5 Moderate Widespread Yes broadleaved scrub Indigenous Shrubland Yes Manuka-kanuka/pasture grass shrubland 4.1 Low Widespread Yes Manuka-kanuka shrubland 4.2 Low Local Yes tauhinu/pasture grass shrubland Tauhinu/pasture grass shrubland 4.3 Low Local Yes Mixed broadleaved shrubs/pasture grass 4.4 Low Widespread Yes shrubland Manuka-kanuka shrubland mixed 4.5 Low Widespread Yes broadleaved shrubland Rock Outcrops Yes Rock outcrops (indigenous) 5.1 High Local Yes Road cuttings (exotic) 5.2 Low Local No Wetland Yes Natural wetland with some indigenous 6.2 Moderate Local Yes species (indigenous) Stock ponds (artificial - exotic) 6.4 Negligible Widespread No Rivers Yes Rivers with indigenous riparian vegetation 7.1 High Local Yes (indigenous) Rivers without indigenous vegetation 7.2 Moderate Local No (exotic) Exotic Forest No Exotic forest/indigenous understory 8.1 Negligible Widespread No Exotic forest or shelter belts 8.2 Negligible Widespread No Exotic Scrub and Shrubland No Gorse-broom scrub 9.1 Negligible Widespread No Gorse-broom/pasture grass shrubland 9.2 Negligible Widespread No Exotic Pasture No Pasture grassland 10.1 Negligible Widespread No Buildings No Buildings 11.1 Negligible Widespread No Roads No Roads 12.1 Negligible Widespread No
14 This includes vegetation types and habitat types such as rock outcrops, which may not have a cover of indigenous vegetation.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 66
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Threatened and Uncommon Species
Prior to the field surveys undertaken for this project, the following ‘At Risk’ or ‘regionally rare’ species were known to be present within or close to the Site or External Roads (threat rankings are from de Lange et al. 2009 or Sawyer 2004):
Within the Site: - wood rose (Dactylanthus taylorii; Threatened-Nationally Vulnerable). Known sites will not be affected.
Habitats adjacent to External Roads: - Teucridium parviflorum (At Risk-Declining); - Coprosma pedicellata (At Risk-Declining); - White mistletoe (Tupeia antarctica; At Risk-Declining); - Dwarf (leafless) mistletoe (Korthalsella linksayi; regionally threatened- sparse).
None of these species were found within habitats to be affected by development of the CHWF, or any other ‘Threatened’, ‘At Risk’, regionally rare, or uncommon plant species.
Pest Plants
Eleven pest plant taxa listed in Regional Pest Management Strategies (Horizons Regional Council 2007 and Greater Wellington Regional Council 2009) were recorded during field visits, or have been reported within or near the Site.
Birds
Systematic surveys were undertaken across the Site, between January 2010 and March 2011, encompassing a full suite of seasons, and two complete spring-summer periods. Systematic surveys undertaken between 20 January 2010 and 11 March 2011 included monthly five-minute bird counts at 90 standardised recording sites across the Site at the locations shown in Figure 3.11, and systematic observations and recording of bird ‘flight paths’ across ridges where turbines are to be placed as shown in Figures 3.12(i) to 3.12(iv). Recording of many incidental observations of species also occurred from October 2009 until March 2011.
Fifty-five bird species - 33 indigenous and 22 introduced - were recorded during field surveys and incidental observations at the Site. A total of 19,053 birds from 42 species were observed during formal monitoring. More than three-quarters (77.4%) of all birds recorded during formal surveys at the Site have been introduced species.
Bats
Long-tailed bats were detected at 15 sites in Turbine Clusters A, D, E, and G, with repeat detections at 11 sites (Figure 3.13). No bats were detected at Cluster B (four survey sites), C (one survey site), or F (one survey site). The largest number of long- tailed bat detections (nearly 70% of total detections) occurred in the lower parts of Patitapu Bush, which is well outside of the area to be affected by construction works.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 67
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.11: Locations of five-minute bird count and flight path monitoring stations.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 68
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.12(i): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster E at the CHWF Site. CHFP5B had the highest number of observed flight paths - all heights
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 69
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.12(ii): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster E at the CHWF Site. CHFP5B had the highest number of observed flight paths - within the potential rotor zone.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 70
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.12(iii): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster D at the CHWF Site. CHFP4B had the lowest number of observed flight paths - all heights.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 71
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.12(iv): Example of a Bird Flight Path Monitoring Map for Cluster D at the CHWF Site. CHFP4B had the lowest number of observed flight paths - within the potential rotor zone.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 72
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.13: Locations of automated digital bat recorders and bat detections at the CHWF Site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 73 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Long-tailed bats are likely to be present in suitable habitat elsewhere within and adjacent to the site, and may forage across much of the Site.
Lizards and Frogs
Common skink, common gecko, southern North Island forest gecko, and the introduced southern bell frog have been recorded at the Site during field surveys (Table 13) and shown in Figure 3.14. These species are all classified as ‘Not Threatened’. Lizards have been found in rock outcrops, scrub, and shrubland habitats throughout the Site. Southern bell frogs have been heard in stock ponds in Clusters A, C, D, and G.
Terrestrial Invertebrates
An initial literature review revealed that no threatened invertebrate species were known from the Site. A field survey was subsequently undertaken using pitfall sampling and demonstrated that a diverse invertebrate assemblage is present at the Site. The results are shown in Figure 3.15. Invertebrates were typical of the habitats present.
Introduced Mammals
Nineteen pest animal species have been recorded at the Site, including ten species listed in the Greater Wellington Regional Pest Management Strategy (2009) and/or the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Pest Management Strategy (2009).
Summary
Vegetation and habitats within the CHWF Site and along External Road margins have been mapped and described in detail and include 29 types (19 indigenous, ten exotic), in 12 broad classes. Each vegetation type has been assessed to determine its relative ecological value, based on composition and structure. These types have been classified as being of High, Moderate, or Low ecological value. Most of the Site is considered to have very limited ecological value, or low ecological value. The CHWF has been designed to avoid areas with formal legal protection DOC protected areas and QEII covenants). Vegetation types that could trigger provisions in the Horizons One Plan and/or District Plans were also identified and have been avoided where practicable. Much of the remaining indigenous vegetation at the Site is in a secondary successional state, being dominated by manuka and or kanuka. Overall, a limited diversity of indigenous vascular plants is known from the Site.
Field surveys were undertaken for birds, bats, lizards, and terrestrial invertebrates. Various bird, bat, lizard, and invertebrate species are known to be present, but only limited numbers of ‘Threatened’ or ‘At Risk’ species are present. The terrestrial invertebrate community is distinct in indigenous and exotic (pasture) vegetation types and several new species (not an unusual occurrence) and infrequently collected indigenous species were found.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 74 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.14: Location of Artificial Cover Objects (ACOs) and lizards found within the CHWF Site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 75 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 3.15: Sampling locations for invertebrates within the CHWF Site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 76 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
3.4 Summary
The CHWF Site is located in a remote and relatively sparsely populated area of the Tararua and Masterton Districts. Both the Masterton and Tararua Districts are characterised by agriculture-based primary production. The Site and surrounding area is rural in nature, significantly modified, currently used for agricultural activities and is generally remote.
It is likely that the CHWF Site and surrounds was visited and used by Maori in the past to gather resources, or they may have travelled through the Site en route to other areas. However, no known or recorded archaeological sites are located within, or in the general vicinity of, the CHWF Site. Archaeological sites in the wider Wairarapa area are generally concentrated on the eastern coast.
The CHWF Site and immediate surrounds are not identified as being within or part of an outstanding natural feature or landscape in the relevant planning documents. The vegetation is dominated by grazed pasture, with hill tops relatively bare of vegetation other than exotic grasses, except for smaller areas of exotic plantation forestry and remnant or regenerating native vegetation in gullies. The noise environment is dominated by rural production activities and natural sounds typical of a rural environment, with some traffic noise from nearby roads.
The CHWF Site is primarily located within the Upper Tiraumea and Tauweru Catchments. Small intermittent streams originate in the upper slopes and combine to form larger perennial streams and rivers in the valley floors and low lying areas. No features of special ecological significance have been identified in the watercourses which drain the CHWF Site. This may be due primarily to the dominance of agricultural activities at the Site, the general lack of riparian protection and sediment run-off from land in the area. Overall, water quality was generally good during winter flow conditions although it declined in some watercourses during reduced summer flows.
Terrestrial vegetation within and around the CHWF Site has been highly modified through significant changes and intensification of land use due to rural uses, including farming and forestry. Forested areas of ecological significance are typically limited to isolated fragments. As a result, the plant and animal communities are dominated by exotic species across much of the Site.
Environmental Setting Section 3 – page 77 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 4.1 Introduction
The development of the CHWF project has followed an iterative process, from the early stages of site selection through concept studies and preliminary environmental effects assessment phases, to detailed environmental assessments and increasingly definitive project design. During the development process, findings from environmental and engineering assessments, and feedback from stakeholders and the wider community, have been considered. As a result, incremental refinements to project design have been made to ensure that the locations of project components are appropriate and that adverse effects are appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated.
This section of the AEE outlines the development process undertaken for the CHWF and alternatives considered. The key project components, proposed construction process and Site reinstatement are outlined, as well as an introduction to the proposed resource consent Environmental Management Plan (“EMP”) and Supplementary Environmental Management Plans (“SEMPs”).
4.2 CHWF Development Process 4.2.1 Introduction Genesis Energy has undertaken a comprehensive development process for the CHWF over the last four years which has culminated in this resource consent application. Refinement of the design has occurred throughout the process to take into account environmental aspects, engineering requirements, site characteristics and wind resource.
Refinement of the design will continue through to construction of the CHWF. This will enable selection of the appropriate Turbine for the Site at the time of construction, and will enable site specific environmental and engineering/constructability factors identified during the detailed design phase to be addressed prior to construction commencing. The final design for the CHWF will be confirmed after the Turbine model is selected after resource consents have been obtained, but will be within the parameters of the resource consents granted. When implementing the CHWF project, Genesis Energy will ensure that final designs fit within the overall location and extent of effects described in the AEE and authorised by the resource consents granted. It will ensure that the nature and scale of the effects associated with the final design are no greater than the authorised adverse effects.
The CHWF development process is outlined in Table 4.1 and detailed further below.
4.2.2 Site Selection To identify an appropriate location for a wind farm development, Genesis Energy undertook a national site screening assessment. The assessment utilised mesoscale and spatial modelling tools to identify areas within New Zealand which experience favourable wind speeds, are likely to have suitable terrain for wind farm construction, and to avoid sites of known environmental sensitivity. Incorporated into the spatial modelling were factors such as wind speed, terrain slope and elevation, proximity of intervening land forms, population, known ecological and landscape features, and
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 78
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects transmission and roading infrastructure. The development approach undertaken in selecting a site is detailed in Section 2.3 of this document. As a result of this process, an area located approximately 20 km east of Pahiatua and Eketahuna was identified as having the required attributes for a wind farm. This led to the identification of what is now referred to as the CHWF Site.
Table 4.1: Outline of the CHWF development process.
Phase Key Activities Nationwide search of possible wind development sites using spatial and mesoscale wind modelling tools Site Selection Focus on sites of high wind (2007- 2008) Avoid areas that are known to have environmental sensitivity, those close to residential areas or of established ecological or national significance
Initial CHWF layout Concept Studies RMA planning and high level environmental assessments (2008 – 2009) Land access secured
Preliminary Wind monitoring and energy assessments Design and Environmental Constructability assessments Assessments Preparation and refinement of alternative Turbine layouts (2009) Preliminary environmental assessments Further development of project design, including development and Project Design refinement of the Turbine Corridor and Assessment of Environmental Engineering to support assessment of environmental effects Effects Detailed environmental assessments (2010- 2011) Ongoing incorporation of environmental assessment findings and feedback from consultation with stakeholders into project design Lodge Resource Consent Project definition finalised Applications Resource consent applications lodged (2011)
Detailed design Development of detailed specifications for tendering and procurement of components and works (before construction) Detailed design prior to construction Finalisation and approval of the resource consent EMP and SEMPs Implementation of the resource consent EMP and SEMPs Final Design Design finalisation and modifications during construction (during construction) Monitoring of construction activities and environmental effects with modifications to design and the resource consent EMP and SEMPs if required.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 79
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.2.3 Concept Studies The second phase in the CHWF development process involved feasibility studies to assess the suitability of the Site for a wind farm development. An initial Turbine layout was developed and high level environmental assessments and RMA planning assessments were undertaken to assess potential environmental sensitivities associated with the Site. Landowner access was also secured with CHWF Landowners to enable more detailed investigation of the Site.
4.2.4 Preliminary Design and Environmental Assessments Preliminary environmental assessments were undertaken during the third phase of the development process to develop a better understanding of the Site’s features and characteristics and to identify any potential environmental sensitivities, or construction constraints. More detailed wind monitoring was also carried out during this phase.
Preliminary environmental assessments included ecology, landscape and visual amenity effects, potential noise implications and transportation issues. A number of potential environmental sensitivities were identified during these preliminary assessments, and were incorporated into the project design. The studies did not identify any significant environmental impediments to the development of the project at the Site.
A constructability assessment was undertaken by Aurecon to determine the construction constraints at the Site. This assessment included an extensive survey across potential Turbine locations to ascertain the suitability of the Site for Turbine placement. The constructability assessment concluded that construction of a wind farm on the Site was technically feasible.
Detailed wind resource analysis was undertaken to further understand the wind resource at the CHWF Site. Ongoing wind data was collected from six wind monitoring masts that were installed across the Site between April and December 200915. LIDAR equipment has also been used to collect wind data from around the Site to supplement the monitoring mast data. This has been analysed with mesoscale wind modelling outputs and information collected from long-term weather stations, particularly the weather station at Castlepoint. The detailed wind resource assessments based on this data confirmed that the CHWF Site has a highly suitable wind resource for wind generation.
Assessments of Turbine technology and wind conditions at the Site were used to identify the Turbines that are likely to be available and suitable for installation at the CHWF Site. From this, a range of Turbine specifications were identified to represent the range of Turbines that may be available and appropriate for the Site, both now and in the future. Four Indicative Turbine Layouts were developed to represent this range of Turbines and specifications, and these in turn have been used to define the Turbine Corridor and for further engineering and environmental assessments.
15 Genesis Energy has installed six 80 m monitoring masts and associated recording equipment in accordance with existing resource consents RM090034 (TDC) and 20090407 (MDC). These masts have been used to study site specific wind conditions for determining Turbine locations, to provide an estimate of the potential electricity production of the CHWF Site, and will enable ongoing optimisation of Turbine output.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 80
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.2.5 Project Design and Assessment of Environmental Effects The project design and assessment of environmental effects phase of the CHWF development process included engineering and environmental assessments to inform and refine the overall project design. The environmental effects assessments are summarised in Section 5 of this document and provided in Volumes 3, 4 and 5.
Consultation with key stakeholders and the wider community, as detailed further in Section 7 of this document, has also been an integral part of the CHWF development process. Feedback obtained during consultation has been used to refine the project design.
The design process for the CHWF has been iterative with the design upon which environmental assessments have been based being refined by the findings of the assessments. Placement of infrastructure has been located to avoid and minimise potential effects where practicable. Further description of how the environmental assessments influenced the design of the CHWF is outlined below. Engineering considerations that were taken into account and influenced the design of the CHWF are described in the COMR provided in Appendix A (Volume 2).
Recreation and Tourism
The Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment concluded that with traffic management, road improvements and mitigation measures the effects on recreation and tourism will at, most, be no more than minor. No specific design modifications were required. Refer to Section 5.2.3 for a summary of recreation and tourism effects and Volume 3 (Section 3) for the Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment.
Landscape and Visual
The position of the CHWF infrastructure was considered with respect to achieving an appropriate fit with the surrounding landscape. From site selection and throughout the development process and project design phase of the CHWF, an important landscape objective has been to achieve a high degree of visual and landscape integration and in doing so, avoiding and minimising potential landscape and visual effects. To disguise or attempt to “hide” the CHWF is not practical. Likewise, to highlight and make the CHWF the major focal point in the landscape was not sought. What has been achieved has been an integrated outcome where the visibility of the Turbines and their associated infrastructure have been carefully considered, as have the potential effects on views, rural character and visual amenity of the area in general and rural dwellings in particular.
Substations, the Internal Transmission Line and 33kV overhead lines have been sited to minimise visibility. Low visibility was one of the criteria considered when selecting Substation sites, and the Internal Transmission Line and 33kV lines have been situated off ridge lines and away from public viewpoints and dwellings where practicable.
Refer to Section 5.3 for a summary of the landscape and visual effects, and Volume 3 (Section 4) and Volume 5 for the Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 81
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Noise
During design predicted noise emissions informed the location and siting of infrastructure by ensuring that all relevant noise standards could be met. Predicted construction noise effects comply with the relevant standards at all External Dwellings therefore no design modifications were required. Predicted operational noise effects comply with the limits set out in the wind Turbine noise standard (NZS6808:2010) at all External Dwellings. At External Dwellings where the predicted noise level is close to the wind Turbine noise standard limit the Turbine Corridor has been reduced to prevent any Turbines being located closer to the dwelling than that assessed. Refer to Section 5.4 for a summary of noise effects and Volume 3 (Section 5) for the Noise Effects Assessment.
Transportation
The transportation effects assessment determined that with appropriate management measures, traffic effects associated with construction and operation of the CHWF would be acceptable. No requirements for modification of the CHWF design to minimise effects were identified. Castle Hill Road was selected as the OW/OD Route to the eastern side of the CHWF rather than upgrading Daggs Road, Wairiri Road and Maringi Road to reduce earthworks relating to External Road upgrades. Refer to Section 5.5 for a summary of transportation effects and Volume 3 (Section 6) for the Transportation Effects Assessment.
Hydrology
A key factor considered in identifying potential sites for buildings such as the Main and Satellite Substations, and the Switching Station, was the potential for flood risk. Buildings have been sited away from potential flood areas as far as practicable and have been designed to avoid and manage effects of flooding. Turbines and associated Turbine infrastructure are primarily located on ridgelines so there is no flood risk associated with these components. Refer to Section 5.6.2 for a summary of the hydrology effects and Volume 3 (Section 8) for the Hydrology Effects Assessment.
Groundwater
The groundwater assessment determined that with mitigation measures the effects of the CHWF on groundwater would be no more than minor therefore no specific design modifications were required. Refer to Section 5.6.3 for a summary of groundwater effects and Volume 4 (Section 1) for the Groundwater Effects Assessment.
Aquatic Ecology
All CHWF infrastructure has been positioned and designed to avoid or minimise clearance of vegetation around watercourses and seepage areas dominated by high value indigenous species. Avoiding and minimising this vegetation clearance will allow a buffer to be maintained at watercourses where practical thereby reducing potential effects from adjacent earthworks disturbance and sediment discharges. The location of water crossings was also reviewed to take into account the relative ecological values
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 82
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects of the waterways On-site. No requirements for modification of the location and design of watercourse crossings were identified. Specific design of erosion and sediment control measures will be completed once the CHWF design is finalised as described in the COMR and the Hydrology Effects Assessment. Refer to Section 5.6.2 for a summary of aquatic ecology effects and Volume 4 (Section 2) for the Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment.
Terrestrial Ecology
Wherever possible and practicable, CHWF infrastructure has been located in vegetation dominated by exotic species, such as pasture, and early successional manuka and/or tauhinu shrubland of low ecological value. All CHWF infrastructure was positioned and designed to avoid legally-protected areas (DOC and QEII administered land), to avoid or minimise clearance of high ecological value vegetation types such as podocarp/broadleaved forest, tawa forest, and kamahi forest and to minimise clearance of manuka-kanuka forest, and broadleaved treeland. All legally protected areas were removed from the Turbine Corridor as were areas of high ecological value wherever practicable. Refer to Section 5.7 for a summary of the ecological effects assessment and Volume 4 (Section 3) for the Ecology Effects Assessment.
Archaeology
The archaeology assessment determined that the CHWF Site had no known sites of archaeological significance and the potential for discovery of unidentified archaeological is low. No specific design modifications were required. Refer to Section 5.9 for a summary of archaeology effects and Volume 4 (Section 5) for the Archaeological Effects Assessment.
Shadow Flicker
The shadow flicker assessment determined that shadow flicker effects on External Dwellings would be within international guidelines therefore no specific design modifications were required. Refer to Section 5.10 for a summary of shadow flicker effects and Volume 4 (Section 6) for the Shadow Flicker Effects Assessment.
Radio Services
The radio services effects assessment determined that there is potential for effects on some radio services. These are being addressed through consultation with the operators and any remaining risks will be addressed through micro-siting of Turbines within the Turbine Corridor during detailed design. Refer to Section 5.11 for a summary of radio services effects and Volume 4 (Section 7) for the Radio Services Effects Assessment.
Health Effects
The health effects assessment determined that there would be no effects as long as the design standards (International Commission for Non-ionising Radiation Protection
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 83
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
(“ICNIRP”) Guidelines 2010) which the EBoP was designed to comply with, continued to be met. As the ICNIRP Guidelines were incorporated early in the design stage, no later design modifications were required. Refer to Section 5.13 for a summary of the health effects assessment and Volume 4 (Section 8) for the Health Effects Assessment.
4.2.6 Alternatives Considered Alternative Generation Options
A number of factors were considered by Genesis Energy in deciding to proceed with a wind farm development in this locality. As outlined in Section 2.2.3, Genesis Energy operates a diverse portfolio of renewable and non-renewable generation that assists in meeting demand while contributing to a secure electricity supply to New Zealand. New Zealand has a world class wind resource, and in line with national energy policies, Genesis Energy considers that renewable generation, and wind generation in particular, will be an increasingly important component of the overall electricity generation mix.
Alternative Sites
Section 2.3 outlines the development approach undertaken by Genesis Energy in deciding to proceed with the CHWF at the identified Site. A range of matters were considered in selecting this Site, including the suitability of the wind resource, land availability, site access, proximity to the national grid, RMA planning considerations and potential environmental effects. The site selection process commenced at a nationwide level, where 14 regions were selected for more detailed study, including (amongst others), Southland/southern Otago, northern Northland, south Waikato, southern Taranaki and southern Hawke’s Bay/Wairarapa. The wind resource for each of these regions was modelled and potential sites narrowed down taking various site attributes and constraints into consideration. From this, the Wairarapa area was considered for further assessment and the Castle Hill Site was ultimately identified as being appropriate for a wind farm development.
Alternative Turbines and Site Layout
The development process undertaken for the CHWF, including how the location and layout of the Turbines, Turbine Corridor, EBoP, Internal Roads and other structures have been defined is outlined above. Any Turbine used for the CHWF will have to fit within the parameters of the Turbine Corridor and Turbine height limits. The Turbine Corridor enables a range of Turbine models to be considered for any specific location, provided that the resource consent conditions are satisfied. The specific Turbine model will be selected as part of the detailed design phase. As part of the detailed design phase, once the Turbine model(s) has been selected, final Turbine layout within the Turbine Corridor will be determined.
Alternative Access
A key consideration with any wind farm development is the access and delivery of wind farm components, and ancillary materials during the construction phase. Given the
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 84
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
OW/OD loads associated with the delivery of wind farm components, a number of alternative delivery routes to the CHWF Site have been considered, including alternative:
Delivery port options for wind farm components; and
Access for the delivery of Turbine components, including rail, air and barge.
The final selection of the delivery port will be confirmed in the detailed design. Alternative options for the delivery of Turbine components to the Site were assessed but have not been considered further due to practical limitations accessing the Site, requirement for double-handling of Turbine components, capacity to transport the required loads and other logistical constraints. Irrespective of which delivery port is utilised, the effects on local roads remains essentially the same.
4.3 Project Components 4.3.1 Introduction This section of the AEE sets out the main project components and features of the CHWF. Components are shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C (Volume 2) and include:
Turbines: plant consisting of foundations, tower, nacelle and rotor for conversion of wind energy into electricity.
A Turbine Corridor: 3,144 ha identified as suitable for Turbine placement. Turbines will be located within this corridor.
Turbine Clusters: groupings of Turbines for ease of reference.
Turbine Configurations: up to 286 Medium Turbines (maximum tip height 135 m) or up to 242 Large Turbines (maximum tip height greater than 135 m but no greater than 155 m) or a mixture of Medium and Large Turbines installed within the Turbine Corridor.
Internal Roads: roads constructed within the CHWF Site for transporting wind farm components, materials and personnel within Site and to allow access around the Site for construction and operational activities.
EBoP: all electrical structures and equipment related to the collection and reticulation of electrical power around CHWF to the point of connection to the External Transmission Line. EBoP includes an Internal Transmission Line, 33kV overhead lines, 33kV underground cables, a Main Substation and Satellite Substation, an optional Switching Station and switch gear huts along with other associated electrical equipment.
External Roads: Public roads near the Site that are planned to be used for traffic associated with the construction and operation of the CHWF and by Over-weight and Over-dimension Vehicles.
Earthworks associated with the construction and maintenance of the CHWF.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 85
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Temporary construction infrastructure: components required for construction of the CHWF including Concrete Batching Plants, Central Laydown Areas, Excess Fill Areas, Contractor Compounds, quarrying and crushing facilities and water storage and abstraction facilities.
Operations infrastructure e.g. operations and maintenance buildings.
Turbines and other imported equipment are likely to be transported from the Port of Napier. This is the closest suitable port to the CHWF and is connected to the Site by a major arterial route (SH 50(A) and then SH 2). Other ports being considered are Centre Port and Port Taranaki. The final selection of the delivery port will be confirmed through discussions with the ports prior to detailed design. Genesis Energy is not seeking resource consent as part of this application, for any upgrading of External Roads that may be required between the chosen Port and Alfredton. Where resource consents are required for the works on External Roads for this section of the route, they will be sought through a separate resource consent application process.
4.3.2 Turbines As outlined, Genesis Energy is seeking resource consents for the construction and operation of the CHWF that provides some flexibility in terms of the Turbine model and size selected, and location within the Turbine Corridor. The actual Turbines will be selected during the detailed design phase of the project.
Turbine Components
Irrespective of the Turbine model selected, each Turbine will comprise several main components, as shown in Figure 4.1 and described below.
Tower
The supporting structure will be a steel or concrete tower fitted with an internal ladder or lift. The dimensions will be dependent on the Turbine model selected. To facilitate their production and transport, the towers will be manufactured in sections which will be assembled at each Turbine location. If a steel tower design is selected, there will typically be up to five sections to transport and assemble on Site. Should concrete towers be used, a larger number of sections are expected (for example approximately 16 individual sections) which may be prefabricated and transported to the Site in sections or fabricated on-site.
Rotor
The rotor consists of three Turbine blades and a hub, and is attached to the shaft which drives the generator in the nacelle. The blades are generally constructed of fibreglass and the hub generally of steel. Motors within the nacelle are used to turn the nacelle to face into the wind and to adjust the pitch of the Turbine blades to maximise energy production.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 86
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Blade
Hub Nacelle
Rotor Diameter
Tower Height
Hub Height
Tip Tower Height Turbine Kiosk/transformer
Turbine Foundation
Figure 4.1: Schematic of Turbine components.
Nacelle
The nacelle is the housing mounted on top of the tower that generally encloses a gearbox, generator, transformer, motors, brakes, electronic components, wiring, and hydraulic and lubricating oil systems and to which the rotor is attached. The nacelle is usually constructed of steel and fibreglass. Weather monitoring equipment located on top of the nacelle will provide data on wind speed and direction for the automatic operation of the Turbine.
Transformer
Turbine transformers are required to transform Turbine generator voltage for reticulation and may be located inside the Turbine nacelle, tower base, or adjacent to the Turbine on separate foundations.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 87
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbine Corridor
Genesis Energy anticipates that a number of Turbine models will be commercially available at the time of tendering for the construction of the CHWF. In order to allow for optimisation in Turbine placement (for commercial, environmental and constructability reasons), Genesis Energy is seeking resource consent for a Turbine Corridor enabling a range of Turbines to be considered. The Turbine Corridor covers an area of 3,144 ha and incorporates all areas within the CHWF Site that have been selected for Turbine placement (see Figure 1.2). Turbines may be sited anywhere within the Turbine Corridor and may not be located outside the Turbine Corridor.
The area and location of the Turbine Corridor is shown in Figures 1.2 and 1.3(i) to 1.3(iv), and in the CHWF Project Maps (Appendix C, Volume 2).
The proposed Turbine Corridor has incorporated environmental and engineering assessments to avoid and/or minimise environmental effects. Firstly, the Turbine Corridor was created by overlaying the four Indicative Turbine Layouts on each other (as shown in the example in Figure 4.2). A buffer of 200 m was applied around each Turbine location with the resulting shape (the initial Turbine Corridor) then being examined and adjusted to ensure that all areas within the Site suitable for Turbine placement were included. The Turbine Corridor approach allows for optimisation of the placement of different sized Turbines and the use of a range of Turbine specifications.
Figure 4.2: Unmodified Turbine Corridor (green) with four overlying Indicative Turbine Layouts.
Environmental sensitivities and engineering constraints were then assessed in detail as shown in the example in Figure 4.3. Areas where legal or statutory plans limit disturbance, such as reserves, QEII Open Space Covenants and DOC land were identified and removed from the Turbine Corridor. The Turbine locations in the Indicative Turbine Layouts were adjusted to avoid or minimise other environmental effects as described in Section 4.2.5 above.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 88
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.3: Refined Turbine Corridor (green).
As part of the detailed design phase, once the final Turbine models have been selected, Turbines will be micro-sited within the Turbine Corridor, with the Turbine model selected dictating the spacing required between the individual Turbines and therefore the total number of Turbines to be installed. Typically Turbine spacing is between 2.5 to four times the Turbine rotor diameter if Turbines are arranged across the predominant wind direction, and five to 12 times the Turbine rotor diameter in the downwind direction. Terrain, wind conditions, Turbine model characteristics and environmental factors will determine the final Turbine locations. The Turbine layout to be used will be defined prior to construction, and construction layout plans will be provided to Council.
Turbine Sizes
Genesis Energy has undertaken an assessment of available Turbines and potential suppliers to identify a range of Turbines suitable for installation at the CHWF. Two Turbine size ranges have been established to capture the range of sizes available:
Medium Turbines have a maximum tip height of 135 m; and
Large Turbines have a maximum tip height greater than 135 m but not more than 155 m.
Turbine Configurations
The size range of suitable Turbines determines the number of Turbines which can be installed. As the rotor diameter of the Turbines increases, the space required between the Turbines also increases to avoid energy loss from wake and other effects. This
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 89
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects means the optimal quantity and positioning of the Turbines changes from one Turbine model to the next.
The following three Turbine configurations have been established to define the maximum number of Turbines in the Turbine Corridor:
Medium Turbine Configuration - comprises only Medium Turbines up to a maximum quantity of 286 Turbines.
Large Turbine Configuration – comprises only Large Turbines up to a maximum quantity of 242 Turbines.
Mixed Turbine Configuration - comprises a mixture of Medium and Large Turbines with the maximum quantity of Turbines of each size determined according to the graph shown in Figure 4.4. This mixture of Medium and Large Turbines is described by the following equation:
NM + NL 1 286 242
where NM is the number of Medium Turbines and NL is the number of Large Turbines in the Mixed Turbine Configuration.
Relationship Between Medium and Large Turbine Numbers 300
250
200
150 Number of Large Turbines 100
50
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Number of Medium Turbines
Figure 4.4: Relationship between numbers of Medium and Large Turbines in the Mixed Turbine Configuration.
The Mixed Turbine Configuration has been included as there is the potential for different types of Turbines to be used within the Turbine Corridor, due to the variance in the wind resource across the CHWF Site. In addition, there may be different
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 90
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbines available for supply at different stages of development. However, the variation between Turbines will be minimised where practicable, for example while the size may differ, very large Turbines will not be utilised next to much smaller Turbines. To minimise visual effects, Turbines will be off-white in colour and will have three blades. Tubular (not lattice) towers will be used.
Turbine Layouts
Four Indicative Turbine Layouts (two Medium Turbine Layouts and two Large Turbine Layouts) have been developed to represent the range of possible Turbine sizes that could be developed at the CHWF Site, and to allow environmental assessment where a specific layout is required. The layouts are based on different rotor diameter sizes to demonstrate the different Turbine spacing that could occur within the Turbine Corridor. The parameters of these layouts are provided in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Indicative Turbine Layouts.
Medium Turbine Layouts Large Turbine Layouts Indicative Turbine Layout Name 80M 90M 100L 110L Indicative Rotor Diameter (m) 80 90 100 110 (may vary up or down) Indicative Hub Height (m) 90 90 100 100 (may vary up or down)
Number of Turbines 286 262 242 186
Maximum tip height (m) 135 135 155 155
Turbine placement for these layouts was determined by:
Suitability of terrain for Turbine construction.
Quality of the wind resource across the Site - this affects which locations are selected but will also dictate the type of wind Turbine that can be used at a particular site.
Spacing required between Turbines to minimise wake effects from one Turbine to another (generally determined by a Turbines rotor size).
Turbine Clusters
As outlined in Section 1.1 and shown in Figure 1.2, the Turbines have been grouped into seven Turbine Clusters (A to G) for ease of reference. The Turbine Clusters are primarily based on geographical location, and do not represent proposed project staging or a construction programme.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 91
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbine Numbering
Turbines are numbered according to the following format:
Layout Name – Turbine Cluster Letter - Turbine Number.
For example, Turbine 5-80-A-016 is Turbine 16 belonging to Turbine Cluster A of revision 5 of the 80M layout.
Turbine Foundations
Turbine Foundations will be regular shaped concrete pads (likely to be circular or octagonal), and constructed from reinforced concrete. The design of each Turbine Foundation will differ depending on Turbine type, geotechnical conditions at each site, earthquake loading conditions and wind loading conditions, and will be determined during the detailed design phase. Indicative Turbine Foundation design parameters for the Medium and Large Turbine options are summarised in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Indicative Turbine Foundation parameters.
Turbine Foundation Reinforcing Steel Concrete Foundation Type Diameter (m) (tonnes) (m3) Depth (m) Medium Up to 18 40 – 50 465 – 520 2.0 – 5.0 Large Up to 21 50 – 65 580 – 710 2.0 – 5.0
Piled foundations may be used in areas of site instability or where weaker soils are present. This requirement will be confirmed once final Turbine locations are determined during the detailed design phase. All Turbine Foundations will be covered with excavated soil and will not be visible after construction. Figure 4.5 provides a schematic cross-section of a Turbine Foundation.
Figure 4.5: Schematic Turbine Foundation cross-section.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 92
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbine Platforms
Each Turbine will have a flat construction platform located adjacent to the Turbine Foundation, to provide a working space for crane operations and for lay-out and assembly of Turbine components. All Turbine Platforms will be located within the Turbine Corridor, and are unlikely to extend out further than 60 m from final Turbine locations.
The Turbine Platform for both the Medium and Large Turbines will be approximately 50 m long and 28 m wide (1,400 m²). However, the specific geometry of each Turbine Platform will be optimised on a case by case basis during the detailed design phase prior to construction, to take into account the local terrain. Where local conditions dictate the need for a smaller Turbine Platform, the size will be reduced to a minimum area of 800 m² for a Medium Turbine and 1,250 m² for a Large Turbine, however a smaller size may be less practical and give rise to construction delays. Figure 4.6 shows a schematic of a Turbine Platform layout.
Figure 4.6: Schematic layout of a Turbine Platform.
The Turbine Platform site will be excavated to a level surface and covered with a layer of compacted gravel. Where appropriate, a stormwater retention system will be established around the perimeter of the Turbine Platform for the duration of the construction period. Post construction, the platform will not be actively rehabilitated but may naturally re-vegetate. This allows for the Turbine Platform to be retained should it be required for future operations and maintenance activities.
Turbine Lighting for Aviation Purposes
Aviation safety and standards in New Zealand are the responsibility of the Civil Aviation Authority (“CAA”). Under Part 77 of the Civil Aviation Rules, anyone proposing a structure that will extend more than 60 m in height above the ground level at its site must notify the Director of Civil Aviation of the proposed structure at least 90 days before it is erected. Under Rule 77.19, any structure exceeding 120 m in height above the ground level at its site is considered a hazard in navigable airspace, and conditions or limitations may be imposed for marking or lighting the structure.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 93
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
With respect to wind farms, the CAA has specific guidelines regarding the lighting and identification of wind Turbines and meteorological masts, and will make a determination on a case-by-case basis as to the lighting requirements. As a minimum, the following conditions and limitations are likely to be included in all determinations by the CAA:
Selected individual Turbines at wind farms with Turbines over 60 m high will be required to have lighting.
The highest Turbines, those at the extremities of the Site, and other Turbines around the perimeter of the Site will be lit. The spacing between lit Turbines will not exceed 1 1,850 m.
Lighting will be medium intensity red as defined in Rule Part 77, Appendix B10 (i.e. an effective intensity of not less than 1,600 candela of red light, and will flash between 20 and 60 times per minute).
The obstruction lights shall be located on or above the top of the nacelle, shall be visible from all directions, and may be shielded below the horizontal plane.
Obstruction lights at intermediate levels will not be required.
The painting of Turbines with obstruction marking will not be required.
All wind farms will be depicted on aeronautical charts (CAA, 2006).
With respect to the CHWF, permanent lights will only be installed on Turbines and wind monitoring masts where required to meet CAA requirements, to minimise lighting in the surrounding area. As a minimum, it is expected that there will be a requirement for lighting to be installed on Turbines around the perimeter of the Site, along with some Turbines within each of the Turbine Clusters.
Genesis Energy has discussed the proposal with the CAA in relation to their requirements, and no specific requirements (other than as noted above) have been identified. The CAA will be formally notified of the project details at the detailed design stage of the project and will be provided with a final Turbine layout. This will enable an assessment to be undertaken at that time to determine the specific lighting and other aviation safety requirements.
4.3.3 Electrical Balance of Plant The EBoP is comprised of all electrical plant on the Site connecting the Turbines to the External Transmission Line. There are two options for the EBoP design (referred to as EBoP Option 1 and EBoP Option 2), as shown in Figures 4.7 and 4.8.
The difference in the EBoP Options relates to the two location options for the Main Substation as the final selection of the Main Substation location will determine the location of various EBoP components. Figures 4.7 and 4.8 show the indicative location of all EBoP components and illustrate how the EBoP component locations vary depending on which Main Substation location is selected.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 94
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The main components of the EBoP include:
Main Substation (two options proposed);
Satellite Substation;
33kV underground cables (double and single circuit);
33kV overhead lines (double and single circuit);
Internal Transmission Line;
Optional Switching Station and Internal Transmission Line Deviation;
Electrical switchgear huts; and
Other components (e.g. earthing / communications).
Each of these components is described in more detail below.
While some flexibility in the footprint of the substations is sought, the layout of the EBoP is not expected to change significantly from that described below and shown in Figures 4.7 and 4.8, regardless of whether a Medium or Large Turbine Configuration is selected.
Location Description for EBoP Components
The EBoP are likely to be located where indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C (Volume 2) but may be located anywhere subject to the following limitations:
Main Substations: located at one of the two locations shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C.
The location of the Satellite Substation is shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C.
The location of the Switching Station is shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C.
The location of the Internal Transmission Line will be within 50m of the location indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C.
The location of the Internal Transmission towers will be within 50m of the locations indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C and will be positioned to avoid clearance or trimming of indigenous vegetation to the extent practicable.
33kV Overhead Lines, Underground Cables and other EBoP components are likely to be located where indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 95
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
but may be located anywhere within the Site, subject to the following limitations:
1. Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
2. Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
3. Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
4. Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
5. Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided.
6. Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
7. Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
Main Substation and Satellite Substation
Main and Satellite Substation sites have been identified according to the following criteria:
Large, flat area central to the surrounding wind Turbines;
Suitable access for heavy vehicles;
Distant from occupied dwellings;
Consideration of visual impacts from overhead lines and the building;
Potential for flood risk;
Proximity to trees and potential sources of flying debris; and
Sheltered from the wind.
From a number of sites of sufficient size, two sites for the Main Substation and one site for the Satellite Substation were identified.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 96 bles !100 ouble circuit !100 ngle circuit 2 !100 d, double circuit A !100 !100 100 !100 ! d, single circut !100 !100 3 !100 !100 sion Line (220kV) !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 sion Line Deviation !100 !100 sion Line towers 4 !100 100 ! !100 !100 !100
! 5 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 Satellite Substation !100 6 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 B 7 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100
!100 !100
!100 9 !100 !100
!100 100 !100 !100 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !00 Optional Switching Station 12 !100 13 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 100 100 !100 100 100 ! 100 ! !100 !100 ! ! ! !100 !100 10!100 !100 !100 D C !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 11 100 !100 ! !100 !100 14 15 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 16 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 100 !100 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 18 !100 100 100 !100 21 ! ! 17 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 25 !100 !100 100 100 ! 100!100 ! !100 !100 ! !100 100 100 !100 ! 100 !100 !100 ! !100 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 23!100 !100 !100 100 !100 100 100 ! E 100 20 !100 ! ! ! 100 !100 100 !100 ! !100 !100 !100 ! !100 !100 26 !100 100 100 100 !100 ! !100 !100 !100 ! !100 ! !100 100 !100 !100 ! F !100 27 !100 !100 100 !100 !100 ! 100 19 !100 22!100 ! G 100 100 ! ! !100 100 !100 !100 ! !100 !100 !10 !0 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 24 !100 !100 28 !100 !100 !100!100 !0
!0 d, double circuit ! d, single circuit !100 ound, double circuit 2 A !100 !100 100 100 ! ound, single circuit !100 ! !100 3 !100 mission Line (220kV) !100 !100 !100 !100 mission Line Deviation !100 !100 100 ! !100 mission Line towers 4 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100
!100 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 Satellite Substation 6 !100 !100 !1 !100 !10 B 7 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100
!100 !100
!100 100 9 !100 !
!100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !00 Optional Switching Station 12 !100 13 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 10 100 !100 !100 !100 100 ! 100 !100 !100 ! ! !100 !100 !100 !100 D !100 100 C ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 100 11 !100 100 14 ! !100 ! 15 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 16 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 100 !100 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 18 !100 100 100 !100 17 ! ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 21 25 100 100 ! 100 100 !100 ! ! ! !100 100 100 !100 ! 1 100 !100 ! 100 ! !100! 100 100 ! !100 100 !100 ! ! !100 !10 ! !100 !100 23 100 !100 !100 E!100 20 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 26 100 100 ! !100 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 100 100 !100 ! ! F !1 !100 27 !100 !100 !100 22 !100 19 !100 !100 100 !100 24 ! !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !00 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !100 !0 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The Main Substation is located in the southern region of the Site connecting about two- thirds of the Turbine circuits directly, and the Satellite Substation located in the northern region of the Site. The Main Substation will be located at one of the two locations shown in Figures 4.7 and 4.8. Of these two options for the Main Substation, one will be selected during the detailed design phase of the project depending on which part of the CHWF is first developed, and the final location of the External Transmission Line. Alternative locations also provide redundancy in the unlikely event that one location is found to be unsuitable.
The Satellite Substation has one location (see Figures 4.7 and 4.8), but two alternative pad sites have been provided for. No significant alterations to the EBoP layout are required for either of the pad sites.
The Main Substation may contain the following components:
33kV to 220kV transformers;
Circuit breakers and switchgear;
Switchgear/control/relay building;
Static Var compensation equipment building;
Overhead gantries and buses;
Oil interceptor tanks;
Communication equipment;
Services building;
Car park; and
Perimeter fence.
The purpose of the substations is to receive the output (33kV) from the Turbines, convert this to the 220kV voltage required for transmission to the national grid, provide a safe, controllable and compliant connection to the External Transmission Line, and to provide other required electrical function.
A control room will be sited at each substation and will typically contain electrical and some wind farm control instrumentation, electrical and communications equipment, routine maintenance equipment and stores, a small work area and staff amenities. An auxiliary services building may also be located at the substation site, which will contain switchyard control equipment and batteries.
The final size and configurations of the substations will be influenced by the level of system security chosen and as an outcome of the detailed design. Generally, the level of system security required depends on the size of the wind farm, the type of wind Turbine model selected, grid requirements and operations, and the potential value of lost generation in the event of plant failure. These factors are subject to change as the CHWF is developed, therefore three potential security system levels for the CHWF project have been developed (outlined in the COMR attached as Appendix A).
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 99
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
For the Main Substation, the maximum external dimensions will be 230 m x 174 m (4 ha), while the Satellite Substation will have maximum external dimensions of 125 m x 125 m (1.6 ha).
The substations will be connected to the Internal Transmission Line via termination towers (approximately 26 m high), while the maximum height of the substation is not expected to exceed approximately 20 m. Buildings within each Substation site are not expected to exceed 9 m. The indicative layout of the Main and Satellite Substations are shown in Figures 4.9 and 4.10 respectively.
Switching Station
A centrally located Switching Station has been developed as an alternative point of connection of the CHWF to the External Transmission Line. Potential sites for the Switching Station were identified taking into account the following:
Ease of access;
Topography;
Earthwork volumes required;
Visibility;
Proximity to dwellings and other buildings;
Risk of flooding;
Expected proximity to the External Transmission Line connection point;
Wind load; and
Location in respect to the Internal Transmission Line.
The Switching Station will be located at the location shown in Figures 4.7 and 4.8.
The Switching Station collects the high voltage (220kV) outputs from both the Main and Satellite Substation, and directs this output to the national grid via the External Transmission Line. The main function of the Switching Station is to connect / disconnect the substations from the External Transmission Line.
The optional Switching Station may contain the following main components:
HV circuit breakers and switchgear;
An optional 33kV to 220kV transformer;
Switchgear/control/relay building;
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 100
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.9: Schematic Main Substation layout.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 101
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.10: Schematic Satellite Substation layout.
Overhead gantries and buses;
Oil interceptor tanks (if required for optional transformer);
Communication equipment;
Car park; and
Perimeter fence.
The Switching Station has an expected footprint of approximately 140 m x 106 m, while equipment within the site will have an expected height of up to 25 m. Figure 4.11 provides an indicative plan of the Switching Station.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 102
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm [Assessment of Environmental Effects]
Figure 4.11: Schematic plan view of the optional Switching Station.
Underground Cables
Turbines are grouped into electrical circuits. Turbines within circuits will be connected by 33kV underground cables typically buried in a trench beneath (or adjacent to) Internal Roads to minimise earthworks and disturbance. A combination of underground
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 103
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects cables and overhead lines will be used to connect these circuits to centrally located substations.
Several cables may be buried in the same trench or in multiple trenches along the same route. Site specific conditions and electrical loads will determine how the cables are laid and the type of cable used. Figure 4.12 shows two typical cross-sections for underground cabling. The maximum length of all underground cable is estimated to range from 160 km to 180 km, depending on the location of the Main Substation, with all but approximately 10km located under or adjacent to Internal Roads.
Figure 4.12: Schematic cross-sections for underground cable trench design.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 104
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Where possible, bedding and backfill material will be sourced from Site (for example excavated material), however it is possible that imported material like sand or crusher dust may be required as bedding material to achieve required thermal resistivity characteristics. This will be confirmed during the detailed design phase. Design and management measures for underground cables is described in more detail in the COMR attached as Appendix A (Volume 2).
Where underground cables are required to traverse a stream, this will be achieved either by directional drilling (from each side of the stream), or through the use of a cable bridge. An indicative sketch of a cable bridge can be found in Appendix A of the COMR. The COMR is attached as Appendix A (Volume 2) to this document.
Overhead Lines
Due to the size of the CHWF, 33kV overhead lines will be required to link the electrical circuit groups to the Main and Satellite Substations.
Overhead line routes will, where practicable, follow existing farm tracks or Internal Roads for ease of installation, monitoring and maintenance. In some sections (for example, close to residential dwellings, due to physical constraints, or where routes cross Internal Roads required for crane movements, the overhead line will convert to underground cabling (see Figure 4.13).
Figure 4.13: Schematic of overhead line to underground cable transition for Internal Road crossings.
To minimise the spread of overhead lines across the Site, and thereby minimise their associated effects, the design of the 33kV reticulation system has sought to bring lines together to follow the same route where possible. This means that in some places, generally as 33kV lines get closer to the substations, more than one set of overhead lines will run in parallel. Table 4.4 provides an estimate of the length of various multiple lines according to estimates based on the current design, and Figures 4.14 and 4.15 show a range of multiple line arrangements. These may vary when detailed design is undertaken. The proposed overhead line routes are shown in Figures 4.7 and 4.8.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 105
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The overhead lines will be supported by a combination of different pole structures. Three representative types of pole structures similar to what will be used for the CHWF are shown in Figures 4.16, 4.17 and 4.18.
Table 4.4: Estimated multiple line lengths.
EBoP Option 1 EBoP Option 2 Length of Total Length of Length of Lines Total Length of Lines Running Individual Running in Individual Lines in Parallel (km) Lines (km) Parallel (km) (km) 1 pole lines 18.2 18.2 35.7 35.7 2 pole lines 17.4 34.8 16.6 33.1 3 pole lines 10.4 31.2 2.6 7.8 4 pole lines 2.3 9.3 1.5 6.1 TOTAL 48.3 93.5 56.4 82.7
Figure 4.14: Isometric view of multiple 33kV line arrangements.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 106
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.15: Isometric view of alternative multiple 33kV line arrangement.
Figure 4.16: Schematic 33kV double circuit pole design.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 107
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.17: Schematic 33kV double circuit pole design.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 108
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.18: Schematic 33kV four circuit pole design.
Internal Transmission Line
A 220kV Internal Transmission Line will connect the Main and Satellite Substations and, if it is required, the optional Switching Station.
Potential routes for the Internal Transmission Line connecting the Main and Satellite Substations have been identified within the CHWF Site, taking into account:
Topography;
Minimisation of road crossings;
Location of External Dwellings;
Constructability constraints;
Proximity to existing tracks;
Minimisation of vegetation clearance required; and
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 109
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Potential landscape and visual issues.
An ecological survey along the identified routes was undertaken and areas identified as having high ecological value were avoided. This process defined the Internal Transmission Line route as proposed in this application. Apart from micro-siting of towers the location of the Internal Transmission Line is not expected to move more than 50 m from the location indicated in Figures 4.7 and 4.8.
Two variations of the Internal Transmission Line route have been developed to encompass the two Main Substation location options (see Figures 4.7 and 4.8). The Internal Transmission Line route has been designed to be at least 300 m from any residential dwelling and a minimum of 7.5 m above the ground at the lowest point, in accordance with ICNIRP electric magnetic field guidelines.
The length of the Internal Transmission Line will depend on the final EBoP configuration however a maximum length of 28 km is anticipated. The Internal Transmission Line may be double circuit, single circuit, or a combination of both, depending on the level of system security chosen, and the EBoP configuration used. Both double and single circuit designs will be carried on a single tower.
The Internal Transmission Line will be supported by lattice tower or pole structures. The type of tower structure may vary at each location, depending on the number of circuits, horizontal loads, terrain clearance required and tower spacing. Typical tower structures that may be used are shown in Figure 4.19.
Three representative tower foundation designs for the lattice towers have been developed based on varying soil conditions:
Mass concrete – low strength / saturated soil conditions.
Bored piers – high strength soil and rock conditions.
Rock anchors – good quality rock conditions.
The detailed design of the tower foundations will depend on specific tower loadings and geotechnical site conditions. A crane pad (approximately 100 m2) will be required at each tower site to support the construction crane required to erect the tower.
Turbine Transformers
Turbine transformers are required to transform Turbine generator voltage up to 33kV for reticulation, and may be located inside the Turbine nacelle, tower base or adjacent to the Turbine (external Turbine transformer). To provide for the option of external Turbine transformers, a representative Turbine transformer kiosk and foundation has been developed, as shown in Figure 4.20.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 110
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.19: Lattice and monopole 220kV tower structure options.
Figure 4.20: Representative external Turbine transformer kiosk design.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 111
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Switchgear Huts
Medium voltage switchgear is generally located within the base of the Turbine tower, however as the loads within an electrical circuit increase, the switchgear rating can be exceeded. In such instances, higher rated conventional switchgear will need to be used and will require an external hut within which the switchgear is housed.
Three potential switchgear hut locations have been identified for the CHWF (see Figures 4.7 and 4.8), however the number and location of these huts will be determined during the detailed design phase of the project. The switchgear huts will be located to avoid areas of high ecological value.
Figure 4.21 shows a conventional switchgear hut, with dimensions approximately 8.5 m long, 5 m wide and 3 m high.
Figure 4.21: Representative switchgear hut design.
4.3.4 Internal Roads Internal Roads are required to enable the movement of wind farm components, construction materials, equipment and personnel, as well as on-going operational traffic within the Site. In particular, Internal Roads are required to access the Turbines, substations, Switching Station, Internal Transmission Line towers, 33kV poles and all other temporary and permanent wind farm components.
Internal Roads have been designed and associated earthworks volumes calculated and will generally be located as shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C. The design philosophy for Internal Roads has been to follow existing farm tracks and the tops of ridgelines wherever practicable to minimise earthworks and overall Site
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 112
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects disturbance. To enable passing, Lay-bys will be included approximately every 1 km along Internal Roads greater than 1 km in length. However, the scope sought within the resource consent will enable the final location of Internal Roads within the Site to be confirmed during the detailed design phase. Further refinement may be required due to the following:
Technological advances in transporters or components, or construction techniques. This may enable a more efficient route to be taken which may reduce earthworks and/or ecological effects.
Unforeseen ground conditions or environmental constraints.
Unidentified archaeological sites or features.
The Internal Road design approach is considered appropriate at this Site because of the large proportion of the Site consisting of low or negligible ecological value. The location of the Internal Roads will be influenced by the fixed locations of key CHWF infrastructure (Turbines within the Turbine Corridor and substations) to which they will provide access but could be located anywhere within the Site, subject to the limits presented below (and summarised in Table 4.15):
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C (Volume 2) and this document. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66 ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Watercourse crossings will not vary in location by more than 100 m each side of locations identified in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C (Volume 2).
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05 ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Internal Roads for Turbine Access
Internal Roads are required to provide access to all Turbine locations. Internal Road alignments have been designed for each of the four Indicative Turbine Layouts. They
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 113
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects will be constructed to a standard that will enable delivery of OW/OD loads (Turbine blades, nacelles, towers etc.), and also to enable the cranes used to erect the Turbines to be shifted from one Turbine position to the next. Parameters for Internal Roads are outlined in Appendix B of the COMR (attached as Appendix A, Volume 2). Post construction, Internal Roads will continue to be used for accessing the Turbines for operations and maintenance.
The Internal Road alignment will be largely the same regardless of whether a Medium or Large Turbine configuration is used. The only exception is that the alignment may be refined when in close proximity to the final Turbine positions, where a longer route is required to traverse steeper slopes or a lower radius curve is required for tighter corners, dips or humps for Large Turbines. The total length of Internal Roads required for Turbine access will range from approximately 146 km – 161 km, subject to final Turbine layout.
Internal Roads for Turbine access within the seven Turbine Clusters is described below and shown in detail in the series of Tile Maps attached as Appendix C (Volume 2) to this document.
Turbine Cluster A
Access to the northern sub-groups in Turbine Cluster A from the west is via Pahiatua Road and Rimu Road in the Rakaunui area (see Tile Maps A5 and A6, Appendix C, Volume 2). Direct access between these two northern sub-groups is not considered feasible due to the deep gully separating them. Access to the southern group of Turbines in Turbine Cluster A is likely to be from Rakaunui Road or directly from Route 52 (see Tile Maps B5 and B6, Appendix C, Volume 2). Between 16 km – 19 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster A.
Turbine Cluster B
Access to the Internal Roads servicing Turbine Cluster B will be located at three locations along Waihoki Valley Road and one on Puketawa Road (see Tile Maps C5, C6, D5 and D6, Appendix C, Volume 2). The two Internal Roads heading south from Waihoki Valley Road will link through to the Internal Road heading north from the Puketawa Road Access Point. Between 27 km – 28 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster B.
Turbine Cluster C
Access to the Turbines in Turbine Cluster C will be via Waitawhiti Road or internal access from Turbine Cluster D (see Tile Maps E4, E5 and F4, Appendix C, Volume 2). Between 9 km – 12 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster C.
Turbine Cluster D
There are three sub-groups of Turbines in Turbine Cluster D north of Castle Hill Road. Access to two sub-groups is likely to be via Ngarata Road, while the third sub-group
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 114
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects has an access point at the summit of Castle Hill Road and an Internal Road link to Turbine Cluster C to the east (see Tile Maps D3, D4, E3 and E4, Appendix C, Volume 2).
Access to areas south of Castle Hill Road will be via a Wind Farm Access Point opposite the northern sub-group Castle Hill Road Access Point and via an Internal Road link from Turbine Cluster G to the south-west (see Tile Maps E3, E4, F3 and F3, Appendix C, Volume 2). Between 33 km – 35 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster D.
Turbine Cluster E
Turbine Cluster E is likely to be accessed from Alfredton-Tinui Road at two separate access points and will also have access via Maringi Road. Significant earthworks are likely to be required to enable the transportation of Turbine components, both on Alfredton-Tinui Road and Maringi Road. A main spine road which links Maringi Road in the south to Alfredton-Tinui Road in the north is likely to be established (see Tile Maps F3, F4, G3 and G4, Appendix C, Volume 2). Between 20 km – 22 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster E.
Turbine Cluster F
The main access to Turbine Cluster F is from Manawa Road, which is linked to Alfredton-Tinui Road to the north. Access is via an existing farm track, approximately 3 to 4 km in length, which leads to the plateau. A new access road will link the Turbines on the plateau.
To the east of Turbine Cluster F, a road is likely to be established to connect to Tanawa Road. This section of road will be utilised by service vehicles to access an identified quarry site (Taipo quarry), located approximately 6 km from the Site but will not be used for over-dimension components. Between 19 km – 23 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster F (see Tile Maps F5, F6, G5 and G6, Appendix C, Volume 2).
Turbine Cluster G
The main access to Turbine Cluster G will be via the Internal Road for Turbine Cluster D, off Castle Hill Road. The main spine road of Turbine Cluster G heads in a south westerly direction from Turbine Cluster D. Wairiri Road, and Daggs Road which leads into it, are not suitable for OW/OD deliveries, but can be used by smaller vehicles as a more direct route to the Turbines in this area. Internal Roads will deviate off the spine road to access all Turbines in Turbine Cluster G. Between 22 km – 23 km of Internal Roads are required within Turbine Cluster G (see Tile Maps F2, G1, G2 and H1, Appendix C, Volume 2).
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 115
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Internal Roads for Electrical Balance of Plant Access
Internal Roads for the Main and Satellite Substations, and the Switching Station have been designed to the same standard as for the Large Turbine Configuration because of the overweight load and crane transport requirements, but with a reduced road width of 6 m due to smaller crane requirements. The total Internal Road length to access these EBoP components is approximately 4 km.
Internal Roads used solely for accessing the Internal Transmission Line towers will not need to be constructed to the same standard as Internal Roads for Turbine access, as there will be no requirement to transport OW/OD loads. A road width of 3 m, including a drainage ditch along one or both channels, will be required. The total length of Internal Roads required to access the Internal Transmission Line towers is approximately 49 km.
Roads to access the 33kV overhead pole locations will generally not require the formation of new roads. Access will utilise existing farm tracks where possible, or will be via four wheel drive access cross-country. A 3 m wide access track has been assumed if any clearance of vegetation is required.
Internal Roads for Other CHWF Components
Quarries will be accessed either by the Internal Road network, External Roads or existing farm tracks. All other CHWF components (such as O&M facilities and Central Laydown Areas) can be accessed by the network of Internal Roads already described.
Internal Road Design
The design parameters for the Internal Roads differ depending on the components or the installation equipment required, and is determined by a number of parameters specific to the Medium and Large Turbine Configurations and other components. The different parameters dictate where the Internal Roads can be located, and how they are formed.
Internal Roads for Turbine access will have a nominal width of 6 m (Medium Turbine Configuration) or 7 m (Large Turbine Configuration), excluding side drainage. The design parameters for all Internal Roads are detailed in the COMR attached as Appendix A (Volume 2).
Internal Road cut and fill slopes have been designed using the following parameters:
Cut slopes are 1 vertical in 0.7 horizontal, with a 2 m wide bench every 6 m cut height.
Fill slopes are 1 vertical in 2 horizontal.
Existing internal tracks have been incorporated into the Internal Road design where practicable. A typical Internal Road cross-section design is shown in Figure 4.22. Road Pavement (the top layer of material on the Internal Road) will be constructed from gravel base-course sourced from within the Site, and will be approximately 200 mm
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 116
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects thick (to a maximum of 300 mm). The Road Pavement design is described in more detail in the COMR (see Appendix A, Volume 2).
Figure 4.22: Schematic Internal Road cross-section design.
Internal Road Water Crossings
Internal Roads to access Turbines and substations will require waterway crossings at 18 locations, as shown in Figure 4.23 and detailed in Table 4.5. Care has been taken to minimise these occurrences, and where they are required, the design of these crossings will consider the physical and ecological characteristics of the particular waterway.
In addition to the new structures required on Internal Roads for Turbine and Substation access, some culverts and bridges are anticipated to be required on the Internal Roads for Internal Transmission Line access. .
There will be a combination of culverts and small bridges to cross water courses, designed to:
Manage a realistic storm recurrence, and to minimise the potential for erosion and sediment.
Allow an Internal Road to cross a stream and allow water to pass.
Manage stormwater runoff by diverting water along, under and away from Internal Roads.
Protect and preserve in-stream ecology and riparian habitat.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 117
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Comply with Regional and District council requirements and with the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan finalised prior to construction (discussed in Section 6).
The approximate lengths of bridges and culverts are detailed in Table 4.5 and 4.6. A total of 570 m of culvert is proposed for Turbine and Substation access (Table 4.5). A large portion of this results from the 270 m culvert required under the Main Substation. None of the indicated culverts have catchments of greater than 200 ha. A maximum total span for Turbine and Substation access bridges of 90 m is proposed, all of which relates to catchments of greater than 200 ha.
Sixteen further Internal Road water crossings are required to access the Internal Transmission Line, as detailed in Table 4.6 (and shown on Figure 4.23). Sixteen structures have been identified for potential replacement, however it is possible that existing structures may be re-used as the anticipated loadings are not as great as on Internal Roads. A total requirement of 85 m of new bridges and culverts has been assessed for the eight locations without any existing crossing structures. Of these, two structures with a total combined length of 20 m have associated catchment areas of greater than 200 ha. These structures are likely to be temporary.
The design of individual culverts will be undertaken prior to construction. Examples of typical bridge and culvert designs incorporating consideration for fish passage are provided in Appendix A of the COMR. The COMR is attached as Appendix (Volume 2) of this document.
4.3.5 External Roads External Roads for the CHWF are the public roads that provide access for construction and operational traffic from their origin (for example, the port, quarries and equipment suppliers) to the CHWF. The Wind Farm Access Points mark the point at which the route moves from External to Internal Roads.
Overweight and Over-dimension Route
Turbines and other imported equipment are likely to be delivered to the Port of Napier. The Port of Napier is the closest suitable port to the CHWF, is a sufficient size to accommodate the delivery of the Turbine components, and is connected to the Site by a major arterial route (via State Highway 50(A) (“SH50(A)”) and then SH2. Other ports being considered are Centre Port (Wellington) and Port Taranaki. Whilst delivery to these ports is not ruled out as an option, the Port of Napier is likely to provide the most straightforward option. The final selection of the delivery port is likely to be the responsibility of the Turbine supplier and will be confirmed through discussions with the ports during detailed design.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 118
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Makuri
Makuri River Mangatiti
Mangaone River N
Tane
PUKETOI FOREST Mangatiti Stream MANGAONE VALLEY ROAD
A ^_20
Rongomai Pa Creek Pori Rakaunui
Tiraumea River Haunui ROUTE 52
Tawataia
Waipori Stream Tiraumea Tawataia Creek ^_ T1 ^_10 PA VALLEY ROAD W ^_12
Tiraumea River ^_11 ^_T2 Ihuraua River ^_ T3 ^_ B ALFREDTON ROAD T4 Alfredton T5 ^_ Waitawhiti Stream T6
^_9 ^_T7 ^_16 Te Hoe Stream ^_ T8 ^_ CASTLE HILL ROAD 21 ^_ ^_4 T9 ^_ T12 T10 14 ^_ ^_^_ T11
^_ T13 Castlehill ^_ C T14 D Ihuraua ^_5
ROUTE 52
^_3 ALFREDTON TINUI ROAD
NGAUMU FOREST T16-1&2 ^_ 1 ^_^_2
19 Wainuiomapu Stream E F ^_ G 13 Mangareia Stream Tauweru ^_River15 ^_6
Whareama River Tinui River
TIVIDALE FOREST
Tinui River
MANAWA ROAD Bideford
Key : Client : ^_ Proposed River Crossings - Internal Roads
^_ Proposed River Crossings - Transmission Access
Indicative Internal Road Extent (R5-100m Dia) Project :
Transmission Access Castle Hill Wind Farm Source: Turbine Corridor 1. CHWF data supplied by Genesis Energy, updated 11/04/11. Hydrology Effects Assessment 2. Topographical information supplied by Corax Topo 2008. Scale:1:120,000 (A3) Turbine Cluster (A-G) 012340.5
CJulFinal 11Title : CHWF Site Kilometres BConsent Draft May 11 Key Road Crossings Project No. : Figure No. : Revision : Council Boundary A Consent Draft Apr 11 of Watercourses A02337300 16 C No. Revision Date App. COPYRIGHT ON THIS DRAWING IS RESERVED Filed: A02337300M501_Road_crossings_RevC.mxd
Figure 4.23: Proposed Internal Road water crossings.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 119 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.5: Internal Road water crossings to access Turbines and substations.
Structure Turbine Catchment Proposed Culvert Length / Description Comments on Structure ID* Cluster Size (ha) Structure Bridge Span (m)
1 G 197** Main Substation access road Existing ford crossing Bridge 15 2 G 144 Main Substation access road Existing ford crossing - on rock Culvert 15 On alternative Main Substation access road – preferred 3 D 70 Existing ford crossing Culvert 30 route crosses no watercourses 4 D 77 Past end of Ngarata Road Existing private culvert will need replaced Culvert 45
C-D inter-cluster road - two crossings at this point on main 5-1 D 753 No existing crossing Bridge 15 river and tributary C-D inter-cluster road - two crossings at this point on main 5-2 D 753 river and tributary No existing crossing Bridge 15
6 F 405 Access road to Turbine Cluster F from Manawa Road No existing crossing Bridge 15 15 9 B 95 Access road to Turbine Cluster B from Puketawa Road No existing crossing Culvert
10 B 288 Satellite Substation access road No existing crossing Bridge 15 11 B 64 In Turbine Cluster B No existing crossing Culvert 20
12 B 99 Turbine Cluster B access point on Waihoki Valley Rd May cross on public road Culvert 20
13 F 307 Turbine Cluster F quarry road access point Existing private culvert/bridge may need to be replaced Bridge 15
14 D 80 South off Ngarata Rd No existing crossing Culvert 15 15 E 34 Just off Maringi Road No existing crossing Culvert 45
16 B 41 Past end of Puketawa Road Existing culvert crossing will need to be replaced Culvert 15
19 G 30 Main Substation site pad No existing crossing. Long culvert required Culvert 270 A new culvert may be required off line for access road to 20 A 60 Off Rimu Road Culvert 30 Turbine Cluster A 21 D 450 Switching Station access Existing ford crossing Bridge 15 Shading indicates water crossings with catchment greater than 200ha. * Note that structure ID numbering is not contiguous as some previously identified structures are no longer required. ** Crossing 1 to be treated as having a catchment of >200ha because it is very close to this size. If the water crossing location varies even a small amount, the catchment size could exceed 200ha. Proposed Development Section 4 – page 120
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.6: Internal Road water crossings to access Internal Transmission Line towers.
Turbine Proposed Culvert Length / Structure ID Tower No. Description Comments on Structure Catchment Size (ha) Cluster Structure Bridge Span (m) T1 B 3 to 6 Existing farm track No existing structure Culvert 62 10 T2 B 9 to 16 Wrights Rd Existing culvert Culvert <200 0 T3 B 9 to 16 Wrights Rd Existing culvert Culvert <200 0 T4 B 9 to 16 Wrights Rd Existing culvert Culvert 191 0 T5 B 9 to 16 Existing farm track Existing culvert Culvert 130 0 T6 B 9 to 16 Existing farm track No existing structure Culvert <200 10 T7 B 9 to 16 On flat plain No existing structure Culvert 72 15 T8 B 17 to 20 Existing farm track Existing culvert Culvert <200 0 T9 C 17 to 20 Existing farm track Existing culvert Culvert 265 0 T10 C 21 Existing farm track No existing structure Culvert <200 10 T11 C 21 Existing farm track No existing structure Culvert <200 10 Northwest of centre of T12 C 22 and 23 No existing structure Culvert 72 10 Turbine Cluster C T13 D 32 to 34 Existing farm track Existing culvert Culvert <200 0 T14 D 32 to 36 Existing farm track Existing culvert Culvert 234 0 Existing farm track and T16-1 D 39 to 50 No existing structure Bridge / culvert 363 10 ford. Existing farm track and T16-2 D 49 and 50 No existing structure Bridge / culvert 342 10 ford * Shading denotes water crossings with catchments greater than 200 ha.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 121
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The preferred OW/OD Route is shown in Figure 4.24 and detailed below.
From the Port of Napier, the route heads south along SH50A/SH2 for approximately 196 km to Pahiatua. There are NZTA defined OW/OD transport routes that will be predominantly followed, and these include some local town bypass sections. SH2 passes through various townships within which some intersections will likely require some minor modification or temporary removal of street furniture, coupled with appropriate traffic management measures either for reasons of geometry or safety. Townships include Napier, Hastings, Waipukurau, Dannevirke, Norsewood, Woodville and Pahiatua.
Turning east from Pahiatua, the route follows Kaitawa Road leading onto Mangaone Valley Road to the Alfredton Road intersection. An alternative route is to continue on SH2, turning east into Hamua Rongamai Road connecting with Mangaone Valley Road, and then onto the Alfredton Road intersection. The route then travels east along Alfredton Road to connect with Route 52 at Alfredton.
From Alfredton the OW/OD Route either heads north on Route 52 to access Clusters A, B and C (via Waitawhiti Road, Puketawa Road, Rakaunui Road, Waihoki Valley Road and Rimu Road), or follows Castle Hill Road south-east to access Clusters D, E, F and G (via Ngarata Road, Castle Hill Road, Alfredton-Tinui Road and/or Manawa Road). The OW/OD Route also uses small sections of Pahiatua Road and Maringi Road for access to some Turbine groups.
The total distance of the OW/OD Route from Port of Napier to the Site is approximately 260 km.
Some upgrading works may be required on the External Road sections between the Port of Napier and Alfredton, however the resource consent requirements for the works are likely to be relatively minor and are not included in the CHWF resource consent application. For completeness, the full route from the Port of Napier to the Site has been described in this AEE. Where resource consents or permits are required for the works on these roads, these will be sought through a separate consent process with the relevant authorities (New Zealand Transport Agency (“NZTA”), District Councils and Regional Councils) for the individual works required.
A review (including swept path analysis and, in sections, preliminary design) of the OW/OD Route from Alfredton to the Site has been undertaken by Traffic Design Group and Aurecon as part of the Transportation Assessment.
Works required for roads forming the OW/OD Route between Alfredton and the Wind Farm Access Points will be included in the CHWF consent application. Upgrade work includes:
Reconstruction or strengthening of some short-span bridges.
Road straightening and widening.
Road smoothing involving excavation or filling of the existing road foundation to remove dips and humps.
Road Pavement reconstruction.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 122
To Port of Napier Legend on SH2 Port of Napier NAPIER CHWF Site " " Council boundary HASTINGS PalmerstonInternal North Roads City (indicative) "WANGANUI External Roads "PALMERSTON NORTH Over-weight/Over-dimension route K a i ta Additional construction traffic route w a R " o MASTERTON a d "WELLINGTON
Horowhenua District d a o R y e l l a Ha V
m Paihiatua Road
e
u n a o 2 Tararua District y R a g a on n w g a h o ig m M H ai Rimu Road e R t o a a t d P S a 2 V 5 ute a o l l R e Rakaunui (Gandys) Road y
R
o
a
d Waihoki Valley Road Alfred to R 2 n oute 5 R oa d W a i ta w C h a i stl ti e H R il o Puketawa Road l R ta Road a o d ad Ngara 2 5 2 e y ut a Ro w
h D
g
i a
g H g ed
e Alfr to
t s n
a R T t
o in S a d u i R oa W d a ir ir i gi R R n o ri ad d o a a a M o d
R
y
e
l
l
Manawa Road a d
V a
o u
h R e d l a a
g Masterton District n n o a d
h n Wellington Region le Tinui Valley Road W G
d oa R d rd Roa fo po int de le Bi ast re ton C re O aster Te O M
Carterton District 03691.5 W-CHL-TP-001 km
Figure 4.24: Proposed OW/OD Route to the CHWF Site. Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Swept path analysis has been undertaken on this route and preliminary design has also been undertaken, including the volume of earthworks estimated to be generated by the works required (See Figure 4.25).
Some local roads that cross through the Site have not been selected for the OW/OD Route, in particular Daggs Road and Maringi Road. These roads would require extensive civil works to bring them up to the required standard. In these cases, the Internal Roads will be used to access the Turbine Corridor for OW/OD loads. The non- OW/OD local roads can still be used by smaller vehicles and trucks for access.
Construction Traffic Routes
Construction traffic not exceeding 40/44t Maximum Gross Weight will utilise the OW/OD Route and as well as the Construction Traffic Route within the vicinity of the Site including (but are not limited to) Pa Valley Road, Whangaehu Valley Road, Daggs Road, Maringi Road, Te Ore Ore Bideford Road, Glendonald Road, Masterton Castlepoint Road, and Tinui Valley Road (see Figure 4.24). This traffic could consist of trucks, bulldozers, excavators, loaders, vans and cars used for the development of the CHWF and for the delivery of components, materials and personnel to Site.
External Roads used for Construction Traffic have been assessed for suitability for construction and operational traffic. Upgrades are likely to be required. However, specific works will not be determined until component dimensions and quantities have been confirmed nearer to construction. Any resource consents required for works on these roads (such as bridge upgrades, road upgrades and road straightening or widening) will be sought in separate resource consent application(s) and are not included in the CHWF resource consent applications. The only exception to this is four bridges, one on Route 52, one on Daggs Road and two on Maringi Road which are included, as detailed in Section 4.4.5. Figure 4.26 shows where works are required on bridges from Alfredton to Site.
Traffic Management
Traffic management measures will be required along the OW/OD Route during the delivery of Turbine components and for construction traffic access. These measures will accord with the requirements of the NZTA and the relevant local authorities. The traffic management measures will be detailed in a Construction Traffic Management Plan, prepared in consultation with the NZTA and local authorities. A detailed Construction Traffic Management Plan (“CTMP”) will be prepared (see Section 6.3.2), and will form the basis of traffic management specific to the CHWF.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 124
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.25: Road design on External Roads to Site.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 125
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.26: Proposed work requirements and locations of External Road bridges.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 126
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.3.6 Permanent Operation and Maintenance Facilities The O&M facilities will provide an important hub for the CHWF, generally acting as a central location for control, operation and maintenance, as well as an entrance to the Site for staff and visitors. The location of O&M facilities will be determined prior to construction depending on the final size, location and order of stages of construction. The O&M facilities may be located anywhere within the Site, subject to the limitations presented below (and summarised in Table 4.15):
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
Key purposes and functions of the O&M facilities include:
Main store of consumables and special tools.
Location and central hub of the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (“SCADA”) system, the computer systems that monitor and control infrastructure and processes for the CHWF.
Staff amenities (e.g. office, kitchen, gear storage, etc).
Workshop for repairs and maintenance that can't easily be done in situ.
Meeting point for visitors needing to meet staff or access the Site (contractors, consultants, etc).
Official portal to Site (Health and Safety, induction, sign-in/out).
Operator (local) and maintenance manager's base.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 127
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Maintenance staff will usually start and finish each day at this location.
It is anticipated that there will be one main O&M facility, and one or more O&M support facilities at other locations within the Site.
The main O&M facility is likely to contain several buildings, including workshops, office space, amenities and a domestic sewage disposal system (septic tank). Permanent power and telecommunications will also be required. Sufficient parking will be provided to allow for the expected usage. An indicative layout of the main O&M facilities is shown in Figure 4.27. The total footprint of any O&M facility will not exceed 135 m by 135 m, and 15 m in height. The building will be designed in accordance with the New Zealand Building Code and adhere to all relevant planning limits (for example, setback distances and recession plane limits).
Figure 4.27: Schematic O&M facility layout.
The location of the O&M facilities within the Site will be finalised prior to construction during the detailed design of the CHWF, and will be subject to the following factors:
Total footprint, including parking, building and land area bounded by a perimeter fence is expected to be no greater than 135 m x 135 m, and
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 128
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
buildings will not exceed a maximum height of 15 m. This is all subject to detailed design requirements.
A hazardous chemicals area will be established to store required fuels, lubricants, solvents and other chemicals necessary for the construction and operation of the CHWF. The hazardous substances store will be designed in accordance with the relevant Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (“HSNO”) requirements.
The O&M facilities will not be located in known sensitive areas (ecological, archaeological and/or streams).
An electrical power supply (three phase power) will be established from the local network. It is proposed that a connection is made from the nearby local distribution lines with overhead lines and poles erected along Internal Roads (where applicable).
Noise emissions are expected to be similar to noise from existing agricultural buildings.
A water supply will be established, through connection to local farm supplies and/or rainwater collection.
Domestic sewerage will be provided by way of a septic tank system that is compliant with applicable local bylaws and codes.
Stormwater – the specific requirements for the O&M facility will be fed into soak-pits or be piped to nearby existing drainage channel(s).
Communications – a separate communications structure is not expected (e.g. communications tower), although one may be required under some project circumstances. If such a structure is required, it will be designed to fit within the relevant District Council permitted activity requirements, or separate resource consent will be sought.
4.3.7 Monitoring Masts Up to 16 wind monitoring masts (eight in TDC and eight in MDC) will be required over the life of the CHWF. These masts are required for Turbine performance testing, future wind and generation forecasting and various other wind monitoring requirements during operation. They may be located at the existing monitoring mast sites (see Figure 1.2), or at new locations identified throughout the project. The final location of the masts will be based on the final Turbine Layout and the requirements from Turbine manufacturers for power curve performance testing.
The design of the monitoring masts will be similar to that shown in Plate 4.1 (80 m high lattice structure), although masts that are shorter and of a single pole structure may also be used. Placement of the masts will avoid areas of high ecological sensitivity, and will be set back a minimum distance of four times the mast height from any dwelling.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 129
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Plate 4.1: Indicative 80 m lattice wind monitoring mast.
4.3.8 Temporary Construction Facilities The construction of the CHWF will require a number of temporary installations, including:
Contractor Compounds.
Concrete Batching Plant(s).
Quarrying and crushing facilities.
Central Laydown Areas.
Water abstraction and storage structures.
Parking facilities.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 130
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Each of these is described in more detail below.
All temporary construction infrastructure will be removed and the site rehabilitated when they are no longer required. Rehabilitation will include site stabilisation, and rehabilitation of disturbed areas, including ripping, top soiling, seeding and watering the area as appropriate.
There may also be an Off-site construction management centre in a location such as Masterton, Pahiatua or Alfredton which would be established in an existing facility.
Contractor Compounds
The Contractor Compounds will be the main centre for construction management, providing temporary offices and storage facilities for both contractors and sub- contractors throughout the construction process. Up to ten Contractor Compound locations may be established across the Site at different times and at locations identified by the contractor prior to construction. It is likely that one or two Contractor Compounds will be operational at any one time during construction. Contractor Compounds may be located anywhere within the Site, subject to the limitations presented below (and summarised in Table 4.15):
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05 ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
Each Contractor Compound will be approximately 6,000 m² in area. An indicative layout for a Contractor Compound is provided in Figure 4.28.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 131
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.28: Schematic of Contractor Compound layout.
Each Contractor Compound is likely to include:
Contractor and sub-contractor offices;
Workshops;
Parking area;
Amenities block with pump out toilet facilities, or portable toilets;
Storage facilities; and
Power, communications and potable water supply.
Construction staff will be accommodated away from the Site except for accommodation at existing dwellings and no camping will be permitted for staff within the Site.
Concrete Batching Plants
Up to four Concrete Batching Plant locations are proposed during the construction process. Concrete Batching Plants will be located either near current construction sites, or near material sources such as quarries or water abstraction sites. Indicative locations have been identified as shown in Figure 4.29 (and the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C, Volume 2) with specific locations to be determined prior to construction. The plants will be re-locatable, with only one or two locations operating concurrently at any one time and sites being rehabilitated as soon as the Concrete Batching Plant is
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 132
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.29: Location of key civil structures for the CHWF.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 133
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects relocated. Identification of Concrete Batching Plant locations will be subject to the limitations presented below (and summarised in Table 4.15:
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05 ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
The Concrete Batching Plants will comprise a concrete mixer, cement bins, sand / aggregate stockpiles, water storage tanks and storage areas for equipment and tools. The COMR (attached as Appendix A of this AEE in Volume 2) describes the environmental management measures proposed for Concrete Batching Plant activities including the management of waste cement and waste water. The Concrete Batching Plant areas will have a washbay which drains to a multi stage settling pond. Periodically cement from the settling ponds will be removed and either be reused to make low-strength concrete blocks for stockpile management or temporary works, or removed off site to landfill.
Sufficient area is required around the Concrete Batching Plants for the operation of front end loaders, delivery of materials and the entry/exit of agitator trucks. A maximum area of approximately 5,600 m² is required for each Concrete Batching Plant. A sketch showing the indicative layout of Concrete Batching Plants is included in Appendix A of the COMR.
Quarry and Crushing Facilities
Potential quarry areas have been identified within the Site to provide aggregate for roading and other hard-standing areas. Further potential quarry locations have been identified on private land Off-site. The location of potential quarry sites is shown in Figure 4.29 and the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C (Volume 2). The quarries will not be limited to the specified quarry locations in Figure 4.29, as additional gravel
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 134
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects sources may be identified during construction. However, identification of new quarry sites will be subject to the limitations presented below and summarised in Table 4.15:
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C (Volume 2) and described in this document. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is required for this application, and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66 ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05 ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
The quarrying and crushing facilities comprise the equipment for extraction and processing of rock and soil from the ground, typically an excavated open pit or cut into a hill. Facilities will include earth moving equipment, stockpiles, processing plant and amenities.
Crushing facilities may be located at several locations around the Site, depending on the aggregate source in use but most likely to be located within quarries. The size and specification of the crushing plants will be confirmed by the contractor and once detailed geotechnical investigations have been performed. Each crushing facility is likely to include a conveyor belt, a primary and secondary crusher and a vibrating screen. The conveyor belt transports the raw materials from the dump truck into the crushers. Typically the belt vibrates to remove the smaller pieces of material and to control the movement of larger pieces of rock into the crushers.
The primary and secondary crushers break the rock down into usable sizes of aggregate. The vibrating screen has several filter layers, which sort the aggregate into different sizes when poured onto the screen. The aggregate also passes through a washing system. Provision for water involved with crushing has been included in the assessment of the volume of water required for the project (as detailed below). Where possible, process water will be recycled. Storm water and runoff will be managed in accordance with the quarrying management plan as outlined in Section 6 and in the COMR attached as Appendix A in Volume 2.
There are specific gravel aggregate size and quality requirements for use in road construction and concrete production. Once the gravel aggregate has been sorted
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 135
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects according to its final use, it will be transported to a Concrete Batching Plant, or it will be stockpiled for use in road formation.
After construction activities have ceased, most quarries will be disestablished and may be backfilled with Excess Fill. The sites then will be rehabilitated. Some quarry sites may not be backfilled and rehabilitated, but will remain in service during the operational phase of the CWHF to be used in accordance with the QMP to allow maintenance to the Internal Roads and other civil engineering requirements.
Central Laydown Areas
Central Laydown Areas are flat, compacted, gravelled areas where Turbine components can be temporarily stored or construction equipment and material can be placed. Sixteen potential Central Laydown Areas have been identified although only up to ten of these areas are likely to be developed (see Figure 4.29 and the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C, Volume 2). Each Central Laydown Area will be up to 15,600 m².
Central Laydown Areas may be located anywhere within the Site, subject to the limitations presented below and summarised in Table 4.15:
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C (Volume 2) and detailed in this document. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66 ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05 ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
The locations identified indicate suitable sites and demonstrate that the requirement to provide Central Laydown Areas can be achieved.
The Central Laydown Areas have been classified as either Primary or Secondary sites. The primary Central Laydown Areas will be the key locations for Turbine component delivery, offering a drop-off location close to main routes and could be used to service
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 136
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects a large construction area. The secondary Central Laydown Areas are typically located closer to the final Turbine locations, to improve efficiency of internal transport of Turbines.
The Central Laydown Areas will be rehabilitated after construction of the CHWF. Any Central Laydown Area adjacent to an O&M facility may however remain, or be only partially rehabilitated, to allow ongoing temporary storage of materials and components required for normal operations and maintenance activities.
Parking Facilities
In addition to the parking provided at Contractor Compounds and other facilities, provision has been made for 25 parking lots (nominal 10 m x 20 m), located close to where specific activities are occurring during construction.
Water Storage and Abstraction
Water requirements have been assessed based on construction work rate assumptions. Estimated average daily water demand is 300 m3/day with a peak of 550 m3/day based on a six day working week. Water is required for concrete production, crushing, truck cleaning, amenities and dust suppression. Four surface water abstraction points have been identified in reasonable proximity to the Site and are included in these resource consent applications.
A breakdown of the maximum daily water requirements per activity is provided in the COMR attached as Appendix A.
Two thirds of the water demand is for aggregate processing and concrete production, accordingly primary water demand is at the following potential sites:
On Castle Hill Road, southeast of Alfredton where a possible quarry and Concrete Batching Plant will be located;
Quarry/Concrete Batching Plant near the ridgeline of Cluster D close to possible aggregate sources;
Quarry/Concrete Batching Plant near the ridgeline of Cluster G close to possible aggregate sources;
Quarry/Concrete Batching Plant at Tiraumea near the potential hard rock source on the Robbie property (near Haunui Rd, west of Turbine Cluster Band; and
Near the existing Taipo quarry east of Cluster F.
To service the primary demand sites, four surface water abstraction points are proposed, as detailed in Table 4.7 and shown in Figure 4.29 and the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C (Volume 2).
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 137
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.7: Proposed water abstraction points.
Core Storage Catchment MALF allocation Supply site Coordinates Catchment (m3) area (ha) (L/s) available (m3/day) Te Hoe Stream 2756620E on Castle Hill 20,000 3,580 Tiraumea 5.6 531 6052240N Rd (WS1) Tiraumea Stream at 2767510E 5,000 4,340 Tiraumea 46 531 Haunui Rd 6059807N (WS3) Tinui Stream at 2776430E Taipo quarry 2,000 5,190 Whareama 3 NA 6039220N (WS5) Tiraumea River at Ihuraua 2752820E 5,000 19,960 Tiraumea 266 531 Confluence 6059600N (WSB)
Each abstraction point involves pumping water directly from the river to an off-line storage area, as shown in Figures B10 to B13 in Appendix B (Volume 2), and detailed further in the Water Supply Assessment (PDP 2011(a)). The proposed water abstraction sites include:
Te Hoe Stream (WS1) - abstraction point is located approximately 400 m north of Q3, with 20,000 m3 total storage proposed in two dams with capacities of 15,000 m3 and 5,000 m3 respectively (see Figure B10 of Appendix B).
Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Rd (WS3) - abstraction point is adjacent to the Haunui Road Bridge over the Tiraumea Stream, with 5,000 m3 storage to be constructed in an old oxbow north east of the proposed intake (see Figure B11 of Appendix B).
Tiraumea River at the confluence with Ihuraua (WSB) - abstraction point is located at the confluence of the Tiraumea and Ihuraua Rivers. Storage of 5,000 m3 will be constructed south of the proposed intake site. Water taken at this point is intended as a back-up supply, with water stored there only being used when the stored water at the three primary supply points is exhausted (see Figure B12 of Appendix B).
Tinui River at Taipo (WS5) - abstraction point is located approximately 200 m upstream of Taipo quarries ford access across the Tinui River, with 2,000 m3 storage to be constructed in an area adjacent to the river (see Figure B13 of Appendix B).
A conceptual intake design for the water take structures is shown in Figure 4.30.
The water supplies proposed will be temporary and used only for the construction of the project.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 138
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 4.30: Conceptual intake design for the water take structures.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 139
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The Te Hoe Stream and the Tiraumea River (Haunui Road) sites will be the primary take locations in the MWRC Region, while the Tiraumea River downstream of the confluence with the Ihuraua River will be used as a back-up supply location when the required volume of water is not available at the other two sites. The Tinui Stream is the only water abstraction point in the GWRC Region. The listed demand sites that will be used during the construction period will be confirmed during the detailed design and will depend on further aggregate investigations and construction programming. Irrespective of the final demand sites, Genesis Energy is seeking the necessary water take consents to supply water for the project wherever the water may be needed.
The maximum rate of taking across all three sites in the MWRC Region will not exceed 531 m3 per day when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) is less than the median river flow, to remain within the available core allocation volume specified by the MWRC One Plan. Genesis Energy also proposes to take up to 3.5 L/s from each MWRC water take site when flows are above 95% of the MALF (provided this does not reduce the flow to below 95% of the MALF at primary take sites), and at no more than 10% of the median flow up to a maximum of 12 L/s at two of the three MWRC sites and up to 24 L/s at the Tiraumea River site when flows exceed 110% of the median flow. No water will be taken from the Te Hoe Stream, Tiraumea Stream or Tiraumea River when the flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi is less than 2.04 m3 per second.
Water will be taken from the Tinui River at a maximum rate of 10.3 L/s (890 m3 per day) when the river flow exceeds 110% of median river flow, and the rate of taking will not exceed 10% of the median river flow. When the river flow is between MALF and 110% of median flow, the rate of taking will not exceed 3.5 L/s.
4.4 Construction Process 4.4.1 Construction Methodology The construction activities associated with the CHWF are outlined in detail in the COMR attached as Appendix A in Volume 2. A brief summary is provided below.
4.4.2 Construction Programme and Personnel In order to assess environmental effects, three indicative construction programmes have been developed based on low, medium and high intensity construction activity.
The shortest construction period anticipated is represented by the high intensity programme assumes parallel work activities being undertaken in different areas for earthworks, Turbine Foundations and Internal Road construction, hence increasing the overall construction rate of the CHWF. Under this programme, it is anticipated that the construction works could be completed in approximately three years, assuming that the CHWF is constructed in one stage. The low intensity construction programme indicates a construction period of approximately seven years if conducted in one stage.
Regardless of the construction intensity, the construction period will be extended if the CHWF is constructed in stages. Staged construction is likely to occur for a number of reasons including Turbine and other component supply availability and allowing new generation to be introduced to the national electricity system on a progressive basis.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 140
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The final construction programme will be determined when Turbine supply times are confirmed and will be produced by the Contractors.
Various assumptions have been made around the indicative construction programmes. The key outcomes are that the overall construction period could range from between three to nearly seven years (depending on the level of intensity) if built in one continuous stage. It is possible for construction to be undertaken in several stages.
For the purpose of assessing effects, it has been assumed that there could be 135 personnel working within the Site on any one day under the low to medium intensity construction scenarios, and up to 185 personnel under the high intensity scenario. Construction personnel may include site management, drivers, technical support, excavators and labourers.
4.4.3 Construction Materials The CHWF will require significant quantities of construction materials, such as gravel, sand, cement, water and steel. A detailed analysis of the sources and quantities of construction materials required for the Medium and Large Turbine Layouts is summarised in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8: Material requirements for Medium and Large Turbine Layouts.
Medium Layout Large Layout Material Sourced Activity / Feature Requirements Requirements
Loose On-site and All base-course / 3 3 875,000 m 915,000 m Gravel Off-site pavement material
Steel All Off-site All concrete 14,100 tonnes 14,400 tonnes
Cement All Off-site All concrete 39,000 m3 40,000 m3
All concrete On-site and Gravel breakdown 3 3 Water 359,000 m 360,000 m Off-site Dust suppression and cleaning All base-course / pavement material Sand All Off-site 164,000 m3 169,000 m3 All concrete Cable trenching Note: Calculations have assumed a 5% loss of gravel, sand and cement as wastage; 5% loss of steel as off-cuts; and 10% loss of water from spillage, leaks and evaporation.
The following quantities have been determined taking into consideration the proposed maximum dimensions outlined above for CHWF components, such as Internal Roads, Turbine Foundations, Turbine Platforms, hardstand areas, substations and O&M facilities foundations, Lay-bys, and Concrete Batching Plants. Other materials required for building construction may include for example, timber framing or tilt-slab precast concrete for construction of the O&M facilities.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 141
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The COMR (attached as Appendix A, Volume 2), provides a further breakdown of material requirements by Turbine Cluster for each Indicative Turbine Layout.
Material Quantities Required
Materials required during the construction of the CWHF are summarised below and detailed in the COMR (attached as Appendix A). Materials include:
Base-course / Pavement Material (90% gravel) required for Internal Roads, External Roads, Lay-bys, Concrete Batching Plants, substations and Switching Station, Central Laydown Areas and O&M facilities.
Concrete for Turbine Foundations, Internal Transmission Line tower foundations and all other building foundations.
Gravel for the establishment of road base-course and hardstand areas and in the manufacturing of concrete. Gravel will be sourced both On-site and Off- site. The gravel used in concrete needs to be of a higher strength than that used for roading and is likely to be imported from Off-site.
Steel for Turbine Foundations will be sourced Off-Site and is likely to come from north of Napier, Masterton or Palmerston North.
Cement will be sourced Off-site and is likely to come from Masterton, although a specific source will be determined prior to construction.
Sand is likely to be required for a number of activities, including use in finished concrete, backfilling cable trenches under roads and road base- course. All sand required for construction purposes will be sourced Off-site, with the most likely source of clean sand being from existing river quarries near Masterton.
4.4.4 On-Site Earthwork Activities The maximum earthworks volume (cut) for construction works associated with the CHWF will be between 6.1 million m3 and 8.2 million m3, depending on the selected Turbine size configuration. Maximum earthworks area is 861 ha. All earthworks and disposal volumes have been calculated from the maximum design parameters for the CHWF described in Section 4.3, and are detailed in the COMR attached as Appendix A (Volume 2).
Earthworks activities for the CHWF have been split into three areas:
Turbine Layout Earthworks – required for Turbine access and installation including Internal Roads, Turbine Foundations and Turbine Platforms.
EBoP Earthworks – required for the installation of the EBoP, including substations, Internal Transmission Line, Switching Station, underground cable trenches and Internal Roads required to access substations and Internal Transmission Line towers.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 142
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Other earthworks – not specific to either the Turbine layout or EBoP earthworks (for example, earthworks associated with Lay-bys, Central Laydown Areas, Concrete Batching Plants and O&M facilities.
Earthworks described in this section are internal to the CHWF Site. Earthworks relating to External Road upgrades between Alfredton and the Site are described in Section 4.4.5. Figures describing earthworks locations and quantities are provided in the COMR attached as Appendix A in Volume 2.
Total earthworks and Excess Fill volumes for the ‘worst case’ Medium and Large Turbine configurations are summarised in Tables 4.9 and 4.10, and outlined further below. Table 4.11 shows the maximum area of earthworks for the 100L Turbine Layout, which has a nominally larger area of disturbance than other layouts.
Table 4.9: Maximum earthwork volumes for the Medium Turbine Layout (based on 80M layout).
Maximum 3 Maximum Excess Fill Earthworks (m ) Cut Used for 3 3 (m ) Turbine Cluster (cut volume in raw Engineered Fill (m ) (including bulking factors compacted state as in situ, (no contingency) and contingency) including contingency) A 490,000 47,500 586,000 B 870,000 76,500 1,056,000 C 410,000 49,750 480,000 D 1,050,000 121,500 1,228,000 E 670,000 51,500 830,000 F 370,000 26,750 457,000 G 670,000 79,500 776,000 Sub-Total 4,530,000 453,000 5,413,000 (Turbine Layout) Sub-Total (Internal 844,000 137,000 892,000 transmission and Switching Station) Sub-Total 720,000 246,000 619,000 (Other)
TOTAL 6,094,000 836,000 6,924,000
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 143
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.10: Maximum earthwork volumes for the Large Turbine Layout (based on 100L layout).
Maximum 3 Maximum Excess Fill Earthworks (m ) Cut Used for 3 3 (m ) Turbine Cluster (cut volume in raw Engineered Fill (m ) (including bulking factors compacted state as in situ, (no contingency) and contingency) including contingency) A 750,000 81,000 889,000 B 1,270,000 96,300 1,561,000 C 500,000 54,700 583,000 D 1,520,000 177,300 1,776,000 E 800,000 77,000 958,000 F 570,000 59,300 671,000 G 1,210,000 80,300 1,516,000 Sub- Total 6,620,000 626,000 7,954,000 (Layout Specific) Sub-Total (Internal 844,000 137,000 892,000 transmission and Switching Station) Sub-Total 720,000 246,000 619,000 (Other)
TOTAL 8,184,000 1,009,000 9,465,000
Table 4.11: Maximum earthwork area by type for the Large Turbine Layout (based on 100L layout).
Earthworks Type Disturbed Area (ha) Internal Roads 230.7 Excess Fill Areas 457.0 Substations and switching 9.2 Towers/ Poles and Cable Trenches 2.7 Turbine Platforms and foundations 67.9 Quarries (Temporary) 54.2 Ancillaries 39.0 Total 860.7
Analysis of earthworks area by catchment is provided in the COMR attached as Appendix A (Volume 2) to this document and in the Hydrology Effects Assessment in Volume 3 (Section 8).
Turbine Layout Earthworks
Turbine Layout Earthworks volumes comprise all excavations to create the Internal Roads, Turbine Platforms and Turbine Foundations. Earthworks associated with the Turbine Platforms and Turbine Foundations have been estimated using the dimensions
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 144
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects described in Section 4.3.2 for such structures, and the terrain complexity rating assessed for each site. Earthworks volumes range from 1,050 m3 to 7,000 m3 per Turbine Platform, and from 690 m3 to 1,400 m3 per Turbine Foundation, depending on the complexity of the Site.
Turbine Layout earthwork volumes for the Site range from 4.5 million m3 for the Medium Turbine Configuration to 6.6 million m3 for the Large Turbine Configuration. Turbine Platforms and Turbine Foundations will be designed for individual locations during the detailed design phase of the project.
Electrical Component Earthworks
Earthworks volumes associated with the construction of the substations and associated Internal Roads are based on the ‘worst case’ quantities. Estimated Electrical Component Earthworks volumes are:
Main and Satellite Substations (293,000 m3).
Switching Station (74,000 m3).
Internal Roads for the Internal Transmission Line access and foundations, based on the EBoP Option 1 design (477,000 m3).
Underground cables not embedded within the Internal Roads (113,000 m3).
Other Earthworks
Other earthworks included in this section are Lay-bys, Central Laydown Areas, Concrete Batching Plants and O&M facilities. The location of these components will be selected and designed following resource consent acquisition and prior to construction. The earthworks figures are maximum volumes that will not be exceeded. Other site earthworks for all Turbine layouts are estimated at 720,000 m3, including:
Lay-bys (325,000 m3).
Central Lay-down Areas (201,000 m3).
Concrete Batching Plants (30,000 m3).
O&M facilities (51,000 m3).
Excess Fill
Earthworks cut material will be used as Engineered Fill in roading foundations, culvert backfilling, and any other situation where Engineered Fill is required as part of the construction process. Cut material will also be used as non-engineered fill (for example, site reinstatement of temporary construction facilities and backfilling quarries, and placement of fill alongside the Internal Road alignments). Any remaining cut material (Excess Fill) that has not been used as either Engineered or non-engineered Fill will be disposed of in Excess Fill Areas.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 145
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The Excess Fill to be disposed of is not more than 7.0 million m3 for the Medium Turbine configuration, and 9.5 million m3 for the Large Turbine configuration. The Excess Fill quantity includes a bulking factor.
Excess Fill Areas
A number of potential Excess Fill Areas have been identified throughout the CHWF Site, covering a total of 460 ha, with final decisions on their locations determined closer to construction. The indicative location of Excess Fill Areas is shown in Figure 4.29 and the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C (Volume 2). Excess Fill Areas may be located anywhere within the Site, subject to the limitations presented below and summarised in Table 4.15:
Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory plans will not be disturbed.
Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be exceeded in construction of the CHWF.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded.
Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor.
Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided.
Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded.
Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated.
Potential Excess Fill Areas have been selected based on minimising the transportation distances required for disposal. Where possible, Excess Fill Areas will be disposed of within the Turbine Cluster from where it is excavated, although some transportation of Excess Fill between Turbine Clusters will be necessary. Three types of Excess Fill Areas have been identified and are detailed in the COMR (attached as Appendix A in Volume 2).
4.4.5 External Road Earthworks Requirements Earthworks are required on some External Roads to enable delivery of the longest OW/OD loads to the CHWF Site. The Turbine blades comprise the longest load, with a maximum length of 55 m. Access will be achieved through widening the roadway and straightening out tight corners so that the blade and associated transport vehicle can
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 146
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects safely negotiate the route to the Site. It also possible that some vegetation trimming and temporary removal of road furniture will be required to enable passage of the loads. There are some instances where the required road widening will encroach into adjacent private property, and consultation with the affected landowners and Council has been undertaken where this is most likely to occur.
Civil works associated with upgrading the OW/OD Route between Alfredton and Wind Farm Access Points, and works on those roads required for upgrading the Wind Farm Access Points to Internal Roads are included in these resource consent applications. Any civil works required for upgrading other External Roads are likely to be of a lesser scale and will be the subject of separate resource consent applications, if any are required.
A swept path analysis was conducted on the OW/OD Route from Alfredton to the Wind Farm Access Points. This analysis was used to indicate the potential areas of road requiring modification to allow the longest load to be able to be transported to the Site, and where neighbouring properties or areas of high ecological value may be affected. The upgrades that will be necessary for the OW/OD Route include:
As a minimum, a 6 m road width will be adopted for access and to provide for appropriate traffic safety. Currently there are a number of places where this road width is not met.
Geometric upgrades are required to allow transportation of the long loads. This will include road straightening, corner widening and road smoothing to remove dips and humps.
Pavement strengthening is required as many roads consist of an unbound gravel surface with a thin pavement depth. Such upgrades are necessary to avoid the risk of deformation failure, particularly at the road edges, to enable the passage of the deliveries being made.
Several bridges will require some form of management or upgrading, ranging from improved traffic management through to structural modifications. In two instances, total bridge replacement (on Maringi Road near Wainuiomapu, and on Maringi Road near Harrison Hills) is proposed.
Stabilisation of some slopes adjacent to the roads.
Drainage infrastructure upgrades will be necessary in some places.
Table 4.12 provides an estimation of earthworks that are required to upgrade the External Roads on the OW/OD Route. The roads and earthworks described in Table 4.12 are illustrated on Figure 4.25.
A number of the External Roads around the CHWF Site do not fully meet the NZS4404:2010 guidelines for road and shoulder widths. Furthermore, many of these roads have been constructed to a lesser standard than the Council roading hierarchy indicates as being appropriate. It is estimated that heavy vehicle movements on these roads could increase between 30% and 50% during the construction period. Accordingly, carriageway widths in some areas may need to be increased to provide a safer and more efficient roading network. The scope of works required for these roads will be significantly less, and are therefore not included in Table 4.12.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 147
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.12: OW/OD Route earthwork volumes between Alfredton and the CHWF Site.
Length of road Total Cut to Fill / Road Road Sealed 3 requiring upgrade (m) Waste (m )
Rimu Road No 4,350 65,000
Rakanui Road No 1,350 70,000
Waihoki Valley Road No 4,750 30,000
Waitawhiti Road No 9,500 25,000
Puketawa Road No 1,000 10,000
Castle Hill Road Partly sealed 21,100 150,000
Ngarata Road No 2,500 35,000
Route 52 Yes 28,750 95,000 Alfredton Tinui Road / No 1,600 5,000 Manawa Road Maringi Road No 3,650 25,000
TOTAL 80,200 510,000
External Road Bridges
A number of External Road bridges between Alfredton and the CHWF Site will require some form of traffic management, upgrading, or complete replacement. Such measures will be necessary, not just for the OW/OD Route, but (in some places) for general access to the CHWF Site. Table 4.13 describes the range of expected works required, from traffic management (minimum requirement) to bridge replacement (maximum requirement). Table 4.14 details the level of work required for all bridges between Alfredton and the Site. The location of the key External Road bridges that required upgrading or replacing are shown on Figure 4.26.
Figure 4.26 identifies four bridges not on the OW/OD Route. Although roads and bridges for non-OW/OD routes are not included in this resource consent application, an exception has been made for these four bridges (one on Route 52, one on Daggs Road and two on Maringi Road). As Construction Traffic will use these routes and it has already been established that these bridges will need major structural work, they are included in this resource consent application.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 148
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.13: External Road bridge work descriptions.
Bridge Works Explanation Required A bridge that may only require monitoring under load by installing strain gauges, or may be suitable for construction traffic if some Traffic Management traffic restrictions are placed on the structure i.e. keeping to the centre of the bridge or one vehicle on the structure at any one time. Propping or Decking A bridge that requires installation of temporary props to the deck or (Temporary by installation of a temporary decking structure (which will be more Strengthening) suited to short span bridges). A bridge that requires permanent strengthening measures to the Strengthening deck or supporting structure, but does not require replacement of structural elements such as deck beams. Major Structural A bridge that requires replacement of major structural elements such Strengthening as deck beams and slab. A bridge that will require complete replacement of the deck and Bridge Replacement supporting structure.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 149
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects Table 4.14: External Road bridge work requirements (SH2 to the CHWF Site).
Bridge Recommended Works Road Name Existing Class Span (m) Structural Type I.D.* Minimum Maximum A-52 12.2 Concrete Traffic management Strengthening Rimu Road A-53 10.7 Concrete Traffic management Strengthening Waihoki Valley Road E-101 H20 S16 14.5 Steel Traffic management Strengthening E-95 H20 S16 10.7 Concrete Traffic management Propping/decking Waitawhiti Road E-96 H20 S16 8.8 Concrete Traffic management Propping/decking E-75 H20 S16 27.4 Concrete Traffic management Propping/decking E-76 H20 S16 15.3 Steel Traffic management Strengthening E-77 H20 S16 21.4 Steel Traffic management Strengthening Castle Hill Road E-79 H20 S16 8.9 Steel Traffic management Strengthening E-80 H20 S16 8.9 Steel Traffic management Strengthening E-81 H20 S16 8.9 Steel Traffic management Strengthening E-82 H20 S16 9.1 Steel Traffic management Strengthening Ngarata Road E-83 H20 S16 9.1 Steel Traffic management Strengthening E-17 II 11 Concrete Propping/decking Strengthening E-18 I 39 Concrete Propping/decking Strengthening E-19 II 36.6 Concrete Strengthening Strengthening E-20 I 42.7 Concrete Strengthening Strengthening Route 52 E-21 I 49.4 Concrete Strengthening Strengthening E-22 I 12.2 Concrete Traffic management Strengthening E-23 I 30.4 Concrete Strengthening Strengthening E-24 I 9.2 Concrete Traffic management Strengthening Alfredton Tinui Road 125 Unknown 24.7 Concrete Strengthening Strengthening Daggs Road 151 Unknown 14.1 Concrete Strengthening Major Structural 76 Unknown 9.6 Concrete Strengthening Major Structural Maringi Road 77 Unknown 24.5 Timber Bridge replacement Bridge replacement 78 Unknown 15.2 Timber Bridge replacement Bridge replacement Manawa Road 79 Unknown 28.04 Concrete Traffic Management Strengthening 80 Unknown 4.57 Concrete Traffic Management Strengthening 81 Unknown 4.27 Concrete Traffic Management Strengthening * Bridge ID is a unique identifier assigned by the relevant District Council
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 150
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.4.6 Erosion and Sediment Control Exposure of soil during the construction process and the formation of topsoil and weathered rock stockpiles, means that there is potential for an increase in erosion and sediment discharges, including airborne dust. Accordingly, erosion and sediment control measures will form integral components of the construction process for the CHWF, with appropriate planning and adoption of control measures for all earthworks to limit the impact on the receiving environment.
The minimisation of erosion is the most effective way of reducing sediment discharges. Earthworks activities associated with the construction process will be kept to the minimum area necessary, and exposed surfaces will be stabilised until the site is appropriately revegetated.
The potential effects associated with earthworks activities can be prevented and minimised with the following guiding principles:
Maintain separation of earthworks from watercourses;
Divert clean surface runoff away from areas of earthworks or soil stockpiles;
Reduce the energy of surface flows in areas of potential erosion;
Allow for the passage of extreme flows and protect against blockage of infrastructure;
Provide containment for sediment entrained in surface flows;
Treat sediment laden water leaving the construction site;
Promptly stabilise or revegetate disturbed areas; and
Monitoring to ensure erosion and sediment controls are operating effectively.
A range of erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented as part of the construction process associated with CHWF. These measures will form part of a series of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (“ESCPs”), and are described in more detail in Section 6 of this document, and within the COMR attached as Appendix A in Volume 2. The ESCPs will set out measures to mitigate potential impacts of construction works on soils and waterways at the Site, and will be prepared for each phase of development and submitted to Council prior to construction.
Erosion and sedimentation control devices will be maintained in working order whilst they are required. Such devices will be inspected on a regular basis, and after prolonged periods of heavy rain. Any defects will be promptly rectified. The COMR provides examples of how stormwater will be managed around temporary construction facilities.
Topsoil that is to be used in revegetation will be stockpiled away from drainage lines and watercourses. These areas will be managed to minimise erosion with surface stabilisation to prevent wind erosion.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 151
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Once construction activities are completed at a particular location, reinstatement and revegetation of the disturbed area will commence. All temporary control measures will be removed and disturbed areas have been appropriately stabilised. Follow up maintenance will be undertaken until the area is satisfactorily stabilised and restored.
4.4.7 Tree Clearance and Trimming An assessment of vegetation clearance requirements has been undertaken. Included in this is the requirement for a small amount of vegetation clearance/trimming to reduce wind flow effects on the Turbines. The approach for this activity is as follows:
Exotic or trees with no significant ecological value will be removed as required.
Some indigenous species may need to be removed – these are specifically located to the south of Wairiri Road. This is described in the Ecology Effects Assessment report.
Where trees will be felled, this activity will be performed by suitably qualified tree felling contractors.
Tree clearance and trimming will be carried out in accordance with the Vegetation Management Plan described in the EMP (contained in the COMR attached as Appendix A in Volume 2).
4.4.8 Bulk Fuel Storage and Refuelling A bulk storage facility (or facilities) will be provided within a suitable location close to Contractor Compound(s), or active construction areas and will be used to provide fuel to service all the vehicles On-site, probably by way of mini tanker. Towable tankers may also be used in some circumstances.
Fuel storage and refuelling areas will be appropriately drained, bunded and surfaced to avoid land contamination and risk of spills Further details regarding fuel storage (and hazardous substances in general) can be found in the EMP.
4.4.9 Delivery of Turbine Components As outlined in Section 4.3.5 and shown in Figure 4.24, the proposed OW/OD Route for the transport of Turbine components is from the Port of Napier via SH2 to Pahiatua, and then local roads to the CHWF Site. The transportation of Turbine towers and blades will be classed as over dimension loads while transformers and nacelles will be overweight loads. Over dimension and overweight loads will follow designated transport routes and permitting requirements as set out by TDC, MDC and the NZTA.
Turbine Towers
Based on the V90 3MW, the maximum tower section load dimensions could be up to 4.6 m wide for the base section, with a length of 30 m for the top sections. The heaviest tower sections will weigh about 65 tonnes. A typical tower transporter for
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 152
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbine tower sections, similar to what will be used in the construction of the CHWF is shown in Plate 4.2.
Plate 4.2: Typical transporter for a Vestas V80 section of tower.
Nacelles
The nacelles contain all the wind Turbine machinery, and are generally assembled at the factory. With the hub and nose cone removed, the nacelles weigh about 86 tonnes, and are about 7.9 m long, 3.6 m wide and 4 m high. The mass of the nacelle is dependent upon the make and installed capacity. An indicative transport arrangement for a nacelle is shown in Figure 4.31.
Figure 4.31: Schematic transport configuration for a nacelle.
Turbine Blades
Each Turbine blade is moulded as a single piece and could be up to 55 m long. The blades weigh up to about 13.5 tonnes each and are carried on purpose-built trailers with steerable rear axles. An indicative transport arrangement is shown in Plate 4.3.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 153
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Plate 4.3: Indicative transporter for a Vestas V80 blade.
Cranes
A 300 tonne or similar crawler or all-terrain crane of up to 10 m width will be required to assemble the Turbines on Site. The crane can be delivered to the Site as 10-12 legally complying loads and will be assembled on Site. The tracks on the crane are able to be retracted for travel between Turbine Sites and to fit the Internal Road. Depending on the size of crane, tracks can be retracted to between 6 and 7 m.
Transformers
The transformers for the substation are expected to be the heaviest loads at up to about 140t (240t loaded on the transporter truck) each. As with the other over-weight loads (such as nacelles), the transformer will be carried on multiple axle trailers which enable distribution of the load on pavements. Additional traction engine power may be necessary on steeper grades.
4.5 Consenting Approach for Location of CHWF Components
Overall, the environmental effects assessment for the CHWF Project has been undertaken on a comprehensive, conservative and robust basis. This AEE, and the supporting technical information, is provided in such detail as corresponds with the scale and significance of the effects that the CHWF activities may have on the environment. As noted, the CHWF Site encompasses some 30,000 ha, with a construction footprint of 861 ha and an operational footprint of some 226 ha. In order to provide an assessment of all potential environmental effects (positive and negative), independent experts have undertaken both specific and representative effects assessments. Thus, while not every spatial area of the 30,000 ha Site has been specifically assessed, the worst case position for all potential effects has been assessed regardless of the final location of all the activities for which resource consent has been sought.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 154
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Optimisation of the CHWF design will be undertaken to make the best use of the wind resource while responding to technological advances, opportunities to minimise environmental effects and any unforeseen Site conditions following the granting of resource consent. When implementing the CHWF project, Genesis Energy will ensure that final designs fit within the overall location and extent of effects described in the AEE and authorised by the resource consents granted. It will ensure that the nature and scale of the effects associated with the final design are no greater than the authorised adverse effects.
Overall, the design of the CHWF has been undertaken to a level sufficient to enable the environmental effects to be assessed robustly and conservatively.
The sections above have described each component and activity along with a description of the finalisation extent sought. Table 4.15 summarises the parameters within which Genesis Energy will refine and finalise the location of the CHWF infrastructure.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 155
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 4.15 Description of component location extent.
Component Rationale Location Description Turbines Siting refinement is important to allow for variation in spacing between Turbines to Turbines may not be sited anywhere other than in the Turbine maximise energy output. Spacing varies depending on the size of the Turbine rotor Corridor. (including Turbine and therefore, optimal spacing can only be determined once the final Turbine Foundations and model(s) are selected after resource consent acquisition. Four Indicative Turbine Turbine Platforms) Layouts have been established to provide a basis for representative engineering and environmental assessments and to illustrate how different Turbine sizes may be placed within the Turbine Corridor. Turbine Corridor The Turbine Corridor incorporates all areas within the CHWF Site identified for The area and location of the Turbine Corridor is located where Turbine placement. The development and refinement of the Turbine Corridor has indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C. incorporated representative environmental and engineering assessments to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse environmental effects. Internal Roads Internal Roads have been designed and associated earthworks volumes Internal Roads are likely to be located where indicated in the calculated and will generally be located where indicated. However the scope CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C but may be located (including Lay-bys) sought within the resource consent will enable the final location of the Internal anywhere within the Site, subject to the limits presented Roads to be confirmed during the detailed design phase. Further refinement may below: be required due to the following: 1. Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, Technological advances in transporters or components, or construction ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory techniques. This may enable a more efficient route to be taken which plans will not be disturbed. may reduce earthworks and/or ecological effects. 2. Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will Unforeseen ground conditions or environmental constraints. be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the Unidentified archaeological sites or features. CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the AEE. Clearance of a limited amount of ‘high ecological The Internal Road design approach is considered appropriate at this Site because value’ vegetation is described and this quantity will not be of the large proportion of the Site consisting of low or negligible ecological value. exceeded in construction of the CHWF. The location of the Internal Roads will be influenced by the fixed locations of key 3. Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and CHWF infrastructure (Turbines within the Turbine Corridor and substations) to will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous which they will provide access. vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be exceeded. 4. Watercourse crossings will not vary in location by more than 100m each side of locations identified in the CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 156
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5. Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor. 6. Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided. 7. Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE are not exceeded. Main Substation Two locations have been identified for the Main Substation. The key factors that The Main Substation will be located at one of the two locations will determine which location will be most appropriate will be the final size, location shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C. and order of stages of construction, and the final location of the External Transmission Line. Two alternative locations also provide redundancy in the unlikely event that one location is found to be unsuitable during detailed design. Satellite Substation The location of the Satellite Substation was identified after a thorough assessment The location of the Satellite Substation is shown in the CHWF of the overall Site against a range of suitability criteria, such as area, topography, Project Maps in Appendix C. visibility, distance from occupied dwellings, and potential for flood risk, accessibility and ecology. Switching Station The Switching Station location was identified after a thorough assessment of the The location of the Switching Station is shown in the CHWF overall Site against a range of suitability criteria, such as area, topography, Project Maps in Appendix C. visibility, proximity to dwellings, potential for flood risk, accessibility, expected proximity to the External Transmission Line connection point and ecology. Internal Transmission The Internal Transmission Line has been designed to a reasonably high level of The location of the Internal Transmission Line will be within Line certainty and apart from micro-siting of towers is not expected to change. 50m of the location indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C. The location indicated in the AEE shows some alternative arrangements depending on the location of the Main Substation and whether the Switching The location of the Internal Transmission towers will be within Station is utilised. 50m of the locations indicated in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C and will be positioned to avoid clearance or trimming of indigenous vegetation to the extent practicable. 33kV overhead lines Wherever practical, the 33kV reticulation system will follow Internal Roads so the These components are likely to be located where indicated in and underground requirement for variation from the routes indicated will match that of the Internal the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C but may be located cables Roads. anywhere within the Site, subject to the following limitations: The opportunity arising from refinement, and the degree of constraint applied is as 8. Areas of legally protected habitats (DOC, QEII) and, ‘rare’, for the Internal Roads. ‘threatened’ or ‘at risk’ habitats identified under statutory
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 157
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Other EBoP Other EBoP components such as switchgear huts will generally be located near plans will not be disturbed. previously listed EBoP components (substations, overhead lines and underground 9. Areas of ‘high ecological value’ as defined in the cables) and will vary in their location as these other components do. Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) will be avoided, except to the extent already outlined in the Excess Fill Areas On-site Excess Fill Areas have been identified as suitable from both an CHWF Project Figures in Appendix C and shown in the engineering and environmental perspective. They are located near or adjacent to AEE. Clearance of a limited amount ‘high ecological value’ Internal Roads to minimise transport of Excess Fill and so may vary in location if vegetation is described and this quantity will not be Internal Roads relocations are required. Other variations may be required to exceeded in construction of the CHWF. achieve engineering or environmental improvements and additional Excess Fill Areas may also be identified by the contractor. 10. Clearance of indigenous vegetation will be minimised and will not cause the maximum quantity of indigenous Central Laydown Indicative Central Laydown Area locations have been identified to indicate suitable vegetation clearance of 66ha described in the Ecological Areas sites and demonstrate that the requirement to provide Central Laydown Areas can Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to be be achieved. exceeded. Contractor The contractor will identify a suitable location for the Contractor Compound prior to 11. Gullies with watercourses will be avoided unless it can be Compounds construction. demonstrated that downstream water quality effects are no more than minor. Operations and The location of O&M facilities will be determined prior to construction depending 12. Seepage areas dominated by indigenous species with an maintenance facilities on the final size, location and order of stages of construction. area greater than 0.05ha will be avoided. Quarries Quarries will be established at the locations indicated or additional sites if 13. Total CHWF earthworks volumes described in the AEE identified during construction. are not exceeded. Crushing Plant Crushing plant is likely to be located at or near the quarry sites. 14. Noise standards will be complied with or effects will be appropriately mitigated. Concrete Batching Concrete Batching Plants will be located either near current construction sites, or
Plants near material sources such as quarries or water abstraction sites. Indicative locations have been identified with specific locations to be determined prior to construction. The plants will be re-locatable, with only one or two locations operating concurrently at any one time and sites being rehabilitated as soon as the Concrete Batching Plant is relocated.. Water abstraction and Water abstraction and storage locations have been identified. The location of water abstraction and storage facilities is storage areas shown in the CHWF Project Maps in Appendix C.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 158
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
4.6 Site Reinstatement
Construction areas no longer required for construction, such as completed Excess Fill Areas and areas used for locating temporary construction facilities will be rehabilitated. Rehabilitation will focus on providing a stable landform and vegetative cover promptly after the infrastructure is no longer required, or when the earthworks activity is complete. Table 4.16 summarises the remedial works proposed.
Table 4.16: Proposed Site reinstatement.
Activity/Infrastructure Proposed Site Reinstatement Turbine Foundation The Turbine Foundation will be situated below the finished ground level, covered in topsoil and sown with grass. Contractor Compounds, All temporary construction facilities will be removed and the Concrete Batching Plants, site rehabilitated once they are no longer required. Central Laydown Areas16, Reinstatement will involve the stabilisation and rehabilitation Quarries17 and crushing of disturbed areas by ripping, top soiling, seeding and facilities, water storage watering the area. Earthworks and Excess Fill Once earthworks are completed at a particular location, the Areas disturbed area will be reinstated and revegetated. All temporary erosion and sediment control measures will be removed when vegetation has established on formerly disturbed areas. Follow up maintenance will be undertaken until the area is satisfactorily stabilised and restored.
Proposed rehabilitation is detailed further in Section 6 of this document.
4.7 Operation and Maintenance Activities
The CHWF will be operational over an indefinite period. Activities on Site during the operational phase are of significantly lower intensity than during construction. The key operation and maintenance activities associated with the CHWF include:
CHWF operation – control and scheduling of electrical equipment and dispatch of power.
Maintenance and repair activities, including:
- Regular and unscheduled Turbine maintenance and servicing, including changes of oils, filters, firmware upgrades, inspections, component replacements and repairs.
16 Note that a Central Laydown Area adjacent to an O&M facility may not be reinstated, or may be partially reinstated. 17 Note that one or two quarries may not be rehabilitated so a reliable on-site supply of aggregate remains for maintenance of roads and other civil structures.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 159 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
- EBoP maintenance, including electrical outages for transformer, switchgear, other plant servicing or upgrades.
- Civil balance of plant upgrades – periodic repair of Internal Roads, buildings or laydown areas to accommodate natural deterioration or degradation, or for specific maintenance events.
Other operation and maintenance phase activities:
- Turbine performance testing.
- Consent compliance testing and monitoring.
- Other activities such as educational visits.
- Refurbishment or replacement of Turbines.
Up to 40 FTE operational personnel could be engaged on the CHWF.
The COMR (see Appendix A in Volume 2) provides more detail in respect to the typical operations and management activities that will occur at the CHWF during the operational phase.
4.8 Management Plans
A COMR for the CHWF has been prepared to identify how potential environmental effects of the CHWF will be managed (see Appendix A). Management of effects and mitigation will be achieved through the implementation of an approved EMP and various SEMPs relating to the key effects. The COMR addresses the design and construction activities for the CHWF, and summarises the proposed EMP and SEMPs. The Management Plans proposed for the CHWF are also discussed in Section 6 of this AEE.
Proposed Development Section 4 – page 160 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5.1 Introduction
Section 1.6 has outlined the environmental assessments that have been undertaken by independent specialist consultants in respect to the CHWF project to inform the project design and assess environmental effects arising from its construction, operation.
This section of the AEE first provides a detailed outline of the assessments of effects undertaken by the various technical specialists involved in the CHWF project, and then provides a summary of the findings of the assessments.
5.2 Socio-economic Effects
Assessments have been undertaken by Concept Consulting Group Limited (2011) to assess the electricity-related effects, and BERL Economics (2011) to assess the economic effects of the CHWF. The Electricity-Related Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Section 1) of this document and is summarised in Section 5.2.1 below. The Economic Impact Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Section 2) of this document and is summarised in Section 5.2.2 below.
Rob Greenaway and Associates has assessed the potential effects on recreation and tourism activities and values identified in the CHWF area, both during construction and operation. The Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Section 3) of this document, and is summarised in Section 5.2.3 below.
5.2.1 Electricity-Related Effects A number of electricity-related benefits associated with the CHWF have been identified at a national and regional level. Those relating to meeting projected electricity demand growth and diversification of generation supply have been outlined in Section 2.2 of this document. Other electricity related benefits include:
Assisting with reducing New Zealand’s carbon intensity and carbon dioxide emissions; and
Providing for supply and demand within the Central Electricity Region18.
These benefits are outlined further below.
Reducing Carbon Intensity and Carbon Dioxide Emissions
The CHWF could produce approximately 1,500 GWh per annum (and possibly up to 3,000 GWh per annum). The equivalent from gas-fired combined cycle gas Turbine generation
18 The Central Electricity Region is defined in the Transpower Annual Planning Report 2011 and comprises the areas of Manawatu, northern Wairarapa, southern Hawkes Bay, King Country, and Taupo.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 161 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects would produce between 789,000 and 1,127,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide, while coal-fired generation would produce 1,700,000 and 2,700,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (Concept Consulting, 2011). These figures for carbon dioxide are equivalent to a range of between 11% and 40% of all emissions from electricity generation in the year to 31 March 2010.
The CHWF project will assist in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from thermal power stations, as it will normally operate ahead of thermal generation in the electricity market. This is consistent with the Government’s overall policy framework to reducing climate change greenhouse gas emissions as outlined in Section 2.2.3. However, in order to provide security of supply, for example when insufficient wind is available for generation, thermal generation will continue to be required.
Supply and Demand within the Central Electricity Region
The CHWF will feed electricity into the Central Electricity Region. On average over the last seven years, the Central Electricity Region has been a net importer of electricity (i.e. regional demand outweighs regional supply). Supply within the Region mainly comes from the Mangahao hydro station, and the Tararua and Te Apiti wind farms. Adding the electricity generated from a project the size of the CHWF will make the Central Electricity Region a net exporter of electricity (i.e. regional supply will outweigh regional demand).
5.2.2 Economic Effects The BERL (2011) assessment investigated the contribution the construction, operation and maintenance of the CHWF will make to the Tararua and Masterton Districts economy. Accordingly, their assessment comprised the likely expenditure and employment over the construction phase (up to year five), and operation and maintenance (year six onwards) phases. From expenditure, input-output analysis was applied to identify the direct effects of the CHWF on Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”). Multiplier analysis was then applied to identify the indirect and induced effects on expenditure, GDP and employment.
The five-year construction phase of the CHWF will cost approximately $1.68 billion, of which $246.7 million is estimated to be spent in the Tararua and Masterton Districts. Once operational, the annual cost of operations and maintenance of the CHWF will be $39.4 million. BERL (2011) estimate $9.4 million will be spent in the Tararua and Masterton Districts.
The socio-economic benefits of the CHWF on the Tararua and Masterton Districts are summarised as follows, and outlined further below:
Increases in GDP and employment;
Diversification of the industry base; and
Indirect economic benefits.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 162 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
GDP and Employment
In the first five years (comprising the construction phase and commencement of the land leases) the CHWF project could annually generate up to $51.3 million in expenditure, contribute up to $15.6 million to GDP and employ up to 147 full time equivalents (“FTEs”)19 within the Tararua and Masterton Districts. Using the input-output analysis, this will result in an increased GDP of $15.6 million. Applying multiplier analysis to determine the indirect and induced effects20 of the proposal over this same period, expenditure increases to $90.6 million, GDP increases to $31.4 million, and employment increases to 325 FTEs annually in the Tararua and Masterton Districts.
BERL (2011) determined that the Tararua and Masterton Districts employed approximately 15,700 FTEs in 2010, and has an estimated GDP of $1.43 billion. During the construction phase, the CHWF could increase GDP in the Tararua and Masterton Districts by 2.2% per annum and employment by 2.4%. During the operational phase, annual expenditure of around $9.4 million will result in an increase of $3.9 million in GDP, and the CHWF will directly employ 3721 FTEs annually. Using multiplier analysis to incorporate indirect and induced effects, the total impact of operations on the Tararua and Masterton Districts will result in expenditure of $14 million, GDP of $5.8 million and employment of 168 FTEs in the Tararua and Masterton Districts.
Diversification of Industry
As outlined in Section 3.1, the Tararua District in particular has a strong economic reliance on the primary sector. The CHWF will result in the industry base of the Region becoming more diverse, with dependency on the primary sector being reduced to some extent. A more diverse industry base is beneficial to the local economy, given the variability of primary sector incomes, which fluctuate on a range of factors such as commodity prices, exchange rates and weather patterns.
Indirect Economic Benefits
An increase in employment is also likely to result in an increase in population, which has a flow on effect in requiring an increase in population based services, such as: health, education and recreation. Existing businesses may also expand, and new businesses could be attracted to the Region. There is also likely to be some improvements in local infrastructure such as roading, as discussed in Section 4.4.5.
19 The 147 FTEs differs from the 135 FTEs estimated by Genesis Energy that it includes the FTE employment generated by landowner expenditure. Employment due to landowner expenditure has been identified by BERL (2011) using industry expenditure to employment ratios. 20 Indirect effects are those that occur when where the industry purchases materials and services from supplier firms, who in turn make further purchases from their suppliers. Induced effects include those that occur when persons employed in the direct development and in firms supplying services earn income (mostly from wages and salaries, but also from profits) which, after tax is deducted, is then spent on consumption. 21 The direct employment of 37 FTEs differs from the 25 FTEs estimated by Genesis Energy in that the BERL (2011) analysis includes the FTE employment generated by landowner expenditure. Employment due to landowner expenditure has been identified using industry expenditure to employment ratios.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 163 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
While there will be some disruptions to existing farming operations during the construction phase, this will not cause any material changes in output. Similarly, the impact of the physical footprint of the CHWF on land use or productivity will be minimal and not adversely affect the level of output.
Overall, BERL (2011) conclude that the construction and operation of the CHWF will have a positive effect on the Tararua and Masterton Districts, adding to its economic activity and employment, acting as a catalyst for further investment, creating diversity in industry and stability in incomes.
5.2.3 Recreation and Tourism The Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment (Rob Greenaway and Associates, 2011) included a desktop and field study as follows:
Literature review of relevant recreational studies, national and regional policy documents and strategies, popular recreation and tourism guides, and international wind farm case studies and research reports.
Exploring internet resources.
Reviewing Tourism Research Council (division of the Ministry of Economic Development) databases.
Reviewing Manawatu and Wairarapa Regional Tourist Organisations’ (“RTO”) promotional information.
Site visit to the CHWF area and other regional recreation settings nearby.
Consultation within the local community.
The area within a radius of approximately 15 km from the edge of the Turbine Corridor (referred to as the “Study Area”), was considered for the Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment. For the purposes of the assessment, recreation is defined as “activities pursued for pleasure during free time”, but does not include recreation taken on one’s own property. Tourism is a subset of recreation and involves a person staying away from their home for at least one night while undertaking recreation activities.
Recreation and Tourism settings in the Study Area are generally small-scale, and are often a diversification of farming activities and include:
Route 52 as a back-road motorcycle, driving and cycling tour route (limited use).
Tinui and Pongaroa settlements.
Adventure activities, such as the Herdwood Equestrian Centre, Costa Plenty 4 x 4 Park (Puketoi Range ridge), Track and Trail Adventures and March Hare Cycling (cycle and wine tour).
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 164 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Golf at the Alfredton golf course.
Reserves and conservation areas, specifically Makuri Gorge Scenic Reserve and Makuri River (local scenic qualities and angling opportunities), Mangatiti Falls (walking opportunities), and Mokiri Bush Scenic Reserve (limited recreational opportunities as access is over private land). Rewanui Forest Park is a private conservation block on Masterton-Castlepoint Road that offers three walking tracks. Reserves within small settlements in the area have locally important sport, camping and recreational areas.
Accommodation providers, primarily backpackers offering farm access.
Gardens to visit – Torara Hills (Kohiku), Dursley (near Bideford) and Howbeg (north of Pongaroa).
Castle Point – a local landmark of limestone reef, Castle Rock and lighthouse.
The primary establishments within a 15 km radius of the CHWF Site are listed in Table 5.1 and shown on Figure 5.1.
Table 5.1: Location key to Figure 5.1.
Label Tourism and Recreational Activity Label Tourism and Recreational Activity A Route 52 L Glennross Backpackers B Coonoor Farmstay M Track and Trail Adventures C Kanuka Wilderness Hunting N Alfredton Golf Course D Howbeg Gardens O Knuckle Bone Backpackers Herdword equestrian centre Mokiri Bush – restricted public E P access option F Pongaroa settlement – visitor setting Q Dursley Garden G Makuri Domain and River (angling) R Tinui Station Country Estate H Costa Plenty 4x4 Park S Tinui settlement – visitor setting I Otapawa Backpackers and Garden T March Hare Cycling J Mangatiti Falls walk – private land U Rewanui Forest Park K Torara Hills garden V Castlepoint
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 165 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 5.1: Location of visitor settings within 15 km of the CHWF Site.
Castlepoint is the most significant visitor setting in the area, with Tinui benefiting from the associated traffic. Route 52 has limited presence as a tourism route but has appeal as a back-road motorcycle, driving and cycling opportunity.
With the exception of Castlepoint, the Study Area is a relatively low use setting in relation to recreation and tourism, with few operations established as destinations in themselves. While the rural backdrop to, for example, Route 52, is clearly an important component of the visitor experience, there is no particular landscape setting which serves as a visitor attraction in itself.
Reserves in the Study Area include settings with natural values, specifically Mokiri Bush, Tauweru Conservation Area, Makuri Gorge and Puketoi Scenic Reserve. Mokiri and Tauweru have very limited recreation access options. Puketoi is a locally important pig and deer hunting area, while the Makuri Gorge and River have visitor values resulting from local scenic qualities and angling opportunities. Reserves within the small settlements in the study area have locally important sport, camping and recreation values.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 166 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Construction Effects
The key potential effects on recreation and tourism activities during the construction of the CHWF will be temporary and localised, and relate to increased traffic movements, road improvements required for transporting over-dimension loads and construction noise.
The key roads for recreation and tourism activities near the CHWF are Route 52 and the Masterton-Castlepoint Road. Route 52 from Alfredton to Rakaunui will require upgrading to provide for OW/OD Vehicles associated with the construction of the CHWF, while the Masterton-Castlepoint Road will be used for general construction traffic and will not require any significant upgrading.
To minimise the effect on the visitor experience to the area, general construction traffic movements will be avoided during key domestic holiday traffic periods, such as the first and last weekends of school holidays and at the start and end of public holidays.
Castle Hill, Rimu and Waitawhiti Roads are used by the Wairarapa Rally and are proposed to be upgraded for the CHWF project to provide for the passage of OW/OD Vehicles. This may reduce the level of challenge on these roads for the one weekend of the year that rallying occurs. As outlined in Section 7.2.7, Genesis Energy has consulted with the event organiser who raised no concerns about the project. While road improvements will reduce the challenge for rally traffic on some roads (although increasing speed will maintain the challenge), it will improve safety levels for other road users, including recreational cyclists and motorcyclists.
Overall, as outlined in Section 5.5.2, with traffic management, road improvements and mitigation measures, it is expected that effect of increased traffic during the construction of the CHWF on current recreation and tourism activities will be, at most, no more than minor.
Operational Effects
The CHWF will modify the landscape in which it is situated, and as such the operational effects on tourism and recreation relate primarily to the visibility and audibility of the Turbines, although no structures will be located on publicly accessible land. Boffa Miskell (2011(a)) has assessed the visibility of Turbines from the tourism and recreation establishments identified within a 15 km radius of the CHWF Site. Two of these sites are located within CHWF Landowner properties and there are limited views of the CHWF from these sites. No other identified tourism or recreation site has a view of any Turbines, apart from occasional views from Route 52 and from the summit of Mount Maunsell near Tinui (located on private land). Visitors to Mokiri Bush (near Castle Hill Road, but with restricted public access) are likely to view some Turbines as they cross private land to reach the reserve, however the reserve is bush-clad and views will be very limited from within it. This situation also applies to the Tauweru Conservation Area, but there is no practical public access to this reserve. The Puketoi Scenic Reserve is also predominantly bush- clad with limited external views.
There is no recreation or tourism activity in the area that defines itself by the landscape setting of the area, although the general rural landscape adds to the visitor experience.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 167 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
While the CHWF will alter the visual amenity of some settings and viewpoints, this is unlikely to result in a notably reduced use of recreation and tourist facilities by those individuals seeking a ‘rural’ or ‘back country’ experience. The changes identified in the landscape assessment for the proposal appear unlikely to lead to notable changes in regional tourism and recreation participation levels.
International research shows that wind farms can, and do, operate as visitor attractions. The presence of the CHWF will add another dimension to the Route 52 visitor experience. As described in the landscape assessment undertaken for this study (Boffa Miskell, 2011(a)), the CHWF will not dominate the landscape along Route 52 but will be visible at times from various points and to various degrees. This means that while the CHWF is very unlikely to diminish visitor activity in the area, due to its low level of effect on specific visitor settings and the low level of current tourism and recreation activities, it has the potential to increase visitor traffic and create a point of interest along Route 52. While the relative remoteness of the locality will temper any such increase, the potential could be harnessed to increase interest in the area.
The audibility of the Turbines during the operational phase of the CHWF has been assessed by Marshall Day Acoustics (2011), and associated noise effects are detailed in Section 5.5.4 of this AEE. As shown in Figures B14 to B17 of Appendix B (Volume 2), the 35dB and 40dB noise contours include some areas of public road, but these are not areas where visitors would stop for specific tourism or recreational purposes. Mokiri Bush and the Tauweru Conservation Area are located within the 35dB contour and although the Turbines may be audible here in certain climatic conditions, these reserves are managed for conservation rather than recreation purposes. The noise levels are not predicted to deter any recreational use of the area.
While the components of the CHWF will alter the visual experience, the effects are not necessarily negative or adverse. Some may perceive that the recreational quality of the area will be reduced by the presence of the CHWF, and some subsequent minor recreation displacement may result. However, the CHWF itself could become a tourist destination, and may result in increased visitation to the site. Wind farms are often recognised as sustainable forms of non-polluting energy generation and the potential exists to develop visitor information services associated with the development.
5.2.4 Summary
Electricity-Related Effects
As outlined in Section 2.2 and Section 5.2.1, the CHWF will:
Contribute to meeting the growth in demand for electricity;
Contribute to meeting the Government target for 90% renewable generation by 2025;
Contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions;
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 168 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Diversify the electricity supply mix; and
Increase security of supply in the Central Electricity Region.
Overall, the CHWF will provide positive benefits to the electricity supply system in New Zealand.
Economic Effects
The construction and operation of the CHWF will cause some disruptions to existing farming operations during the construction phase, however this will not cause any material changes in output. Overall the CHWF will have a positive effect on the economies of the Tararua and Masterton Districts, making a material contribution towards GDP, adding to its economic activity and employment, acting as a catalyst for further investment, creating diversity in industry and stability in incomes.
Recreation and Tourism
During the construction phase of the CHWF, the movement of heavy vehicles may have some effect on recreation and tourism traffic in the CHWF area. However, these effects can be readily managed through appropriate timing and management of construction traffic and by avoiding peak holiday times where practicable.
At the regional level, once operational, the CHWF is predicted to have no measurable effect on recreation or tourism activity. There are no important visitor settings or tourism operations from where views of Turbines are predicted to have adverse effects. Conversely, the potential exists to provide some tourism benefit by better marketing Route 52 as a travelling route, using the wind farm as a tourist attraction.
Road upgrades and developments to provide for over-dimension loads will improve safety levels for road users but may reduce the challenge for rally traffic on some roads.
Given the relatively low level of use of existing tourism and recreational activities in the general area, and the fact that all current recreational activities will retain almost all of their setting and experience characteristics during the construction and operation of the CHWF, the net effect of the CHWF on current recreation and tourism activities will be, at most, no more than minor.
5.3 Landscape and Visual 5.3.1 Introduction Boffa Miskell (2011(a)) has undertaken a comprehensive assessment of the existing landscape context, and the potential effects on landscape and visual amenity associated with the CHWF. The Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Section 4) and is summarised below. The Visibility Mapping and Viewpoint Simulations from representative pubic viewpoints and sites of significance, and the Visibility Analysis
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 169 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects from External Dwellings are provided in Volume 5 (Sections 1 and 2 respectively) of this document. Visibility maps, viewpoint simulations and visibility analysis from External Dwellings are also provided in Appendix B (Volume 2) of this document where they are specifically referred to below.
The review of the existing landscape context and setting included the following methods:
Site and wider area inspections.
Selection and photography from representative public viewpoints throughout the area.
Review of the Regional and District Plan provisions with reference to outstanding natural features and landscapes, public reserves, recreation and amenity areas.
Review of the Wairarapa Landscape Study (2010) – Boffa Miskell was jointly commissioned by the GWRC, MDC, Carterton District Council and South Wairarapa District Council to undertake a landscape study of the Wairarapa in consultation with landowners, stakeholders and the wider community. This is the first phase of a more detailed landscape assessment project for the wider area. For the purposes of the CHWF Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment, the landscape character areas identified in the Wairarapa Landscape Study were expanded to include the CHWF area within the Manawatu-Wanganui Region.
Assessments of the potential effects of the CHWF on landscape and visual amenity were made using both computer modelling and photosimulations, taking into account visibility and context factors (for example, distance, screening and orientation). In particular, the visibility of the CHWF from public viewpoints and rural dwellings are considered.
5.3.2 Wind Farm Visibility Variations in the height and density of different Turbine Configurations were considered with respect to potential visual effects to ensure the Turbine Configuration with the greatest potential effects was used for the assessment. The 80M, 90M 100L and 110L Turbine Layouts were developed and compared from six representative public viewpoints. Figures B18, B19 and B20 of Appendix B (Volume 2 of this document) illustrate and compare the two most visible Turbine Layouts. Following fieldwork and modelling of the Medium and Large Turbine Configurations, a layout of 242 Turbines with a 110 m rotor and a maximum tip height of 155 m was selected and is referred to as the “assessed layout” for the landscape and visual assessment. This layout is considered to be the most visible Turbine arrangement and was used as the basis for the visibility analysis and visual effects assessment.
It is noted that if both Medium and Large Turbines are used in a layout, their relatively different sizes will not be particularly apparent.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 170 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Visibility Mapping
Wind farm visibility mapping, extending some 40 km from the nearest Turbine, has been carried out individually for each of the seven Turbine Clusters, as well as the combined Turbine Clusters, in order to illustrate the overall visibility of the CHWF from the wider area.
The visibility mapping for the CHWF used the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (“ZTV”) technique which is widely adopted for the visibility mapping of Turbines. As the ZTV mapping is based entirely on ‘bare ground’ topographic data, it does not take into account the screening effects of intervening vegetation or structures in the landscape. The ZTV mapping utilised 2 m contours for the area within 2 km of the Turbines, with 5 m contours out to approximately 5 km from the Turbines. Beyond this, 20 m contours from the 1:50,000 NZMS Topomap Series were utilised. ZTV mapping also takes into account factors relating to the curvature of the earth and light refraction.
Turbine Visibility Analysis
Turbine visibility mapping extended in excess of 40 km from the CHWF Site. While the Turbines may theoretically be visible from viewpoints beyond 30 km, in reality they would be difficult, if not impossible to see from such locations due to the distance, variable atmospheric conditions and the effect of intervening vegetation and other structures within the landscape. Accordingly, the visual assessment has focussed on locations and areas within 30 km of the nearest Turbine within the CHWF Site.
Figures B21, B22, B23 and B24 of Appendix B (Volume 2 of this document) show the visibility mapping for all seven Turbine Clusters as a percentage/colour graduation of visibility, with the visibility of a single blade or blade tip counted, for visibility purposes, as being a full Turbine.
The visibility of each Turbine Cluster is summarised below.
Turbine Cluster A – Purple (32 Turbines)
The visibility of Turbine Cluster A is more apparent to the north and east out to around 15 to 20 km (see Figure B21, Appendix B (Volume 2 of this document)). Generally, the visibility to the south and west in particular, is screened by the Puketoi Range and the associated foothills to the south-west. While Cluster A is visible from offshore locations beyond 5 km, it is not visible from the coastline itself. Based on landform screening only, Cluster A is not visible from SH2 or the rural towns and settlements to the west of Route 52.
Turbine Cluster B – Yellow (38 Turbines)
While Turbine Cluster B is located to the east of Route 52, its visibility pattern is similar to Turbine Cluster A, given its location at the northern end of the CHWF (see Figure B22,
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 171 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Appendix B (Volume 2). As with Turbine Cluster A, the higher levels of visibility are from more elevated locations generally where there are fewer public roads or rural dwellings. Turbine Cluster B is not visible from the coastline, SH2 or the townships and settlements to the west of Route 52. Neither Turbine Clusters A or B are visible from the rural communities to the south such as Tinui, Bideford, Whangaehu or Whareama.
Turbine Cluster C – Dark Blue (19 Turbines)
Turbine Cluster C is located in the centre of the CHWF (see Figure 1.2). Based on the ZTV map, the main area of Turbine visibility is in the eastern sector up to approximately 7.5 km away from Turbine Cluster C (see Figure B22, Appendix B (Volume 2). While the high visibility pattern also extends along the eastern side of the Puketoi Range and the Tararua Ranges further to the west, in reality visibility would be severely restricted from the eastern side of the Puketoi Range by vegetation screening. Visibility from the western side of the Puketoi Range is completely screened by the range itself, which in turn fully screens the CHWF from the Woodville and Pahiatua townships and other rural settlements to the north of Alfredton. While the visibility mapping shows Turbine Cluster C being visible from the Tararua Ranges to the west, in reality visibility would be restricted due to these viewpoints being some 30 km distant and in many cases screened by intervening vegetation. Turbine Cluster C is not visible from the Wairarapa coastline, SH2 or the upper valley that the State Highway traverses.
Turbine Cluster D – Green (54 Turbines)
Turbine Cluster D is the most visible of the Turbine Clusters (see Figure B23, Appendix B (Volume 2). Notwithstanding this, Turbine Cluster D is not visible from the Wairarapa coastline or SH2. While the ZTV map shows some visibility in the Woodville and Masterton urban areas, in reality the Turbines in this Turbine Cluster would not be visible from these locations due to the screening effects of local and intervening vegetation and structures. Turbine Cluster D would not be visible from Pahiatua or Eketahuna. Also, being some 30 km distant from the coast, views would not be readily apparent if unobstructed views were available.
Turbine Cluster E – Orange (25 Turbines)
While the ZTV mapping shows Turbine Cluster E, like most other Turbine Clusters, as being visible from the Tararua Ranges some 35 km to the west, the main area of visibility of Turbine Cluster E is towards the east and within 7.5 km of the Turbine Cluster itself (see Figure B23, Appendix B (Volume 2). Generally, the visibility of Turbine Cluster E is restricted from public viewpoints such as roads and settlements. Turbine Cluster E is not visible from the Wairarapa coast, SH2 or Route 52.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 172 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbine Cluster F – Red (29 Turbines)
Turbine Cluster F is the most easterly of the seven Turbine Clusters. While this Turbine Cluster is within 10 km of the coast, it is not visible from the coastline or the near inshore waters (see Figure B24, Appendix B (Volume 2). The main areas of Turbine Cluster F visibility are within the area immediately to the east and west, and also to the south extending for some 20 km to 30 km. From the settlement of Tinui, some 8 km to the south, Turbine Cluster E is not visible, nor is it visible from the other rural settlements such as Bideford further to the south. The ZTV map shows the visibility pattern and density to be directly related to the elevated locations within the more immediate inland and coastal hill country areas.
Turbine Cluster G – Light Blue (45 Turbines)
Turbine Cluster G is located at the southern end of the CHWF Site. While the visibility pattern within 10 km of this Turbine Cluster shows the surrounding hill country to be the area of highest visibility, Route 52 stands out as being relatively well screened due primarily to its valley alignment (see Figure B24, Appendix B (Volume 2). Turbine Cluster G is not visible from the coastline, SH2 or the main settlements between Masterton and Woodville. While the ZTV map shows the Turbine Cluster G being visible from Masterton and Woodville, in reality this Turbine Cluster will not be visible from these urban settlements due to intervening screening and distance.
Combined Turbine Cluster Visibility
A combined cluster ZTV map was prepared to show the combined visibility of all seven Turbine Clusters. The combined visibility ZTV map (see Figure B25 of Appendix B (Volume 2) shows the screening effect of the Puketoi Range to the west of the CHWF is particularly evident, as is the screening of views from SH2, and to a lesser extent Route 52 to the south of the Puketoi Range. The combined visibility ZTV map also illustrates the effectiveness of the coastal hills in screening the CHWF from the Wairarapa coastline and the inshore waters.
Areas of Turbine visibility based on ZTV mapping of landform screening within 10 km of the nearest Turbine, including all elevated land from where Turbines are most likely from, are outlined in Table 5.2.
As outlined in Table 5.2, within the 10 km zone no Turbines are visible from approximately 23% of the area (33,618 ha) due to the local screening effect of the topography. From a further 49% of the area (72,115 ha), up to 50 Turbines or 21% of the total number of CHWF Turbines would be visible. On the basis of these figures, which are based on landform screening only, from 72% of the area, no more than 50 Turbines (or parts of them) would be visible. Of this total no Turbines would be visible from 23% of the area, one to 20 Turbines would be visible from 25% of the area, and 21 to 50 Turbines would be visible from 24% of the area within 10 km of the CHWF.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 173 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.2: Visibility (based on landform screening only) within 10 km of the nearest Turbine.
Turbines Visible Area/Hectare Area/Percentage None 33,618 23% 0-20 37,357 25% 21-50 34,758 24% 51-100 24,494 16% 101-150 10,295 7% 151-242 6,758 5% TOTAL 147,280 ha 100%
From the ZTV analysis of overall CHWF visibility, the following conclusions are made:
The CHWF will not be visible from the Wairarapa coastline or from the near inshore waters.
The Puketoi Range effectively screens the CHWF from viewpoints to the west and in particular from the urban settlements of Eketahuna and Pahiatua.
No Turbines will be visible from SH2 or the rural settlements within the State Highway corridor.
From Route 52, the visibility of the Turbines will be limited and constrained by landform screening and existing vegetation.
While the ZTV mapping shows the CHWF as being theoretically visible from Woodville and Masterton, in reality this would not be possible due to the screening effects of intervening landforms (such as the Puketoi Range) and vegetation.
In the context of the scale and size of the CHWF, its overall visibility based on landform screening will be confined and largely contained to the central section of the inland hill country landscape character area in which it is located (see Section 3.3.2 and Figure B4 of Appendix B (Volume 2).
Public places and rural dwellings within the wider area are generally located within the hill country valley system, and accordingly will be partially screened from the CHWF.
No Turbines will be visible from 23% of the total area within 10 km of the CHWF. Excluding land within the CHWF Site, no Turbines will be visible from 29% of the area within 10 km of the CHWF.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 174 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
From 49% of the total area within 10 km of the CHWF, between one – 50 Turbines, rotors or rotor blade tips will be visible.
Based on fieldwork, local vegetation screening is likely to significantly decrease the areas from where Turbines or parts of them are visible.
5.3.3 Visibility from Public Viewpoints Approach to Public Viewpoint Analysis
Views of the CHWF from public viewpoints have been taken into consideration as part of this landscape and visual assessment. Whilst the ZTV maps have been used in the analysis of wind farm visibility, they also provided a useful basis for the selection of representative public viewpoint locations. A total of 42 representative public viewpoints within 32 km of the Site were used to assess the visibility of the wind farm (see Figure B26 of Appendix B (Volume 2). The viewpoints were located on public roads and were selected on the basis of distance, elevation and orientation so as to provide a comprehensive and representative range of simulated views of the CHWF. From each of these viewpoints, a visual simulation has been prepared. These views incorporate the screening effects of intervening vegetation and other structures in the landscape.
With respect to viewing distance, the viewpoints selected generally fall within the following distance categories:
Foreground – up to 5 km from the nearest Turbine.
Near middle ground – between 5 to 10 km to the nearest Turbine.
Distant middle ground – between 10 to 20 km to the nearest Turbine.
Background – beyond 20 km to the nearest Turbine.
Photographs were taken from each of the identified public viewpoints between September 2009 and February 2011. As far as possible, clear days with favourable light and atmospheric conditions were sought for the viewpoint photography.
The simulations provide an accurate representation of the scale, location and general appearance of the CHWF, even though there may be variations in light and atmospheric conditions at various times of the day, differing seasons and varying weather conditions. Notwithstanding these constraints, the visual simulation technique is appropriate and assists in the depiction and assessment of visual effects. The visual simulations prepared for the CHWF project utilised specialist ‘Windfarm’ software, which is used extensively in New Zealand and overseas.
The visual simulations for each public viewpoint included all relevant features of the CHWF, including, the assessed layout, Main and Satellite Substations, Internal Transmission Line and Internal Roads. Other than the Turbines (which are visible from most public viewpoints) and the Internal Transmission towers (which are visible from a
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 175 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects limited number of public viewpoints), other aspects of the CHWF are not generally visible. In the case of the Internal Roads, where these are visible they have been shown in a pre- rehabilitation state. If the Internal Roads were shown in their final rehabilitated form, they would generally not be visible in the simulations. The simulations therefore show the maximum visibility of the CHWF.
In all public viewpoint simulations, the orientation of the Turbines is shown facing the viewer so that the three rotor blades are fully visible. In reality, depending on wind direction, the Turbines could be oriented ‘side on’ whereby rotors would be less distinguishable and less visible. The Turbines have also been shown in a pure white colour for clarity. However, the Turbines will be finished in an off white/light grey colour, which is typical for Turbines.
Table 5.3 lists the viewpoint location, distance to the nearest Turbine and elevation, the number of Turbines and/or rotor blades visible, the total number of Turbines visible and the corresponding percentage relative to the total number of Turbines for the CHWF. Figures B27 to B32 (Appendix B) provide examples of the public viewpoint simulations from Viewpoint 3 (Gladstone Road, 32 km), Viewpoint 24 (Mangamahoe Central Road, 11 km), Viewpoint 21 (Castle Hill Road, 5.2 km), Viewpoint 40 (Alfredton-Tinui Road looking east, 2.9 km), Viewpoint 33 (Bideford, 4.5 km) and Viewpoint 10 (Pongaroa Domain, 8 km).
Table 5.3: Public viewpoint visibility of the CHWF.
Turbines Viewpoint Location, Distance (km) and Rotors VP and Total Percentage Elevation (m) only Rotors 1 Saddle Road (46) (300) 5 69 74 30% 2 Troup Road, Woodville (32) (80) 0 0 0 0 3 Gladstone Road (32) (95) 18 39 57 23% Masterton (Langsdown) Golf Course (19) 4 0 0 0 0 (180) 5 Whangaehu (5.5) (155) 16 30 46 19% Te Ore Ore (Masterton-Castlepoint Road) 6 2 2 4 2% (18 (110) 7 Whareama (17.5) (20) 1 1 2 1% 8 4 km north of Tinui (5.5) (45) 9 13 22 9% 9 Tinui (9) (40) 0 0 0 0 10 Pongaroa Domain (8) (145) 5 5 10 4% Route 52 – 300 m south of Rimu Road (2.5) 11 3 13 16 7% (160) Route 52 – 1 km north of Rakaunui Road (2) 12 5 7 12 5% (275) Route 52 – Junction with Rakaunui Road 13 8 64 72 30% (1.5) (335) Pahiatua-Pongaroa Road (Puketoi Range) 14 21 110 131 54% (2.6) (450) Waihoki Valley Road looking northwest (1.7) 15 1 6 7 3% (270)
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 176 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.3: Public viewpoint visibility of the CHWF (cont.).
Turbines Viewpoint Location, Distance (km) and Rotors VP and Total Percentage Elevation (m) only Rotors 16 Waihoki Valley Road looking east (1.2) (255) 3 9 12 5% Route 52 – Tiraumea looking northeast (1.8) 17 7 25 32 13% (260) Route 52 – Tiraumea looking south (8.5) 18 28 59 87 36% (260) 19 Waitawhiti Road looking south (3.3) (290) 0 18 18 7% Waitawhiti Road looking northeast (3.8) 20 7 36 43 18% (260) 21 Castle Hill Road (5.2) (165) 5 24 29 12% 22 Flat Bush Road looking east (3) (175) 1 6 7 3% 23 Flat Bush Road looking south (2.7) (175) 7 20 27 11% 24 Mangamahoe Central Road (11) (270) 17 49 66 27% 25 West of Eketahuna (23) (270) 0 0 0 0 26 Pahiatua Track (37) (370) 7 55 62 25% 27 Pahiatua-Pongaroa Road (1) (355) 2 8 10 4% Pahiatua-Pongaroa Road (near Mangatiti) 28 1 8 9 4% (2.6) (235) Alfredton-Tinui Road looking northeast (1) 29 10 62 72 30% (420) Alfredton-Tinui Road looking southeast (3.8) 30 2 18 20 8% (420) 31 North of Bideford School (3.5) (165) 6 15 21 8% 32 Near Bideford School (4.1) (150) 8 27 35 13% 33 Bideford (4.5) (150) 13 17 30 12% Tanawa Road (near Rahui Gardens) (2.7) 34 1 1 1 1% (145) 35 Wairiri Road (1.5) (265) 1 10 11 4% 36 Settlement Road (4.6) (180) 1 9 10 4% Alfredton – Tinui Rd looking east to Summit 37 0 3 3 1% (0.8) (292) Alfredton – Tinui Rd looking west to Summit 38 2 4 6 3% (1.4) (324) 39 Alfredton – Tinui Rd – Plateau (0.5) (300) 1 11 12 5% 40 Alfredton – Tinui Rd looking east (2.9) (122) 1 26 27 11% 41 Waitawhiti Rd looking east (2.7) (246) 0 7 7 3% 42 Route 52 – Tiraumea School (1.9) (210) 3 12 15 7%
Public Viewpoint Visibility Analysis
The public viewpoint simulations show that the topography of the northern Wairarapa hill country, combined with local shelter and amenity planting, provides a large measure of local screening of the Turbines and associated infrastructure. The local topography and vegetation also confines views of, and within, the landscape such that from locations
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 177 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects where Turbines are visible, they tend to be seen as small groupings, particularly when viewed from the valley floor and the lower foothill areas from where most of the public road network and rural dwellings are located. From ridges and higher plateau areas, while more Turbines are visible, the viewing distance is greater and the Turbines are seen in a more expansive and open setting. In this regard, the northern Wairarapa landscape is made up of a series of localised ‘little landscapes’ set within a larger matrix of northern Wairarapa hill country landscapes. Accordingly, from public viewpoints the CHWF tends to be primarily experienced from within the smaller and more local landscapes rather than from the wider and more expansive hilltop and plateau areas.
Many wind farms are located on leading ridgelines with Turbines being visible from the surrounding area (such as the Tararua Range wind farms in relation to the plains to the east and west). The CHWF however is more widely spread out within a topographically diverse landscape. As a result, the CHWF appears to be more integral with the character of the rural working landscape, rather than appearing as a visually prominent single focal point of development in the rural landscape. In this regard, the CHWF appears to sit comfortably ‘within’ the landscape, rather than appearing to sit prominently ‘upon’ the landscape.
Based on the ZTV mapping, field observations and the preparation of a number of visual simulations from public viewpoints, the major visual elements of the CHWF, namely the Turbines, appear to be well integrated with the local and wider northern Wairarapa landscape. The northern Wairarapa landscape, by its very nature and character, also has a high capability to visually absorb the number and scale of the Turbines proposed within the Turbine Corridor relative to public views throughout the area.
From a landscape and visual perspective, the alignment of the Internal Transmission Line has been carefully and sensitively located within the CHWF Site (as detailed in Section 4.2.5), and is largely out of public view. Figures B34 and B35 of Appendix B (Volume 2) show viewpoints from public roads that specifically illustrate the alignment and appearance of the Internal Transmission Line.
The two options for the Main Substation site will not generally be visible from public viewpoints. The Satellite Substation will potentially be visible from Waihoki Valley Road over several hundred metres either side of the proposed site (Figure B35 of Appendix B (Volume 2) shows a view of the indicative Satellite Substation).
Internal Roads and the proposed Central Laydown Areas will generally not be visible from public viewpoints due to the nature of the topography and landforms within the Site, relative to the available public viewpoints. Figure B36 of Appendix B (Volume 2) shows a viewpoint example of Internal Roads. While some Excess Fill Areas may be visible from public viewpoints, these areas will be re-contoured and rehabilitated to integrate with the adjacent landforms and/or to enhance pastoral production opportunities (see Figure B33, Appendix B, Volume 2). Where visible, cuts and Excess Fill Areas do not have a significant visual effect.
From the visibility analysis of 42 representative public viewpoints, the visibility of the CHWF can be summarised as follows:
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 178 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
There are no public viewpoints from where all seven Turbine Clusters are visible.
From the 42 public viewpoints selected, no Turbines or rotor blade tips can be seen from four of the viewpoints due to the screening effects of intervening vegetation.
Of the 38 viewpoints that have full or partial views of the CHWF:
- One cluster is visible from 25 viewpoints. - Two clusters are visible from five viewpoints. - Three clusters are visible from three viewpoints. - Four clusters are visible from five viewpoints. - Five clusters are visible from one viewpoint.
Other than Viewpoint 14, which is on the Pahiatua-Pongaroa Road from where 54% of the CHWF is visible (i.e., Turbines or rotor blade tips), the next most visible public viewpoint is Viewpoint 18 on Route 52 at Tiraumea, from where 36% of the CHWF is visible (i.e., Turbines or rotor blade tips). At all other viewpoints, less than 36% is visible.
From 28 viewpoints, between 1% to 15% of the Turbines and/or rotor blade tips are visible.
From seven viewpoints, 16% to 30% of the Turbines and/or rotor blade tips are visible.
From three viewpoints, 31% to 54% of the Turbines and/or rotor blade tips are visible.
From public viewpoints the Internal Transmission Line is not generally visible. From viewpoints where it is visible, the towers will not be visually prominent.
The Main Substation will not be visible from public viewpoints.
The Satellite Substation on Waihoki Valley Road will be partially visible from several hundred metres on either side of the structure.
The Internal Roads and their associated earthworks will not generally be visible from public viewpoints due to the topography, the location of the roads and the distance from public viewpoints.
While some aspects of the earthworks, including the Quarry sites and Excess Fill Areas may be partially visible during the construction phase of the CHWF, following rehabilitation these areas and sites will generally not be visible.
Temporary installations and activities such as Concrete Batching Plants, and Central Laydown Areas will not generally be visible from public viewpoints.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 179 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.3.4 Visibility from Rural Dwellings The visibility of the CHWF from all dwellings (including churches, public halls and schools) located within 5 km of the nearest Turbine has been undertaken for the visual and landscape assessment. The analysis from rural dwellings was based on the ZTV mapping, recent high resolution aerial photography taken in 2010, 3D digital terrain modelling and field observation and checking. The 173 dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine were classified according to those being totally screened by landforms, those screened by vegetation, those partially screened by vegetation and those dwellings where there was limited or no screening.
Based on field observations, the ZTV visibility mapping and the visual simulations prepared from public viewpoints, a distance of 5 km of the nearest Turbine was considered to be the area within which potential visual effects from rural dwellings and/or their immediate curtilage area could be significant. While the focus of the dwelling analysis has been on Turbine visibility, other infrastructure, such as the Internal Transmission Line and Internal Roads, have also been considered.
In the context of this assessment; schools, halls and churches, being places of congregation were included as dwellings. Table 5.4 provides a summary of the identified dwellings22 within 5 km of the nearest Turbine, both within and outside the CHWF Site. The location of these dwellings is shown in Figure 3.1.
Table 5.4: Rural dwellings located within 5 km of the nearest Turbine.
Distance to Nearest Turbine Dwellings Less than 2 km 2 km – 5 km Total External Dwellings 20 91 111 CHWF Landowner Dwellings 47 15 62 Total Dwellings 67 106 173
While this visibility analysis includes the CHWF Landowner Dwellings, the detailed analysis from CHWF Landowner Dwellings is not included in the Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment (Boffa Miskell 2011(a)) or this document. The visibility and potential visual effects assessment for these dwellings has been prepared and discussed with each of the CHWF Landowners. The results obtained from the CHWF Landowner Dwelling analysis has, however, informed and assisted the assessment of visual and landscape effects overall, and in particular with respect to visibility and rural character effects in general. The results obtained from the CHWF Landowner Dwelling analysis are therefore included in the rural dwelling analysis. External Dwellings where a RMA written approval form has been provided are also included in the overall dwelling analysis.
22 Within this area there are five non-residential buildings, namely two schools, two halls and one church that are included as rural dwellings.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 180 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Rural Dwelling Visual Analysis
Based on the desk top analysis and subsequent field observations, all 173 dwellings were classified according to the following levels of visibility:
Screened by landforms - primarily carried out using digital terrain modelling and ZTV techniques.
Screened by vegetation - largely carried out using high resolution aerial photography which showed the vegetation pattern and density relative to the potentially visible Turbines. Where appropriate, tree heights were verified in the field.
Partially screened by vegetation - where dwellings appeared to be partially screened by intervening vegetation and/or there was some uncertainty as to how effective this screening might be, field inspections and/or site visits were carried out to verify the level of effectiveness of the vegetation screening.
Limited or no screening – where this situation was evident, field checks and site visits were carried out.
Table 5.5 summarises the visibility level from each of the CHWF Landowner Dwellings and External Dwellings.
Table 5.5: Rural dwelling visibility within 5 km of the nearest Turbine.
Partial Limited Dwellings Within 5 km of Screened by Screened by Vegetation Vegetation the Nearest Turbine Landforms Vegetation Screening Screening CHWF Landowner Dwellings 1 2 46 13 (62 dwellings) External Dwellings 15 46 41 923 (109 dwellings) Total (173 dwellings) 16 48 87 22 Total Screened 64 Partial or no Screening 107
While some of the rural dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine are in elevated locations, most of the dwellings are located within the lower valley network and tend to be well established with respect to shelter and amenity plantings within their dwelling curtilage areas. The visibility of the CHWF from rural dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine is summarised as follows:
23 The landowner of one of these dwellings has signed a RMA written approval form. The dwelling has only been included to assist the assessment of visual and landscape effects overall and in particular with respect to visibility and rural character effects in general.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 181 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Of the 173 dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine, 64 or 37% are fully screened from views of the Turbines and other CHWF infrastructure, by intervening landforms, or existing vegetation around each respective dwelling.
Of the 64 dwellings that are screened, three are CHWF Landowner Dwellings and 61 are External Dwellings. Given there are 111 External Dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine, 55% of these are fully screened by existing landforms or vegetation.
Of the remaining 109 rural dwellings that are partially screened or have limited screening, 59 are CHWF Landowner Dwellings and 50 (46%) are External Dwellings. Of the 50 External Dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine, 41 (or 82%) have partial screening due to existing vegetation, while nine or 18% have limited vegetation screening.
5.3.5 Landscape and Visual Effects of the CHWF In the context of studies carried out on other wind farm projects in New Zealand and overseas, and in recognition of the particular and distinctive characteristics of the northern Wairarapa landscape, the following assessment criteria were considered in determining the landscape and visual effects of the CHWF (Boffa Miskell, 2011(a)):
Will the CHWF compromise or degrade the scenic values of the rural northern Wairarapa landscape?
Will the CHWF have an adverse effect on the rural character and rural amenity of the northern Wairarapa landscape?
Will the views of residents who live in close proximity to the CHWF (i.e. within 5 km of the nearest Turbine) be compromised or adversely affected by the proposed development?
Will the CHWF intrude upon views to or from important landscape features, cultural/heritage landscapes or public reserves?
Will physical modifications to the landscape be adverse and/or compromise the character of the northern Wairarapa landscape?
Will the CHWF limit or restrict the on-going rural use of the area within or near the Turbine Corridor?
What forms of mitigation can be utilised to reduce and/or minimise potential landscape and visual effects?
What is the potential for cumulative effects if consent was granted for the CHWF?
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 182 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
From a landscape and visual perspective is the CHWF an appropriate activity in the northern Wairarapa landscape?
This section summarises the key findings of the landscape and visual assessment, resulting from the analysis of the proposal using the above ‘assessment criteria’.
Effects on Scenic Values
The northern Wairarapa area is an attractive and well managed rural working landscape, relatively sparsely populated, made up of a number of small urban and rural settlements, and is dominated by pastoral faming. This landscape is also well defined and visually contained by local landforms, compared to the more open and expansive landscapes of the Wairarapa Plains to the south and the Manawatu Plains to the west. This visual containment within the northern Wairarapa landscape is a particular feature of the CHWF, particularly with regard to the CHWF being seen to be integral to the northern Wairarapa landscape rather than as a prominent and highly visible focal point when viewed from the surrounding landscape. The visual simulations illustrate the confined and contained nature of the local area landscape relative to the visibility of the CHWF Turbines. The simulations also show the visual effects of the CHWF in the landscape, as integral to the northern Wairarapa landscape, rather than as a prominent and highly visible focal point.
The CHWF may affect scenic values from some viewpoints, particularly from those in close proximity (i.e., within 5 km of the nearest Turbine). In these instances the Turbines may be seen as being visually prominent elements in the landscape, particularly where there is little or no intervening landform or vegetation screening. However, from most public road locations within 5 km of the nearest Turbine, the individual Turbines are either not visible or are unlikely to appear visually dominant or intrusive. From viewpoints within 10 km of the nearest visible Turbine, the visual effects will not degrade or compromise the scenic values of the northern Wairarapa landscape.
From viewpoints and locations where the CHWF may be perceived as being visually prominent, the question remains as to whether this degrades the landscape or is it more a case of change in the composition, order and appearance of that landscape, which will essentially continue to be an attractive rural working landscape, albeit different in appearance. In this regard, the effect is the difference in people’s perception of the change in the appearance of the landscape, rather than a degradation of the landscape as such. To some people, the clean sculptural forms of Turbines are considered to be visually appealing, particularly with regard to their appearance, simplicity, repetition and their contrast within the rural landscape, while to others, wind farms and Turbines are seen as an industrial-like activity and consider their scale and appearance to be out of character and a visual intrusion in the rural landscape.
While the CHWF may have a relatively local effect on the areas scenic values, when viewed from some locations, these scenic values as a whole will not be adversely affected. The change may be visually prominent from some viewpoints, but the landscape, while different in appearance than without the wind farm, will not necessarily be adversely affected.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 183 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Effects on Rural Character and Rural Amenity
From some viewpoints the CHWF will be seen as a visually prominent feature in the landscape. The Turbines will also introduce a new infrastructural element into a rural landscape that currently displays high levels of ‘naturalness’. While the rural character will remain the predominant characteristic in terms of the landscape’s overall appearance and land use, the form and appearance of the CHWF will be seen in contrast to the pastured hill country landforms.
While both the MDC and TDC District Plans seek the protection, management and enhancement of the rural character and amenity of the northern Wairarapa landscape, rural areas are also acknowledged as potential candidate areas within which energy generation developments, such as wind farms, can be accommodated provided they do not adversely affect other resource users, ecosystem values or compromise the sustainability of rural land use and landscape character.
From some locations the CHWF may be seen as being visually prominent and even dominant in the context of its rural landscape setting. However, it will also be seen to be an integral part of the working landscape. Accordingly, while the CHWF by its very nature will be visible and generally seen as small clusters from most rural viewpoints, natural elements and rural characteristics will continue to be dominant in the northern Wairarapa landscape.
The slender and elegant form of the Turbines, coupled with the open and spread out nature of their siting within the Site, allows a degree of transparency which contributes to the appearance of a “high ratio of open space relative to the built environment” (structures in this case). In visual terms the Turbines and the associated infrastructure will be seen to sit within the rural landscape, rather than simply occupying large continuous areas of space and consuming the landscape. The CHWF, while visually prominent from some viewpoints, has relatively transparent characteristics which will enable the landscape to continue to “flow through” and between the Turbines and the overall Site.
Another potential effect on rural character and rural amenity may be created by the installation of obstacle lights. Such lights are required by the CAA on the perimeter of the wind farm area to demarcate to aircraft pilots the extent of the wind farm and the location of the highest Turbines. Such lights are usually placed at or above the top of the nacelle. From this position light spill can be managed and directed so as to avoid and/or minimise light effects relative to specific rural dwellings and the surrounding area in general. Given the nature of the CHWF Site and its relatively isolated location, obstacle lighting can be positioned to minimise any potential adverse effects.
Some landowners may consider the visibility of Turbines and/or other elements of the CHWF to be an effect which compromises their rural amenity and/or the enjoyment of their workplace environment. The Turbines and elements of the CHWF will be seen from some work place locations throughout the area. This is unavoidable. Notwithstanding this and in the context of the wider inland hill country landscape, the CHWF does not have the potential for widespread adverse effects on the rural landscape character and rural amenity of the local or the wider northern Wairarapa landscape.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 184 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Effects on Residential Dwellings
While some views from rural dwellings may be affected by the CHWF, care has been taken when refining the Turbine Corridor to minimise potential adverse visual effects as far as possible. In the context of views and visual amenity, the effects from houses and their associated outdoor living areas has been the prime focus of the assessment, rather than specific locations within the farm properties.
Some may consider that the Turbines and the CHWF in general will detract from and/or intrude upon their particular view, and consequently degrade what they consider to be the landscape or views they know and have come to expect. These people may prefer to have no change to the appearance of their viewed landscape or outlook. With respect to maintaining rural amenity values, the MDC and TDC District Plans seek to manage the adverse effects of buildings and structures on adjoining properties and are not specific or directed towards private view protection as such.
The assessment of visual effects relating to rural dwellings was based on roadside and/or site inspections to each property. The visual effects assessment took into account the following:
The number of Turbines and/or rotor blades that are visible.
The distance between the dwelling and the nearest Turbines.
The orientation and elevation of the dwelling in relation to the visible Turbines.
The condition and the effectiveness of the existing vegetation relative to the Turbine views.
Table 5.6 summarises the results of the visual effects assessment from rural dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine.
Table 5.6: Potential visual effects on dwellings within 5 km of the nearest CHWF Turbine.
Visual Effects Dwellings Visibility None Low Moderate High Fully screened 61 - - - Partially screened - 37 4 - External Dwellings (111) Limited screening - 1 3 5 Sub total 61 38 7 524 Fully screened 3 - - - CHWF Landowner Partially screened - 29 16 1 Dwellings (62) Limited screening - 1 11 1 Sub total 3 30 27 2 All Dwellings (173) Total 64 68 34 7
24 The landowner of one of these dwellings has signed a written approval form (as outlined in Section 1.5). The dwelling has only been included to assist the assessment of visual and landscape effects overall and in particular with respect to visibility and rural character effects in general.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 185 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Based on the results of the potential visual effects assessment from the 173 dwellings within 5 km of the nearest CHWF Turbines, from 132 or 76% of these dwellings there are no visual effects (37%), or the potential visual effects are assessed as being low (39%). By comparison, of the 111 External Dwellings, there are no visual effects from 61 of these dwellings (55%), or the potential visual effects are assessed as being low (34%), with 11% having a moderate (6%) or a potentially high visual effect (5%). The location of these dwellings and the levels of potential visual effect are shown on Figure B37 in Appendix B (Volume 2).
The five External Dwellings that have the potential for high visual effects are located on the following three properties:
Dwellings 396 and 407 – Pakowai, Waihoki Valley Road.
Dwelling 397 – Pine Hills, 909 Rimu Road.
Dwelling 400 – 161 Gandys Rd25.
Dwelling 402 – Benmore, 107 Waitawhiti Road.
Genesis Energy has approached these landowners with regard to possible landscape mitigation measures. These discussions are continuing.
As shown in Table 5.6, of the rural dwelling areas from where the visual effects have been assessed as being low, 30 are CHWF Landowners dwellings and 38 are External Dwellings. Of the dwelling areas where the visual effects have been assessed as being moderate, seven are External Dwellings and 27 are CHWF Landowner Dwellings. There are five External Dwellings and two CHWF Landowner Dwellings from where the visual effects have been assessed as being high.
In general discussions with landowners within 5 km of the nearest Turbine, particularly those who are not CHWF Landowners, the question of visual effects from “out on the farm”, as opposed to the area immediately about the dwelling, is seen by some as a particular issue. While the view from one’s workplace environment is a factor to consider, the activities that occur on neighbouring properties can only be controlled in the context of what is appropriate and permissible under the MDC and TDC District Plans. Notwithstanding this, there will be views of some Turbines and other CHWF infrastructure from a range of locations within adjacent farm properties and in particular the open high points.
From 29% of the land outside of the CHWF Site, but within 10 km of the nearest Turbine, no Turbines are visible. As the visibility analysis does not include the screening effect of trees and other vegetation, the area from which no Turbines would be visible could increase to 35 - 40% of the total area. In the context of the CHWF and its 10 km distance setting, this is a significant area from where no Turbines would be potentially visible.
25 The landowner of one of these dwellings has signed a written approval form (as outlined in Section 1.5). The dwelling has only been included to assist the assessment of visual and landscape effects overall and in particular with respect to visibility and rural character effects in general.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 186 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Within 5 km of the CHWF Site, approximately 11% of the area immediately adjacent to, but excluding the CHWF Site, will not see any of the Turbines. On the basis that existing vegetation would likely increase the screening to 15 to 20%, this represents a significant area from within which no Turbines would be visible. The area from which one to 20 Turbines and/or parts of rotor blades would be visible is 29%, with 21 to 50 Turbines being visible from a further 29% of the area.
While the above figures are theoretical, they are indicative and a conservative estimate of the wider Turbine visibility within 5 km and 10 km distance zones from the nearest Turbine. It is also worth noting that where a large area of an adjacent rural property may have views of Turbines, the actual land area regularly frequented would generally be confined to access tracks, stockyards and other site specific areas, with the remainder of the property being traversed on a relatively irregular basis.
Effects on Landscape Features, Cultural/Heritage Landscapes or Public Reserves
There are no important landscape features, cultural/heritage landscapes or reserves within the CHWF Site that would be directly or indirectly affected by the CHWF or associated infrastructure. As outlined in Section 3, the CHWF Site and immediate surrounds are not identified in the GWRC, MWRC, TDC or MDC planning documents as being within, or part of, an outstanding natural feature or landscape. The nearest identified outstanding natural feature or landscape to the Site is the Puketoi Range in the Tararua District. The skyline of the Puketoi Range when viewed from the west has been identified as the key visual/scenic characteristic. Tinui Taipos, which is some 7.5 km to the south of the CHWF, is also identified as an outstanding natural feature in the Combined Plan.
The Anzac Cross (Tinui Memorial Cross), which is located on private land, is one of the first places in New Zealand where locals gathered to commemorate the first Anzac Day on April 25, 1916. While the site is not a public viewpoint, a visual simulation and an assessment of visibility and potential visual effects from Maunsell Trig, which is immediately to the north of the Tinui Taipos, was carried out with the permission of the landowners (see Figure B38 of Appendix B, Volume 2). From this particular viewpoint, the nearest visible Turbines are those in Cluster F, which is 7.1 km away. From this location, the visual effect is low and the CHWF, which is partially visible in the distance, does not intrude upon the wider view or the significance of the site. The viewpoint simulated from Maunsell Trig provides greater visibility of the CHWF than would be the case from the Tinui Taipos site from where foreground vegetation tends to screen most of the site. From the site of the Anzac Cross, which is to the south of Maunsell Trig, views of the CHWF are screened by foreground vegetation.
At the request of Rangit ne o Wairarapa, a visual simulation was prepared from Rangitumau, a significant landscape feature to the north of Masterton and some 8.5 km to the nearest CHWF Turbine (see Figure B39 of Appendix B, Volume 2). Rangitumau, which is 604 m asl, provides expansive views in all directions and is regarded by Rangit ne o Wairarapa as a site of cultural importance, but not a publicly accessible location. While all 242 Turbines are theoretically visible from this viewpoint, the CHWF Turbines extend from 8.5 km (being the nearest Turbine) to in excess of 40 km to the most distant Turbines. Potential visual effects from this viewpoint are assessed as being
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 187 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects moderate for those Turbines up to 15 km distant, low for those up to 30 km distant and insignificant for those beyond 30 km. In terms of overall visual effects from the Rangitumau viewpoint, these are assessed as being moderate/low.
While not apparent in the visual simulation, Rangitumau hosts a number of major telecommunications facilities which are particularly prominent from the viewpoint itself and from the surrounding area from where the landform is seen as a feature in the wider landscape. Notwithstanding this, the views from Rangitumau are not adversely affected or compromised by these facilities as there is sufficient opportunity to move around them in order to take advantage of clear and unobstructed views. Likewise, the expansive views to the east are not compromised by the Turbines which occur in a relatively narrow segment of the wider views from Rangitumau. In the context of the views to the east from Rangitumau, the Turbines appear as a focal point of interest and are likely to be seen as a feature in the wider view rather than an intrusion in the view.
While the CHWF is not visible from SH2 between Masterton and Woodville, it is visible in part from short sections at the northern end of Route 52 between Tiraumea and Pongaroa, from where Turbine Clusters A and B are in close proximity to Route 52. Notwithstanding this, the visibility of the CHWF from Route 52 is relatively well screened by the road alignment, the adjacent local landforms and the screening effect of the existing vegetation. The visual effect of the CHWF from Route 52, and from other local roads in the area is low, with most views being intermittent and fleeting.
Landscape Planning Provisions
The relevant Regional Plans and the District Plans contain no specific landscape provisions with respect to wind farm developments. In many respects the plans are permissive in terms of major developments in the rural landscape provided they do not adversely affect the character and amenity of the rural landscape. From a visual and landscape perspective, the plans neither exclude nor encourage wind farms which, as a rural based utility activity, are becoming a major consideration in many rural areas.
Given the need to accommodate appropriate energy infrastructure in the rural landscape and on the basis that utility activities such as wind farms can be accommodated and integrated into the rural landscape in a sensitive and sustainable manner, and where rural character and rural amenity is not compromised or adversely affected, the CHWF meets the relevant planning provisions from a landscape and visual perspective.
Effects on the Character of the Northern Wairarapa Landscape
The CHWF extends over an area in excess of 30,000 ha, of which approximately 3,144 ha is within the Turbine Corridor. While the Turbine Platforms and much of the associated Internal Roads will be located within the Turbine Corridor, some Internal Roads and substations will extend beyond this and onto the wider CHWF Site.
While existing farm tracks will be used as far as possible, the total length of Internal Road access is likely to be in the order of 200 to 214 km. The Internal Road formation width,
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 188 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects including side drainage, will be up to 8 m during the construction phase and managed as farm access tracks and for CHWF operation and maintenance following completion of construction. While the construction effects will be visible from some locations beyond the Site, the post construction effects will not generally be apparent following rehabilitation. Based on preliminary earthworks design, it is anticipated that maximum cuts could be in the order of 8 m in height with maximum fills in the order of 4 m in depth. Within the Excess Fill Areas, the maximum height of fills will be in the order of 8 m with a range of 4 m to 8 m being the depth generally adopted.
While the construction of the CHWF will necessitate significant earthworks over an extensive area, the progressive rehabilitation of disturbed areas will reduce the extent of site disturbance at any one time. From most vantage points beyond the Site, the visual effects of earthworks and landscape modification will not generally be apparent as the Internal Roads follow ridges and spurs and wherever possible seek to follow easy gradients. Following rehabilitation, the Internal Roads and any associated road formation earthworks will not generally be apparent. All other earthworks associated with the wind farm infrastructure has been carefully and sensitively sited and planned so as to reduce the potential for landscape and visual effects.
The landscape and visual effects principles that have guided the alignment and formation of Internal Roads, Turbine Platforms, and other earthworks, include the following:
Siting and aligning Internal Roads on the flatter terrain and minimising significant cuts across the visible faces of slopes.
Avoiding placement of Turbines on prominent landform features, rock outcrops and watercourses where practicable. Excess Fill Areas have also been sited in areas where farming improvements and/or enhancements can be achieved.
Siting Excess Fill Areas so that they avoid natural features, significant areas of vegetation and/or waterways.
Developing appropriate rehabilitation principles as part of a SEMP during the detailed design phase for Excess Fill Areas, in order to ensure that the landscape character of the CHWF Site is not compromised.
Ensuring that re-contoured areas reflect and/or are appropriate to the existing scale and topography of the Site and are shaped so that they are integrated seamlessly into the surrounding landscape and landforms.
Ensuring surface compaction is suitable to establish and support re-grassing or woody vegetation establishment as and where appropriate.
The earthworks associated with the construction of the CHWF have been incorporated in the public viewpoint visual simulations and were also considered in the visual effects assessment from rural dwellings. As the earthworks associated with the Internal Roads and the Turbine Platforms tend to be on ridge lines and within the flatter plateau areas of the Site, their visibility from public places and rural dwellings is limited. Likewise the earthworks associated with the substations, Quarry Sites and Excess Fill Areas have also
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 189 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects been sited in areas that are not generally readily visible from public viewpoints or rural dwellings.
While the quantities and extent of the earthworks associated with the CHWF are significant, the physical modifications to the landscape will not generally be visible or perceived as being significant or adverse when viewed from public viewpoints or from rural dwellings. Accordingly, the earthworks will not compromise the landscape character of the local northern Wairarapa landscape, nor will they appear as scars on the landscape, particularly following landscape rehabilitation.
Effects on Rural Land Use and Character
The rural use (grazing and some forestry) of the land within the Turbine Corridor and CHWF Site in general can continue throughout the life of the project, as the actual wind farm elements and supporting infrastructure will occupy a relatively small combined footprint within the Turbine Corridor. It is estimated that the post construction and rehabilitation of the footprint of the Turbines and Internal Roads will occupy approximately 226 ha, or 5% of the Turbine Corridor. This is less than 1% of the overall CHWF Site. Earthworks within the Site can also enhance rural productive areas and access, meaning any loss of productive area can be offset by other improvements. It is therefore likely that productive values can be retained to levels which are currently achieved and there are likely to be little or no effects on the continued productive rural use of the land.
Potential Mitigation of Landscape and Visual Effects
Given the size and extent of the Turbines within the CHWF Site, mitigation opportunities and measures are limited. Notwithstanding this, the position of the wind farm infrastructure has been a consideration with respect to achieving an appropriate fit with the surrounding landscape and mitigating the overall effect of the development. In this regard, and as outlined in Section 4.2 of this document, environmental considerations such as landscape and visual effects, have contributed to determining the size and shape of the Turbine Corridor, and the siting of other CHWF infrastructure.
Throughout the development process and project design phase of the CHWF, an important landscape objective has been to achieve a high degree of visual and landscape integration and in doing so, avoiding and minimising potential landscape and visual effects. To disguise or attempt to hide the CHWF is not an option and would be impossible to achieve. Likewise, to highlight and make the CHWF the major focal point in the landscape was not sought. What has been achieved has been an integrated outcome where the visibility of the Turbines and their associated infrastructure have been carefully considered, as have the potential effects on views, rural character and visual amenity of the area in general, and rural dwellings in particular.
Turbine colour is one of the more effective means of minimising the visibility of Turbines. The majority of research, including the 1995 New Zealand EECA Guidelines, recommends the use of white or off-white as a Turbine colour. The argument for using these colours is an acknowledgement of the visibility of the Turbines, avoiding the impression that the
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 190 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects development is attempting to be hidden or blended into the landscape. Based on overseas examples and New Zealand experience, it is clear that the most effective colour will be in the off-white to light grey, non-gloss (low reflectivity) colour range. The use of the low reflectivity colours also reduces the potential for rotor blade glint. Genesis Energy proposes the use of a non-gloss off-white colour for the CHWF Turbines.
The visual effects assessment from public viewpoints did not identify any particular locations from where landscape mitigation in the form of Off-site or viewpoint based planting was necessary to screen the Turbines or other CHWF infrastructure. The visual simulation from Viewpoint 16 on Waihoki Valley Road shows a view of the Satellite Substation without landscape rehabilitation (see Figure B35 of Appendix B, Volume 2). As part of the detailed design of the Satellite Substation, Genesis Energy plans to incorporate colour mitigation and planting as appropriate along the road frontage of the site. These measures will screen most of the Satellite Substation elements from most Waihoki Valley Road viewpoints.
The visual effects assessment from rural dwellings within 5 km of the nearest CHWF Turbine indentified five External Dwellings that have the potential for high visual effects. Genesis Energy has approached these landowners with regard to visual effects and possible landscape mitigation measures. These discussions are continuing.
Cumulative Effects
Cumulative visual effects can occur as a result of additional effects from other existing or consented wind farms in the same view catchment, or the wider area and region in general. Cumulative effects can arise as a consequence of:
Increase in the number of wind farms visible in the landscape;
Numerical increase in the Turbines visible from a particular viewpoint or view; and
Increase in the number of wind farms or Turbines visible or experienced sequentially when travelling through the landscape.
Wind farms that may potentially contribute to cumulative effects relative to the CHWF include the existing wind farms on the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges, the consented Turitea Wind Farm on the Tararua Ranges and the consented Waitahora Wind Farm on the western side of the Puketoi Range.
The wind farms on the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges are quite distant, being some 35 km from the CHWF. As is evident in the ZTV mapping which shows the potential visibility of the CHWF, views towards the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges are largely screened by the Puketoi Range to the east of the CHWF. While the screening effect of the Puketoi Range is less effective from the southern clusters of the CHWF, local landforms continue to provide a high level of screening to the west. Given the distance between the wind farms on the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges and the CHWF, cumulative visual effects will be low.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 191 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The consented Waitahora Wind Farm, located on the western side of the Puketoi Range, is approximately 15 km to the north of the CHWF. While the Waitahora Wind Farm is within the CHWF distant middle ground area (10 to 20 km), the Puketoi Range separates and screens the two wind farms from each other. The additional screening effect of vegetation, not included on the ZTV maps, confirms that the likelihood of cumulative effects will be minimal even though the two wind farms are within 15 km of each other.
While the CHWF has been grouped into seven clusters for ease of reference, it is, and will be developed as one wind farm development. This is evident and reinforced by the landscape setting of the CHWF, which has been sited entirely within a distinctive and contiguous section of the inland hill country landscape character area. In this context, the CHWF will appear as a single wind farm development.
With regard to the sequential effects experienced when travelling through the landscape, while views of the wind farms to the west on the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges are possible when travelling on SH2, views of the CHWF to the east are not possible due to the screening created by landforms. Likewise, when travelling on Route 52 between Te Ore Ore and Pongaroa views of the CHWF are not possible until north of Alfredton from where only partial views are obtained. However, from these locations on Route 52 to the north of Alfredton, views of the wind farms on the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges are screened by the Puketoi Range.
From local roads and rural dwellings in the local and wider northern Wairarapa area, cumulative effects from the Tararua – Ruahine wind farms and the Waitahora Wind Farm will not generally be apparent due to the screening effects of intervening landforms and vegetation, as well as distance and orientation relative to most potential viewpoints.
Appropriateness of the CHWF in the Northern Wairarapa Landscape
Based on the field observations and assessments carried out by Boffa Miskell (2011(a)), the CHWF Site is an appropriate location for a wind farm of the scale and character proposed for the following reasons:
The CHWF has been sited within a landscape character area that can physically and visually accommodate the proposed development.
The CHWF does not impinge upon, or compromise any outstanding natural landscapes, features or amenity landscapes within the local or wider areas, nor will it intrude upon views to or from important landscape features, cultural/heritage landscapes or public reserves.
The visual effects of the CHWF are confined and well contained.
Views from most External Dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine will not be compromised or adversely affected by the CHWF.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 192 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The physical effects of the CHWF relative to earthworks, will not generally be visible from locations beyond the site and where visible can be rehabilitated and effectively integrated with their particular landscape settings.
The inland hill country landscape can accommodate the CHWF without adversely affecting, or compromising its rural character or its associated rural activities.
While the CHWF will introduce an industrial-like element into the rural landscape, the landscape will still retain its rural use and rural character, albeit somewhat different in appearance.
There will be no cumulative visual effects with other existing or consented wind farms in the wider area.
5.3.6 Summary By their nature, wind farms are usually highly visible. An assessment of their visual effect depends on an analysis of effects on individual properties, from public areas, and an assessment of how well the wind farm fits into the broader landscape. The potential visual and landscape effects of the CHWF can be summarised as follows:
From a landscape and visual perspective, the northern Wairarapa hill country landscape is an appropriate location for the CHWF.
The CHWF does not impinge upon or compromise any outstanding natural features or landscapes within the northern Wairarapa area.
The inland hill country landscape of the northern Wairarapa can accommodate the CHWF without adversely affecting or compromising its rural character or its associated rural activities.
While the CHWF will introduce a new and significant industrial-like element into the rural landscape, the landscape will essentially retain its rural character, albeit somewhat different in appearance.
From public roads and rural settlements within 30 km of the CHWF, the visual effects will be minor.
Of the 111 External Dwellings within 5 km of the nearest Turbine there are no visual effects from 61 of these dwellings due to landform and/or vegetation screening (55%), or the potential visual effects are assessed as being low (34%). From seven (6%) of the dwellings the potential visual effects have been assessed as being moderate and from five (5%) of the dwellings the potential visual effects have been assessed as being high.
The visual effects assessment from rural dwellings within 5 km of the nearest CHWF Turbine identified five External Dwellings that have the potential for high
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 193 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
visual effects. Genesis Energy has approached these landowners with regard to visual effects and possible landscape mitigation measures. These discussions are continuing.
The landscape effects of the CHWF relative to earthworks associated with Internal Roads, Turbine Platform construction and other earthworks will not generally be visible from locations beyond the CHWF Site. Where visible these activities can be effectively managed and mitigated.
Following construction all disturbed areas will be rehabilitated, recontoured and grassed as appropriate.
Landscape effects relative to five dwellings with relevant External Landowners who are potentially affected by the CHWF development26.
From public roads and External Dwellings in the northern Wairarapa area, the cumulative visual effects of the Tararua – Ruahine Range wind farms and the consented Waitahora Wind Farm will not generally be apparent due to the screening effects of intervening landforms and existing vegetation, as well as distance and orientation relative to potential viewpoints.
Visual mitigation in the form of specific colour finishes on the Turbines is not recommended other than having the Turbines finished to a matt or low gloss off-white colour.
5.4 Noise Effects 5.4.1 Introduction An assessment of potential noise effects associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of the CHWF has been undertaken by Marshall Day Acoustics (2011). The Noise Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Section 5) of this document and is summarised below.
Potential noise effects during the construction phase of the CHWF includes noise generated from the upgrading of External Roads, construction of Internal Roads, establishment of CHWF infrastructure and associated construction traffic. During the operational phase, noise sources include Turbines, substations, overhead lines and operational traffic. The characteristics of Turbines typical of those that are likely to be used in the CHWF have been used to determine the potential noise effects.
5.4.2 Relevant Noise Standards Construction and operational noise fall under the control of TDC and MDC. The respective District Plans for TDC and MDC refer to New Zealand Standard NZS6803:1999 (“NZS6803”) for construction noise. For consideration of permanent noise sources, the
26 The landowner of one External Dwelling has signed a written approval form as outlined in Section 1.5.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 194 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Proposed Tararua District Plan refers to NZ6801:2008 for measurement and NZS6802:2008 for assessment, while the Combined Plan refers to NZS6801:1999 for measurement and NZS6802:1991 for assessment. Noise limits are consistent across these standards, therefore for the purposes of this AEE the standards are collectively referred to as NZS6801 and NZS6802.
Construction Noise
The relevant limits in NZS6803 for construction noise for projects of long-term duration (exceeding 20 weeks) are set out in Table 5.7. Noise levels are to be measured outside of buildings (approximately 1 m from the wall most exposed to the sound under investigation), where practicable.
Table 5.7: Recommended upper noise limits (dBA) for construction work noise received at dwellings in Rural Areas – long-term project duration (NZS6803).
Noise Level (dBA) Sundays and Public Period Weekdays Saturdays Holidays Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax 0630 - 0730 55 75 45 75 45 75 0730 - 1800 70 85 70 85 55 85 1800 - 2000 65 80 45 75 45 75 2000 - 0630 45 75 45 75 45 75
Non-Turbine Related Operational Noise
The permitted activity noise limits for both MDC and TDC is 55 dB LA10 during daytime and 45 dB LA10 at night for all noise other than Turbine noise or construction noise. This limit will apply to noise sources such as substations and other mechanical plant associated with ancillary buildings. The measurement and assessment of these noise sources is controlled by NZS6801 and NZS6802 respectively, with regard to the appropriate version of each standard as referenced in the District Plans. These standards have been adopted in assessing the noise effects of the CHWF, with the exception of noise generated by the operational Turbines.
Turbine Operational Noise
NZS6808:2010 Acoustics – Wind Farm Noise (“NZS6808”) has been specifically developed for the assessment of noise effects associated with wind farms. NZS6808 recognises the relationship between wind Turbine noise and the ambient noise environment, as a function of wind conditions. The MDC District Plan refers to NZS6808:1998, while the Proposed TDP refers to NZS6808. It is generally accepted that
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 195 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects the 2010 version is an appropriate means of assessing noise effects associated with Turbines, therefore the later version has been used in this assessment.
NZS6808 recommends that the sound level from a wind farm should not exceed, at any residential site, and at any of the nominated wind speeds, a limit of 40 dB LAeq or 5 decibels above the existing background sound level. For the purposes of this assessment, this limit is referred to as the “standard noise limit”.
NZS6808 has provision for a “high amenity noise limit” of 35 dB LA90 or background + 5 dB at night-time in specific circumstances and under some wind conditions, which depend on there being provision for a higher-than-normal degree of noise protection specified in the District Plan. A high amenity noise limit is not specified in either the MDC or TDC District Plans, and as such, the standard noise limit was applied in this assessment.
NZS6808 also considers the issues of infrasound, vibration, and health effects, and concludes that these effects are not significant for wind farms, and that the standard noise limit provides adequate protection for health and amenity.
5.4.3 Construction Noise Noise from construction activities will, in most cases, be received in the context of daytime rural activities, which are characterised by quiet periods dominated by bird and insect noise, stock and dog noise, and wind in vegetation, and punctuated by vehicles and farm machinery. Figure 3.5 of this document shows the “noise sensitive” dwellings where background noise measurements were taken, which are representative of the existing noise environment within or near the CHWF Site. In accordance with NZS6808, background sound level measurements were taken at these properties as the sound level of the CHWF is predicted to exceed 35dBA.
During construction, the following activities will be the main sources of noise:
Construction of Turbine Foundations and Platforms;
Construction of substations;
Internal Road construction;
External Road upgrades;
Construction of Internal Transmission Lines;
Construction traffic on Internal Roads;
Quarrying; and
Concrete Batching Plants.
An assessment of potential noise effects from each of these activities is outlined below.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 196 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbine Foundation and Platform Construction
The dominant noise sources during Turbine Foundation and Platform construction are from bulldozers or scrapers, loaders, dump trucks and trucks delivering Turbine components. The maximum sound level received at all External Dwellings from the construction of Turbine Foundations and Platforms is less than 45 dB LAeq, which is the most stringent (night-time) limit for construction noise specified in NZS6803.
Table 5.8 lists the predicted noise levels (where greater than 30 dB LAeq) at the nearest External Dwellings to the CHWF Site during Turbine Foundation and Platform construction (see Figure 3.1 for the location of these External Dwellings). These values represent the highest level of noise at the particular receiving location during the construction of Turbine Foundations and Platforms. As outlined in Table 5.8, at all noise sensitive locations the predicted noise from Turbine Foundation and Platform construction easily complies with the daytime construction noise limit of 65 dB LAeq, and complies with the night-time construction noise limits by a least 5 decibels.
Table 5.8: Predicted Turbine Foundation and Platform construction noise levels at nearest External Dwellings.
Residence Maximum Predicted Noise Level Number (dB LAeq) X170 32 X186 33 X187 36 X188 36 X189 36 X190 34 X209 31 X258 31 X263 30 X264 30 X265 40 X321 31 X358 31 X359 31 X361 32 X362 30 X377 32 X378 30 X379 33 X391 30 X392 32
Construction of Substations
Noise associated with construction of the Main and Satellite Substations was based on the same construction equipment as used for Turbine Platform construction. Sound levels
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 197 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects were predicted at all External Dwellings within 5 km of the proposed Main Substation (Options 1 and 2) and the Satellite Substation. Tables 5.9 and 5.10 show that noise associated with the construction of the Main and Satellite Substations respectively, is well below the most stringent construction noise limits, even for night-time activities (45 dB LAeq).
Table 5.9: Construction sound levels at External Dwellings near the Main Substation options.
Dwelling Sound Pressure Level (dB LAeq) Option 1 Option 2 X171 -- 10 X359 21 -- X360 20 -- X361 15 -- X377 -- 30
Table 5.10: Construction sound levels at External Dwellings near the Satellite Substation.
Dwelling Sound Pressure Level (dB LAeq) X186 21 X187 26 X188 26 X189 26 X190 25
Internal Road Construction
Construction of Internal Roads will occur for a relatively short period of time at any given noise-sensitive location (i.e., in the order of several days while a portion of roadway near to an External Dwelling is being constructed). Equipment associated with the construction of Internal Roads includes bulldozers, loaders, off-road dump trucks and road-going trucks. It is estimated that the use of this equipment will produce noise levels of 70 dB LAeq within 50 m of where Internal Road construction is taking place. This is the maximum noise level allowed during day-time construction activities. Beyond this distance the predicted level of construction noise is less than the daytime construction noise limit.
No External Dwellings have been identified within 50 m of an Internal Road construction site, and this is unlikely to occur because Internal Roads are located On-site.
External Road Upgrades
External Road upgrades are proposed between Alfredton and the Site as part of this resource consent application. Section 4.4.5 (and Figure 4.25) of this document detail
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 198 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects areas where road improvements (such as earthworks and widening) will be necessary. All such works will be subject to meeting the noise limits contained in NZS6803, and typical construction methods are capable of meeting these limits.
Noise from External Road upgrades is predicted to be within construction noise limits, except at two External Dwellings. Where construction activities will exceed these noise limits, appropriate mitigation for residents or other noise sensitive activities in the vicinity of the works (for example, schools) will be required. Using the same methodology as applied to Internal Road construction, construction noise limits may be exceeded at External Dwellings located within 50 m of any proposed External Road upgrade. Potentially affected External Dwellings include:
External Dwelling X171 along Castle Hill Road; and
External Dwelling X359 along Maringi Road.
Construction activities at these sites will likely be of short duration, and appropriate mitigation measures may include programming of activities to avoid noise sensitive times, temporary relocation of residents during construction, and / or temporary noise barriers.
Construction Traffic Noise on Internal Roads
Noise from construction traffic on Internal Roads must comply with the noise limits in NZS6803 (see Table 5.7). To predict noise levels from construction traffic on Internal Roads at residences, “peak hour” traffic levels (which relate to combined truck movements and construction crew vehicle movements), and “average daily” traffic levels, have been applied for each Turbine Cluster.
Table 5.11 outlines the predicted construction traffic noise levels for the identified residences outside of the CHWF Site. For most External Dwellings, the peak hour construction traffic noise levels are less than the night-time permitted activity noise limit (45 dBA L10, which is equal to approximately 42 dBA Leq for traffic noise). At four External Dwellings close to the Internal Road network, peak hour construction traffic noise will exceed 55 dB LAeq, and will become a significant part of the daytime noise environment. The duration of these activities will be in the order of months, and during this time the effect of noise at these External Dwellings may be significant. The noise levels are consistent with those anticipated by NZS6803, and are considered reasonable in the context of their limited duration.
The noise levels shown in Table 5.11 are consistent with those anticipated by NZS6803, and are considered reasonable in the context of their limited duration. Only peak hour construction traffic noise will exceed 55 dBA LAeq at four External Dwellings, but the duration of these activities will be limited to several months.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 199 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.11: Predicted construction traffic noise levels.
Predicted Traffic Noise Levels, dB L External Dwelling Turbine Cluster Aeq Peak Hour Average Daily X209 A 43 38 X247 A 56 51 X248 A 59 54 X249 A 62 57 X250 A 54 49 X251 A 53 48 X252 A 53 48 X253 A 51 46 X255 A 50 45 X256 A 51 46 X257 A 48 43 X265 B 48 43 X321 F 51 46 X396 B 48 43 X397 A 68 63
Construction of Internal Transmission Line
The Internal Transmission Line is located at least 300 m from External Dwellings similar to the Turbine Platforms. The Internal Transmission Line and associated towers are located closest to External Dwellings X186, X187 (and nearby External Dwellings X188 – X190) and X403. The sound level from the construction of the Internal Transmission Line and associated towers is based on the following equipment:
20 tonne excavator with auger or drill rig;
Hiab and concrete trucks; and
Four-wheel drive vehicles.
The predicted sound level at External Dwellings X186, X187 and X403 is 40 dB LAeq, 40 dB LAeq and 47 dBA LAeq respectively. At all locations the predicted noise level complies with the daytime construction noise limits of NZS6803 by a large margin, and with the night- time construction noise limits at all locations expect for External Dwelling X403. To avoid potential adverse effects, there will be no construction outside daytime hours in the vicinity of External Dwelling X403.
Quarrying
As outlined in Section 4.3.8 and shown in Figure 4.29, a number of potential quarry sites have been identified On-site and Off-site, where quarrying of construction materials may occur. Potential noise levels from quarrying activities include the operation of a large bulldozer and large excavator, loader, quarry dump truck and crushing facilities. The total sound power for this equipment is 120 dBA.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 200 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
NZS6803 excludes on-going quarrying activity from consideration as a construction activity. However, quarrying activity which is part of a construction site, and has duration strictly limited to the period of construction of the project which the quarry is supplying, should be assessed using NZS6803. Quarries which are independently established and which operate for a period before or after the defined construction period of the project in question, must comply with relevant District Plan noise limits for permitted activities, or according to any specific consent conditions they may have been granted. In these situations, NZS6801/NZS6802 would be appropriate for the noise assessment.
Quarrying activities are generally located amongst Turbine sites (in particular in Turbine Clusters B, D and G), and noise from quarrying operations will have a similar level and noise effects to those associated with the construction of Turbine Foundations and Platforms, as described above.
The maximum sound level received by all External Dwellings across all quarry sites near Turbines is less than 45 dB LAeq, which is the most-stringent night-time limit for construction noise in NZS6803, and complies by a very large margin with the daytime construction noise limits.
One potential quarry is located away from the Turbine sites, and approximately 1,500 m from the nearest External Dwelling (X190). The sound level predicted for External Dwelling X190 is 38 dB LAeq, and is reduced by a further 10 – 15 decibels if the attenuation provided by the hill located between the quarry and the External Dwelling is considered.
Overall, noise from quarrying activities at all potential On-site quarry locations will comply with the construction noise limits at all times, including the 45 dBA night-time noise limit.
Some existing quarries outside the CHWF Site have also been identified as potential sources of gravel during the construction of the CHWF (see Figure B12, Appendix B (Volume 2). The nearest External Dwellings (X168 and X170) are both located approximately 260 m from the quarry site. The predicted sound level form quarrying activities at these External Dwellings is 59 dB LAeq, without taking into account terrain shielding. This sound level easily complies with daytime construction activity noise limits, however at these established quarries the relevant noise limit will either be the daytime permitted noise limit of 55 dBA L10 or a specified limit in the consent condition for the particular quarry. Genesis Energy will either comply with this daytime noise limit during the construction of the CHWF or provide appropriate mitigation. These mitigations may already be present in the current quarry design.
Concrete Batching Plants
Concrete batching will be carried out at one or two locations, both On-site and potentially Off-site, at any one time and will be located next to water abstraction points, quarries and/or adjacent to Turbines on ridge tops, as detailed in Section 4.3.8. The sound power level of concrete batching used in this assessment is 114 dBA, a similar level and noise effect to that associated with the construction of Turbine Platforms.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 201 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
To assess the noise from Concrete Batching Plants, dwellings located close to the proposed water abstraction sites have been assessed.
The maximum noise level at the nearest External Dwellings (X209, X167 and X190) to the proposed water abstraction sites is 42 dB LAeq, 62 dB LAeq, and 57 dB LAeq respectively. This is compliant with the daytime construction noise limit at all sites by a significant margin, and with the night-time construction noise limits at the water abstraction site near X290 and at all sites near Turbine Platforms. These noise levels do not comply with night- time limits at the X167 or X190 water abstraction sites. Concrete production during the night-time hours will therefore be restricted to ensure compliance with NZS6803.
Summary of Construction Noise
The noise from construction activities associated with the CHWF will, in most cases, be received in the context of daytime rural activities, characterised by quiet periods dominated by bird and insect noise, stock and dog noise, and wind in vegetation, and punctuated by vehicles and farm machinery. Noise effects during the construction of the CHWF have been considered against this noise context.
Noise from machinery (including quarrying and concrete batching) at or near the Turbine Foundations and Platforms, and Substation sites is predicted to be at lower levels than typical daytime ambient noise levels. At most noise sensitive locations construction traffic noise will also be below the ambient noise level. Noise effects from these activities are expected to be less than minor. Noise from existing Off-site quarries may exceed permitted activity noise limits, but it is likely that mitigations are already in place, or consent conditions allow elevated noise levels, as these quarries are already established.
At four External Dwellings, peak hour construction traffic noise will exceed 55 dB LAeq, and will become a significant part of the noise environment. The duration of these daytime activities will be in the order of months, and during this time the effect of noise at these External Dwellings may be significant. The noise levels are consistent with those anticipated by NZS6803, and are considered reasonable in the context of their limited duration.
At various External Dwellings near Internal and External Road construction sites, there will be short-term periods in which noise levels will increase significantly. These activities will occur over a period of days or several weeks at each site, and in some cases special attention will be given to noise mitigation. For the brief periods involved in these works, these noise levels are consistent with those anticipated by NZS6803, and are considered reasonable in the context of their limited duration for daytime activities.
At all times during construction, the timing and coordination of operations will be undertaken to ensure that construction noise limits are complied with and noise effects are minimised. A Construction Noise Management Plan will be prepared and implemented prior to the commencement of any construction works (other than site investigations), as detailed in Section 6.3.5 and in the COMR attached as Appendix A. This will be generally in accordance with Section 8 and related annexes of NZS6803, which details the types of
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 202 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects construction and procedures that will be carried out to ensure compliance with the Standard and to control noise effects.
With the implementation of a Construction Noise Management Plan, it is anticipated that the noise effects associated with construction activity will be less than minor.
5.4.4 Operational Noise Operational noise sources from the CHWF primarily relate to the Turbines, however substations, overhead lines and traffic activities have also been included in the Noise Effects Assessment. An assessment of noise effects from each of these activities is discussed below.
Turbine Noise
The sound level emitted from a Turbine varies with wind speed, which can be characterised by a “sound power curve”. Turbine noise is modelled on the basis of the wind speed at which the peak in sound power level occurs. After a review of available wind Turbine models, Genesis Energy has determined that maximum sound power levels of 110 dBA and 108 dBA for the Large Turbines and Medium Turbines respectively, will allow an appropriate degree of flexibility in final Turbine selection and layout.
For the purposes of modeling and effects assessment it is also necessary to determine the shape of the sound power curve. For the noise assessment, Marshall Day (2011) has used the shape of the older Vestas V90 sound power curve as a modelling example because it forms a conservative maximum relative to other typical Turbines, including some margin for higher sound power levels from larger Turbines built in the near future. The Vestas V90 Turbine also exhibits a peak in sound power level at relatively low wind speeds. Using this curve shape in noise assessments ensures that the predicted noise levels are compared against the more sensitive part of the noise limit. The sound power curve for the modelled Turbines is shown in Figure 5.2.
For modelling purposes, it is also necessary to determine an appropriate frequency spectrum shape. The shape of the frequency spectrum used in the modelling is taken from the Vestas V90 Turbine (109 dBA) and adjusted upwards to represent the Large Turbines, or downwards to represent the Medium Turbines.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 203 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
120
110
100
Large Turbines 90 Medium Turbines
80 dBA Sound Power dBA Level
70
60 0 5 10 15 20 25 Wind Speed (m/s) at hub height
Figure 5.2: Modelled sound power level curves for the CHWF noise assessment.
Each Turbine has been modelled as a point source at the height of the nacelle (90 m above ground level for the Medium Turbine Layout or 100 m above ground level for the Large Turbine Layout). This represents the observation that the noise generated by a Turbine is mainly emitted from the tip of each blade, which reaches its maximum output as it passes downward through the horizontal. Mechanical noise radiating from the nacelle and the body of the tower is considered to be negligible. The 90 m and 100 m nacelle heights have been selected as part of the worst-case envelope. Should lower nacelle heights be selected, the sound levels predicted would be expected to decrease by a small amount due to increased screening from terrain, or remain the same.
Predicted noise levels for External Dwellings and schools external to the CHWF Site which are predicted to receive more than 35 dB LAeq, from at least one of the Indicative Turbine Layouts are listed in Table 5.12 and shown in Figures B14 to B17 of Appendix B (Volume 2). Predicted noise levels do not include contribution from any other noise sources other than the Turbines. Noise levels relate to the peak sound output, which typically occurs at a wind speed of 10 - 12 m/s at hub height. The sound level at faster or slower wind speeds will be less.
The noise sensitive locations listed in Table 5.12 have been assessed by comparing the predicted noise levels with background noise measurements taken at the External Dwellings, or at nearby representative External Dwellings. Table 5.13 summarises the maximum elevation over background noise created by Turbine noise and the predicted frequency of such events.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 204 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.12: Predicted Turbine noise levels at External Dwellings.
Noise Level (L ) Dwelling eq 80M 90M 100L 110L Max (Leq) X170 34 34 36 35 36 X171 35 34 37 36 37 X185 34 35 36 35 36 X187 34 34 36 35 36 X188 35 34 36 35 36 X189 35 34 36 35 36 X190 34 33 35 34 35 X258 32 32 33 33 33 X265 39 38 40 40 40 X321 33 33 35 32 35 X358 35 34 35 35 35 X362 35 33 35 35 35 X377 38 37 39 37 39 X378 33 33 35 33 35 X379 35 34 36 35 36 X380 34 34 35 34 35 X391 34 34 36 34 36 X392 35 34 36 35 36 X396 38 38 40 39 40 X397 39 39 42 39 42 X403 38 37 39 36 39 X405 35 34 35 35 35 X407 38 38 40 40 40 X408 34 36 37 37 37
The potential effect of Turbine noise (based on the loudest of the Indicative Turbine Layouts) on each individual External Dwelling where the frequency of elevation over background noise will potentially occur ‘often’ is detailed below. Where appropriate the External Dwellings have been grouped together. For those External Dwellings where the sound level from the Turbines is notably higher than the existing background sound level ‘rarely’, the noise effects are considered to be less than minor as it occurs infrequently and is less than the minimum night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq. Those External Dwellings are not assessed further in this document, but are discussed in the Noise Effects Assessment provided in Volume 3, (Section 5) of this document.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 205 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.13: Wind farm noise assessment summary at External Dwellings.
Maximum Elevation Frequency of Maximum Sound Dwelling over Background Elevation over Level (dB L ) Aeq Noise (dB) Background Noise X170 36 11 Rarely X171 37 12 Rarely X185 36 6 Rarely X187 36 6 Rarely X188 36 - Rarely X189 36 - Rarely X190 35 5 Rarely X258 33 3 Rarely X265 40 10 Often X321 35 2 Rarely X358 35 4 Often X362 35 4 Often X377 39 8 Often X378 35 4 Rarely X379 36 5 Rarely X380 35 5 Rarely X391 36 5 Rarely X392 36 5 Rarely X396 40 10 Often X397 42 5 Rarely X403 39 2 Rarely X405 35 4 Often X407 40 10 Often X408 37 1 Rarely
External Dwelling X185
The relationship between the predicted Turbine noise levels at X185 in comparison with the NZS608 noise limit based on the measured background noise levels, are shown in Figure 5.3.
As shown in Figure 5.3, at wind speed where Turbine noise output peaks, the sound level at External Dwelling X185 is predicted to be 36 dB LAeq. Turbine noise at this location will comply with noise limits.
The potential adverse effects of noise from the CHWF are sleep disturbance and loss of amenity.
In assessing the noise effects of the Turbines at External Dwelling X185, it is noted that:
While the wind is blowing in the prevailing direction, X185 is downwind from the CHWF.
At all wind speeds, the sound of the Turbines will be immersed in the existing background sound level.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 206 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Noise Limit – X185 60
50
40
30
20
Sound Pressure Level (dBA) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Limit Background Wind Farm Downwind All Directions Wind Farm Prevailing Wind Wind Farm Upwind
Figure 5.3: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X185.
While on these occasions this sound level is higher than the existing background sound level, this level is regarded as reasonable for the following reasons:
The highest predicted sound level (36 dBA) is less than the minimum night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq most recently recommended by the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) (World Health Organisation, 2009).
At other times the noise level will be significantly below 37 dB LAeq.
The highest predicted level is less than the 45 dB LA10 level which would be considered reasonable if assessing night-time noise from another activity such as a hydroelectric generating plant, or milk drying plant in this area.
While noise from the wind farm may be audible outside dwellings at times, the noise level is sufficiently low to avoid sleep disturbance and will not result in adverse amenity effects, therefore it is concluded that noise effects are no more than minor.
External Dwellings X265, X396 and X407
Figures 5.4 and 5.5 show the relationship between measured outdoor background noise levels, NZS6808 noise limits, and the predicted Turbine noise at External Dwellings X265, and X396 and X407 respectively.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 207 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Noise Limit – X265 60
50
40
30
20
Sound Pressure Level (dBA) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Limit Background Wind Farm Downwind All Directions Wind Farm Prevailing Wind Wind Farm Upwind
Figure 5.4: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X265.
Figure 5.5: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X396 and X407.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 208 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
At the wind speed where Turbine noise output peaks, the sound level from the Turbines is predicted to be 40 dB LAeq for External Dwellings X265, X396 and X407. This noise level complies with the 40 dBA limit for the loudest Turbine layout (1 – 2 dB quieter for other Indicative Turbine Layouts).
In assessing the noise effects of Turbines at these particular External Dwellings, it is noted that:
While the wind is blowing in the prevailing direction, these dwellings will lie downwind from the CHWF.
When wind speeds are low or high, the sound of the Turbines will be near that of the existing background sound level.
Under moderate wind conditions (4 – 13 m/s), the wind Turbine noise level will be up to 10 dB higher than the existing background sound level.
While on these occasions this sound level is higher than the existing background sound level, this level is regarded as reasonable for the following reasons:
The highest predicted sound level (40 dBA) meets the minimum night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq most recently recommended by the WHO (World Health Organisation, 2009).
At other times the noise level will be significantly below 40 dB LAeq.
The highest predicted level is less than the 45 dB LA10 level which would be considered reasonable if assessing night-time noise from another activity such as a hydroelectric generating plant or milk drying plant in this area.
While noise from the wind farm may be audible outside dwellings at times, the noise level is sufficiently low to avoid sleep disturbance and will not result in adverse amenity effects, therefore it is concluded that noise effects are no more than minor.
External Dwelling X358, X362 and X405
Figures 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8 show the predicted Turbine noise levels in comparison with the NZS6808 noise limit based on the background noise level at External Dwellings X358, X362 and X405 respectively.
At the wind speed where Turbine noise output peaks, the sound level from the Turbines is predicted to be 35 dB LAeq for all three External Dwellings. This noise level complies with the 40 dBA limit for the loudest Turbine layout.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 209 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Noise Limit – X358 60
50
40
30
20
Sound Pressure Level (dBA) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Limit Background Wind Farm Downwind All Directions Wind Farm Prevailing Wind Wind Farm Upwind
Figure 5.6: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X358.
Noise Limit – X362 60
50
40
30
20
Sound Pressure Level (dBA) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Limit Background Wind Farm Downwind All Directions Wind Farm Prevailing Wind Wind Farm Upwind
Figure 5.7: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X362.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 210 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Noise Limit – X405 60
50
40
30
20
Sound Pressure Level (dBA) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Limit Background Wind Farm Downwind All Directions Wind Farm Prevailing Wind Wind Farm Upwind
Figure 5.8: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X405.
In assessing the noise effects of the Turbines at these particular dwellings, it is noted that:
While the wind is blowing in the prevailing direction, these dwellings will lie downwind from the CHWF.
When wind speeds are low or high, the sound of the Turbines will be immersed in the existing background sound level.
Under moderate wind conditions (7 – 12 m/s), the wind Turbine noise levels will be up to 4 dB higher than the existing background sound level.
While on these occasions this sound level is somewhat higher than the existing background sound level, this level is regarded as reasonable for the following reasons:
The highest predicted sound level (35 dBA) is less than the minimum night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq most recently recommended by the WHO.
At other times the noise level will be significantly below 35 dB LAeq.
The highest predicted level is less than the 45 dB LA10 level which would be considered reasonable if assessing night-time noise from another activity such as a hydroelectric generating plant or milk drying plant in this area.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 211 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
While noise from the wind farm may be audible outside dwellings at times, the noise level is sufficiently low to avoid sleep disturbance and will not result in adverse amenity effects, therefore it is concluded that noise effects are no more than minor.
External Dwelling X377
Figure 5.9 shows the predicted Turbine noise levels in comparison with the NZS6808 noise limit based on the background noise level at External Dwelling X377.
At the wind speed where Turbine noise output peaks, the sound level from the Turbines is predicted to be 39 dB LAeq for External Dwelling X377. This noise level complies with the 40 dBA limit for the loudest Turbine layout.
In assessing the noise effects of the Turbines at this particular dwelling, it is noted that:
While the wind is blowing in the prevailing direction, X377 will lie downwind from the CHWF.
When wind speeds are low or high, the sound of the Turbines will be immersed in the existing background sound level.
Under moderate wind conditions (5 – 13 m/s), the wind Turbine noise levels will be up to 8 dB higher than the existing background sound level.
Noise Limit – X377 60
50
40
30
20
Sound Pressure Level (dBA) 10
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Wind farm wind speed at hub height (m/s)
Limit Background Wind Farm Downwind All Directions Wind Farm Prevailing Wind Wind Farm Upwind
Figure 5.9: Predicted noise levels of Turbines at External Dwelling X377.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 212 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
While on these occasions this sound level is higher than the existing background sound level, this level is regarded as reasonable for the following reasons:
The highest predicted sound level (39 dBA) is less than the minimum night-time noise limit of 40 dB LAeq most recently recommended by the WHO (World Health Organisation, 2009).
At other times the noise level will be significantly below 39 dB LAeq.
The highest predicted level is less than the 45 dB LA10 level which would be considered reasonable if assessing night-time noise from another activity such as a hydroelectric generating plant or milk drying plant in this area.
While noise from the wind farm may be audible outside dwellings at times, the noise level is sufficiently low to avoid sleep disturbance and will not result in adverse amenity effects, therefore it is concluded that noise effects are no more than minor.
Substation Noise
The EBoP for the CHWF includes a Main Substation and a Satellite Substation. As detailed in Section 4.3.3 and shown on Figures 4.7 and 4.8, two possible locations have been identified for the Main Substation, and one for the Satellite Substation. The nearest External Dwelling to either the Main or Satellite Substations is over 2 km away.
The sound power spectrum used for modelling has been taken from the Transpower NZ Ltd North Island Grid Upgrade Project report. This report describes a standard sound power level spectrum for large 33/220 kV transformers, and has been used by Transpower NZ Ltd for substation noise predictions. These spectra were accepted in the proceedings of the North Island Grid Upgrade hearing, and are consistent with spectra and levels observed when investigating modern substation transformers. This has been adopted for the Noise Effects Assessment for the CHWF.
The predicted sound pressure levels at the nearest external residential dwellings to each substation are shown in Tables 5.14 and 5.15.
Table 5.14: Sound levels at External Dwellings near the Main Substation (both options).
Predicted Sound Pressure Level (dB L ) External Dwelling Aeq Option 1 Option 2 X359 9 - X360 9 - X361 5 - X377 - 17
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 213 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.15: Sound levels at External Dwellings near the Satellite Substation.
External Dwelling Predicted Sound Pressure Level (dB LAeq) X186 7 X187 11 X188 12 X189 12 X190 10
At all External Dwellings shown in Tables 5.13 and 5.14, the predicted sound level from any of the substations is less than the District Plan night-time noise limits (including penalty for tonality) by at least 28 dB. Noise effects at these External Dwellings will be less than minor.
The optional Switching Station may include one small transformer. The nearest External Dwelling to the proposed Switching Station location is over 2 km away. The sound power level has not been specified for the Switching Station, but will be considerably less than that of the substations. Accordingly, the noise level from the Switching Station at the nearest External Dwellings will be less than that from the substations and is assessed as being insignificant.
Overhead Transmission Lines
Noise from overhead lines consists of tones generated by wind in wires (referred to as Aeolian noise), and noise from arcing to damp atmosphere, (referred to as corona discharge). Noise from both of these effects is generally low and weather-dependent.
Corona discharge from 33kV lines is generally not significant, and it is anticipated that there will be no noise effects associated with corona discharge from 33kV overhead lines within the CHWF Site. Aeolian tones at a distance of 40 m (distance to the nearest Dwelling X380), for an array of three conductors of 20 mm diameter, are approximately 25 dBA for moderate winds of 8 m/s. At higher wind speeds, the sound level increases in a similar manner to wind in other structures such as trees and buildings. At further distances from the wires the sound level attenuates to lower levels, at a rate of between 3 and 6 decibels per doubling of distance. At all External Dwellings the sound level from wind noise in wires is similar to or less than the environmental noise present during windy conditions, and the effects will be less than minor.
The Internal Transmission Line (220kV) is located within the CHWF Site and is greater than 800 m away from noise sensitive locations (the nearest location is Dwelling X403). Aeolian noise occurs with 220kV lines and corona discharge noise can also be significant, within a typical effects corridor between 40 – 60 m wide. The distances to noise sensitive locations outside of the CHWF Site are much greater than this corridor, and thus noise effects from the Internal Transmission Line will be negligible.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 214 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Operational Traffic Noise
Potential noise effects on External Dwellings from operational vehicles travelling on Internal Roads have been assessed in the same way as construction traffic was assessed (see Section 5.5.2). However, noise generation has been predicted on the basis of 17 two way vehicle movements accessing the Site per day. The predicted noise level at the nearest External Dwelling (X397) is 46 dB LA10, which complies with the day-time noise limits.
As described below in Section 5.5.4, operational traffic generation on External Roads associated with routine maintenance of the Turbines is considered to be negligible within the existing traffic environment. Noise effects associated with traffic are only considered to be significant when traffic flows double. As operational traffic will not double the traffic volumes on External Roads, subsequent noise effects will be less than minor.
Overall, noise effects associated with operational traffic will be less than minor.
5.4.5 Summary Construction noise associated with the CHWF can comply with the provisions of NZS6803 at all External Dwellings as required by the TDC and MDC District Plans. Construction noise from upgrades to External Roads will, in some cases, exceed the noise limits in NZS6803 for brief periods at some External Dwellings.
NZS6808 provides the noise performance standard for wind farms and establishes a noise limit of 40 dBA L90 or 5 dB above the existing ambient background sound level, whichever is the higher. NZS6808 is regarded as an appropriate compliance requirement for this project and in terms of the assessment of effects, it provides a conservative approach because:
The noise propagation calculation is based on a worst-case assumption that the assessment point lies downwind of all Turbines at the same time; and
The noise assessment is based on the peak level of sound from the Turbines, which only occurs at certain wind speeds and thus only occurs occasionally. This contrasts to other noise sources, such as geothermal or hydroelectric generation facilities, which produce noise continuously.
The prediction method in NZS6808 was also used as a tool for the selection of suitable Turbine sites with regard to noise level compliance measurements.
As a worst-case scenario, noise levels at all External Dwellings comply with the noise limits of NZS6808. At one External Dwelling the noise level from the loudest Indicative Turbine Layout exceeds 40 dBA, but complies with NZS6808 on the basis of a higher noise limit due to high existing background noise level. The final design will ensure that compliance with the noise standard will be achieved, either by design of the CWHF or by establishing that the elevated noise limit is appropriate over a variety of seasonal variations.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 215 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
While the Turbine Corridor allows for flexibility in Turbine placement, during the detailed design phase, CHWF will be designed so that noise effects from Turbines will be reasonable at all External Dwellings.
Substation noise can comply with noise standards set in the District Plan and noise effects will be less than minor at all External Dwellings. Noise from the Overhead Transmission Line is predicted to be 25 dBA or less at all External Dwellings, and noise effects will be negligible. Road traffic noise from Internal Roads during the operational stage will be 46 dB LA10 or less at all dwellings, and resulting noise effects will be less than minor.
A Construction Noise Management Plan and an Operational Noise Management Plan will be prepared to ensure that the construction and operation of the CHWF complies with all relevant noise standards, and that measures are in place to avoid, remedy or mitigate situations where those standards are breached. A Final Noise Assessment Report will also be prepared, which will supersede the current Noise Effects Assessment (Marshall Day, 2011) once a Turbine model has been selected, its operating parameters are known and the Turbine locations are finalised. This will ensure that the noise emissions from the CHWF will comply with the relevant noise standards and produce noise effects no greater than described above.
5.5 Traffic Effects 5.5.1 Introduction TDG (2011) has undertaken an assessment of potential traffic effects on External Roads associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of the CHWF. The analysis has considered access to the Site, including all External Roads and the OW/OD Route (as described in Section 4.3.5). The Transportation Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Section 6) of this document and is summarised below.
The scale of the CHWF is such that a significant number of vehicle movements will be required during the construction phase, including OW/OD loads. The following approaches have been adopted in assessing potential traffic effects, including:
Assessing a range of potential construction programme intensities when determining the number of truck movements required for delivery of bulk materials to the site. The figures represent an expected worst case scenario of total vehicle movements.
Average regional traffic growth rates have been factored into the equations to evaluate the capacity of the existing road networks to accommodate increases in flow. This ensures that a reasonable base value is used in predicting the effects of the CHWF.
Traffic demands on the existing road network associated with the CHWF will be at their highest during the construction phase. In general terms, once constructed the CHWF will result in little change to existing traffic movements in the area.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 216 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Traffic and transportation effects arising from the CHWF can be separated into three components:
Construction traffic;
Operational traffic; and
Cumulative traffic effects with other consented wind farm projects.
Each of these is discussed in detail below.
5.5.2 Construction Traffic Effects As described in Section 4.3.5 and shown on Figure 4.21, the OW/OD Route during the construction of the CHWF follows SH50 out of the Port of Napier, then SH2 for approximately 196 km until reaching Pahiatua. The OW/OD Route then uses local roads to the CHWF Site. Other traffic associated with construction activities (such as trucks, bulldozers, excavators, loaders, vans and cars) for the delivery of components, materials and personnel to the Site will utilise the OW/OD Route, as well as External Roads in the vicinity of the Site (see Figure 4.21).
Construction Traffic Requirements
The volume of traffic generated during construction will be directly related to the construction programme selected during the detailed design stage of the CHWF. As outlined in Section 4.4.2, three indicative construction programmes have been developed, low, medium and high intensity, with each programme generating specific traffic and transport volumes. In order to maintain a conservative approach in this assessment, the highest potential traffic generation programme (i.e., the high intensity programme), has been used to determine the actual and potential effects of construction traffic.
During construction of the CHWF, traffic will be generated for the delivery of the following components:
Construction materials, plant, heavy equipment and supplies;
Concrete;
Steel, cement, sand, water and fly-ash (if used);
Off-site quarry materials;
EBoP material and supplies;
Construction personnel; and
Turbine components, cranes and transformers.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 217 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Proposed External Road improvements associated with the CHWF also have the potential to affect traffic on External Roads.
Each of these activities in respect to traffic generation is discussed further below.
Construction Materials, Plant, Heavy Equipment and Supplies
At the start of the construction phase several items of earth-working plant, such as bulldozers, excavators, loaders and dump trucks, will be delivered to the Site by transporter to undertake earthworks and for the construction of Internal Roads and other civil infrastructure. Provisional assessments indicate that about 100 vehicles (200 vehicle movements) will be required over the initial establishment period for each Turbine Cluster and related support facility. These will be spread over the course of the initial establishment period, and will be in accordance with the construction programme which is to be proposed.
Concrete
Each Large Turbine Foundation is predicted to require up to 710 m3 of concrete. Concrete production will primarily occur On-site for Turbine Clusters D, F and G, however concrete for Turbine Clusters A, B, C and part of E could be produced Off-site. Up to 142 standard concrete truck deliveries (up to 284 movements) are predicted for each Turbine Foundation. On average, this equates to one concrete truck delivery every five minutes during a Turbine Foundation concrete pour. With each truck taking approximately 10 minutes to off-load, three to four trucks can be expected at the pour at any one time. Therefore, over the course of a day’s pour (lasting approximately 11 hours), between 21 and 26 movements (10 to 13 loads) per hour are predicted. Most of these movements would be internal to the Site as a result of On-site concrete production.
Steel, Cement Sand and Water
Steel, cement and sand are expected to be supplied from Masterton (some steel may be sourced from Napier or Palmerston North), while water will be sourced from the water abstraction points identified in Section 4.3.8. Steel and sand would typically be delivered by standard single unit truck, truck and trailer combinations, or by articulated truck and trailer combinations. Cement will be delivered in pressure vessels on low centre of gravity articulated trailers.
Reinforcing steel will be delivered by truck to the site with between two and four loads (four to eight movements) required per Turbine Foundation.
Off-site Quarry Materials
It is predicted that 226,400 m3 (medium case) and 504,200 m3 (worst case) of quarry rock, plus 85,000 m3 for concrete will be sourced from Off-site quarries and trucked to the Site.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 218 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Gravel requirements for the construction of the CHWF have been detailed in Section 4.4.3 of this document and potential quarry sites are shown on Figure 4.29. Materials distributions on the road network are shown on Figure B40 of Appendix B (Volume 2).
Electrical Balance of Plant
EBoP components that will require transportation to the CHWF Site include:
Up to eight transformers (each representing an over-dimension load);
Up to 400 (33kV) cable drums and 140 overhead line conductor drums;
Approximately 270 high voltage (220kV) overhead line conductor drums;
Lattice tower components; and
Other substation equipment such as circuit breakers, disconnectors, gantry and bus bar components, and 33kv poles.
Aside from the transformers, EBoP materials are likely to be transported to the Site using standard flatbed trucks. Some 340 movements will be required to transport this equipment to the Site.
Construction Personnel
The peak time for construction personnel traffic will be during the overlap of earthworks and Turbine construction. The total number of personnel traffic movements will be in the order of 68 to 93 vehicles on the road network at peak hour times, or an additional 136 – 186 vpd on the road network. These figures are based on an assumption that all personnel travel to the Site in the same one hour period, and that an average vehicle occupancy of 2 persons is achieved.
Parking will be provided wholly within the CHWF Site for personnel at the Contractors Compounds, or if this is not practical, within other level ground areas close to Internal Roads or Turbine Platforms. Parking areas will be sized to provide for the maximum identified peak demands.
Based on experience at other Sites, it is reasonable to expect that contractors will car pool, with occupancies of four or five persons per vehicle on average expected with contractor planning. A Travel Plan has been recommended as part of the Construction Traffic Management Plan (“CTMP”) to maximise the opportunity for ride sharing, and other trip reduction possibilities and is outlined further in Section 6.3.2. These movements will be distributed on the road network according to the location of work fronts within the different Turbine Clusters, particularly where two construction teams are working concurrently. The residential location of construction personnel will also affect the distribution of traffic.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 219 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Based on these assessments, peak hour traffic movements can be expected to involve between 27 and 34 vehicle movements for the low and medium construction programmes. Between 37 and 47 peak hour movements can be expected for the high intensity construction programme. These are typically one way movements, arriving at the Site in the morning and departing in the evening. In practice 80% to 90% of these movements can be expected in the predominant flow direction at peak hour times.
Turbine Components, Cranes and Transformers
Once the Internal Roads have been constructed to an appropriate standard, Turbine components and associated items of heavy equipment can be delivered to the Site. The expected worst case transport requirements for a Medium and Large Turbine is 12 truck movements.
As described in Section 4.4.7, the transport of Turbine towers and blades will be classed as over-dimension loads while transformers and nacelles will be classed as over-weight loads. These OW/OD loads will follow designated transport routes and be subject to the permitting requirements as set out by NZTA, TDC, MDC and other territorial authorities along the route. In order to provide for tracking of over-dimension loads and the weight requirements of the over-weight loads, some intersections and bridges along the OW/OD Route will require modifications and upgrades. These modifications and upgrades will be addressed as part of the separate permitting requirement for OW/OD loads. Upgrades and improvements to External Roads has taken into account the requirements of OW/OD loads, as discussed further in Section 4.4.5.
Cranes are required On-site for the erection of Turbine components and EBoP. The location from which these vehicles will travel to the Site will be determined during detailed design. Given that these vehicles are OW/OD in their own right, their travel to and from the Site will be included in the separate permitting requirements for OW/OD loads from NZTA.
Construction Traffic Generation
Traffic volumes will noticeably increase during the construction phase of the CHWF. The expected truck movements associated with each construction work front are shown on Figures B41 and B42 of Appendix B (Volume 2). Figure B41 and B42 show indicative average daily and collective peak hour construction truck movements on the main External Roads. The total number of truck movements includes vehicles associated with transporting concrete, gravel, steel, cement, water, sand and EBoP components. Provision has also been made for miscellaneous construction consumables such as timber, formwork and scaffolding. The evaluations also include material movements expected to occur as a result of the External Road gravels supply, but do not include local distributional activities between cut and Excess Fill areas that can be expected within External Road construction areas. These localised activities are planned as a requirement for the CTMP. An additional provision is to be overlaid to account for the OW/OD Vehicles, and also for contractor personnel vehicle movements.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 220 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure B42 of Appendix B (Volume 2) shows how the construction programme effects that relate to increasing movements during the early part of the Turbine Cluster construction, peaking near the middle of the Turbine Cluster activity when work is active on all fronts, and then tapering off towards the end of the Turbine Cluster construction period. Table 5.16 summarises the peak total movements (including OW/OD Vehicles, HCV and light vehicle movements) to generate the total peak period vehicle movement expectations.
Table 5.16 shows the following:
The High Intensity programme does not always contribute to the peak demand to be expected on the road network. At times, and at some locations, the Medium Intensity construction programme is expected to generate a higher daily and peak hour movement.
The peak daily traffic activity of any of the programmes is expected to generate total additional traffic volumes of between about 205 and 451 vpd (two way). Half of these movements can be expected to occur in each direction over the course of the working day.
Peak hour demands can be expected to generate up to between 96 to 133 movements (two way total). These peak period flows are predominantly expected to be influenced by the directional contractor travel to and from work patterns and accounts for about 93 movements in the peak hours. The assumptions indicate that these movements are based on a two person per vehicle occupancy. Based on comparative assessments, it is evident that with managed travel plans, this primary contributor group could be significantly reduced.
The peak mid-day travel demands are expected to account for between two and 26 movements (two way total). These movements are predominantly expected to comprise the contractor HCV movement demands, with about half of these movements expected to occur in each direction during this period. These will be the typical peak demand flows that can be expected over the course of the working day.
When compared with the typical and current daily traffic activity on the External Roads east of Alfredton (traffic activity of typically between about 30 and 100 vpd, see Table 3.4), construction traffic activity will be expected noticeably increase the local and peak daily traffic activity. When this is considered in the context of the peak typical mid-day hour, the busiest sections of road are expected to carry an additional four to 13 vehicle movements each way per hour, when compared with the typical one to 10 movements that occur at present.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 221 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.16: Forecast peak total contractor vehicle movements – daily, peak hour and mid-day.
Peak Average Hcv Daily Traffic (Vpd) Road Two Way Total For Each Work Total Total Network Total Maximum Programme Peak Turbine Contractor Maximum Average Mid Location Average Daily Road Road Section Delivery Light Vehicle Average Peak Day Hourly Reference Vehicle Name Description Traffic (vpd Movements Hour Vehicle Vehicle Number Movements Low Medium High two way) (vpd two way) Movements Movements (Figure B41, (vpd two way) (vph two way) (vph two way) Appendix B) Intensity Intensity Intensity
1 Route 52 East of Alfredton 94 183 221 9 186 416 128 23 2 Route 52 Rakanui Road 125 251 294 9 186 489 138 30 3 Route 52 West of Rimu Road 60 139 144 4 186 333 115 15 Waihoki 4 Valley East of Route 52 64 113 150 5 186 341 116 16 5 Waitawhiti East of Route 52 32 55 74 5 186 265 105 8 6 Castle Hill East of Alfredton 136 252 164 13 186 451 133 26 Alfredton 7 Tinui West of Cluster E 38 52 68 12 186 266 105 8 8 Tinui West of Cluster F 21 52 35 3 186 242 101 6 9 Daggs East of Route 52 9 9 19 0 186 205 96 2 East of Wairiri 10 Maringi Road 34 77 67 3 186 266 105 8 11 Tanawa East of Cluster F 32 79 53 0 186 265 105 8 Route North of Daggs 12 52(South) Road 9 9 19 0 186 205 96 2 13 Alfredton West of Alfredton 72 117 184 13 186 382 122 20
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 222
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure B42 of Appendix B (Volume 2) shows how the three construction programmes affect the intensity of traffic movements generated. In particular:
Construction period traffic effects on each section of road show a gradual build-up of traffic from lower Site establishment levels to full construction demands at about the middle of the construction period;
A tapering off of traffic movements is expected following the peak demand periods;
The high intensity construction programme is shorter resulting in an increase in the peak level of activity expected;
Peak periods of construction are expected to occur for a relatively short period, with more typical levels of activity between 60 to 80% of vehicle movements at peak times; and
The busiest sections of the External Road network are expected to be Alfredton Road, Route 52, and Castle Hill Road.
Overall, the distributed traffic movements during construction are expected to result in peaks of up to 489 movements two way total per day (244 vehicles each way) on the External Road network. The corresponding maximum peak hour period is expected to involve up to about 30 vehicle movements two way total. Where two work crews are advanced at the same time, and where they rely on the same sections of road for access, the construction crew generated effects will be additive.
The traffic flow capacity of the rural two lane roads that form the External Road network to the east of Alfredton have surplus capacity at current operation levels (many roads are at levels of 10% to 20% of a practical operating capacity limit). On the busier roads, the construction traffic demands are expected to increase flows. At these busiest traffic flow levels the consumed capacity may be within the range of 20% to 40% of the practical operating capacity (85%) level. Motorists can expect a minimal level of travel interruption at these levels.
At these levels, the total heavy construction traffic movements can be readily accommodated within the capacity of the External Road network in the vicinity of the Site.
Construction Traffic Effects
Section 3.3.4 of this document outlines the range of uses and activities that occur on the External Road network, including school bus travel, stock movement, specific events, seasonal variations and logging truck movements. These activities, combined with the increased HCV movements, construction personnel traffic movements and OW/OD load deliveries associated with the construction of the CHWF may result in conflicting uses of the local road network. While it is noted that the increase in traffic volumes described above can be accommodated onto the local road network in a
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 223 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects capacity sense, a number of management and mitigation measures are required to ensure that the increase in HCV movements and construction personnel movements does not cause material adverse effects on existing road users. The effect of OW/OD loads on the wider road network will be addressed through the separate required permitting process.
Potential effects of construction traffic include effects on:
School bus travel;
Specific events and stock movement;
Logging truck movements;
OW/OD loads on local roads and rural intersections;
Site access, parking and loading; and
Travel time conveniences.
The potential effects on these activities are described in more detail below.
School Bus Travel
As outlined in Section 3.3.4, External Roads east of Alfredton have one return bus trip before and after school each day (between 7.30 am and 9.00 am, and 2.30 pm and 4.30 pm). While some assessment of school bus services has been made to inform the Traffic Effects Assessment (TDG, 2011), the CTMP will have regard to the presence of, and varying nature of, school bus routes in relation to Site generated traffic movements.
TDG has consulted with the TDC and MDC engineers about this occurrence and they confirm that the matter can, at times, present a potential safety risk. The location of these collection points may change from time to time depending on local transport demand, however it would assist the construction vehicle movements if these collection areas were made so that parked and waiting vehicles were able to position themselves clear of the Site access route carriageways. This could be achieved through local shoulder widening or relocation of the stop to the nearest side road for example. These need not be formal parking facilities but can be metalled to an all-weather travelling surface. Sites may have a dual purpose such as providing for the storage of metal for roading projects, or they may involve sight distance improvements to alignments.
As far as practicable, HCV movements will be scheduled outside of the local school bus pick-up and drop-off times. However, there will inevitably be some overlap with HCV movements and to manage this overlap, Genesis Energy is proposing to establish a system for radio communication between the HCV vehicles associated with the CHWF development and the school buses which travel along the proposed transport
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 224 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects roads close to the Site. This would be an extension of the system that currently operates. Further details are provided in Section 6 of this document and will be set out in the CTMP.
Some External Roads will also be widened and improved, as outlined in Section 4.4.5. The widening and improvement of local roads will assist in ensuring that safe two way movements between school buses and HCV movements can occur on the road network.
Specific Events and Stock Movement
A number of specific events, such as the Dunlop Targa and Rally Wairapapa, and farm practices use the External Roads identified for CHWF construction traffic. As detailed further in Section 7.2.7, Genesis Energy has consulted with the organisers of both the Dunlop Targa and Rally Wairarapa events. The organisers of both events raised no particular concerns about the CHWF, and consider that event organisation will necessarily have to have regard for the environment that exists at the time the event is planned.
To provide for the uninterrupted continuation of these and other events on External Roads in the CHWF area, Genesis Energy will consult with affected parties to provide an appropriate planning framework for the continuation of these events. The planning framework will be provided for as part of the CTMP discussed below. Compliance with the CTMP will ensure that the effects of construction traffic on stock movement and specific events will be less than minor.
Logging Truck Movements
Logging trucks currently generate a significant volume of the HCV vehicles on the local road network and will continue to do so through the construction of the CHWF. The assessment of current traffic volumes has taken into account the proportion of HCV’s already using the local road network and used this information to design the proposed local road upgrades. The upgrades will provide for safe two way movements of HCV’s on the network, and as such the effects of additional construction traffic is expected to be no more than minor. Radio contact is also proposed between CHWF HCV’s, logging HCV’s and the CHWF gate house.
Over-dimension and Over-weight Loads
In conjunction with the local road improvements detailed below, further specific road improvements may be required depending on the final Turbine selections. These improvements are likely to include realignment of corners and intersections, local sight benching, and vegetation clearance. Genesis Energy will consult with all potentially affected property owners to establish appropriate communication channels to develop the necessary access solutions.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 225 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
It is noted that some over-dimension loads will need to track through private property air space. Genesis Energy will consult with local landowners and the permitting authorities as part of the applications for OW/OD load applications. The effects of road upgrades and tracking through private property air space are predicted to be no more than minor provided that the appropriate consultation is undertaken.
Site Access, Parking and Loading
As described in Section 4.3.5, access to the CHWF Site is from Route 52 and Castle Hill Rd via a number of local External Roads. On-site roading and Site access has taken into account the requirements of HCV’s, OW/OD loads and the relevant engineering requirements. The CTMP will provide details on the maintenance of External Road access and On-site roading. Given the design parameters set out, it is expected that the transport related effects of On-site roading and Site access will be less than minor.
Parking areas will be provided wholly On-site, either within the Central Laydown Areas, Contractor Compounds or on relatively flat ground close to Internal Roads and Turbine Platforms. As outlined in Section 4.3.8, Central Laydown Areas will provide a drop-off location for construction materials delivered to the Site. All vehicles and material can be stored, loaded and unloaded wholly within the site. Because no vehicles will be parked, and no loading or unloading will take place on the local network, the effects are predicted to be less than minor.
Travel Time Convenience Effects
The increase in HCV movements on the local road network is likely to result in the average road user encountering between one and two HCV’s travelling in the same direction and between three and five HCV’s travelling in the opposite direction associated with the CHWF. In a worst case scenario of no overtaking opportunities, it is expected that an additional five to eight minutes of travel time will be added to the average journey (between 20 and 45 km in length) on local roads. Where a motorist catches up to a vehicle halfway through the journey and is unable to pass for the rest of the journey, the additional travel time will is expected to be about 2.5 to 4 minutes.
This increase is not considered to be onerous in nature, however Genesis Energy has proposed a series of driver protocols to be incorporated in the CTMP, requiring CHWF HCV’s to slow down and / or pull over to create every opportunity for safe overtaking where practicable. The rear of each vehicle could have a sign providing a customer phone number so that comments (positive or negative) can be provided on driver behaviour. These methods (incorporated within the CTMP) will ensure that any effects on travel time convenience will be less than minor.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 226 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.5.3 Traffic Management Local Road Upgrades
Genesis Energy is proposing to upgrade the External Road network that provides access to the CHWF Site as part of the traffic management and mitigation proposals. External Road upgrades and improvements will be undertaken under the following categories:
Maintenance Provisioning – the pavement surface will be subject to increased wear and tear as a result of the increase in HCV movements. Genesis Energy proposes to establish a partnering agreement with MDC and TDC to enable the existing Council maintenance contracts to be utilised by Genesis Energy for the required maintenance activities as a result of the CHWF construction traffic.
Structural Pavements and Widening of Unsealed Roads – four sections of External Road have been identified which will be improved and upgraded to a consistent six metre carriageway cross section and an appropriate design pavement depth to meet the demands generated by the CHWF construction traffic.
Structural Pavements and Widening of Sealed Roads – no general widening and improvement of sealed roads has been identified as necessary at this stage. Nevertheless, Genesis Energy proposes to undertake a number of route inspections in conjunction with MDC and TDC prior to construction to identify and plan for any reasonably foreseeable pavement wear issues.
A swept path analysis has been undertaken across the External Road network to inform planning for the OD Vehicle movements. A refined swept path analysis has been undertaken to ascertain the extent of External Road works required. The extent of these refined swept path analyses and the sections of External Road where physical road works design has been undertaken is shown on Figure 4.25.
Further details of the External Road upgrades and improvement proposals are detailed in Section 4.4.5, and the Transportation Effects Assessment (Volume 3, Section 6).with the relevant traffic management options described in Section 6.
Road Safety
Section 3.3.4 of this document details the current road safety assessment for the local road network, concluding that overall, both individual driver behaviour and road conditions are a contributing factor to accidents that have occurred on the roads in the CHWF area. As noted above, and detailed in Section 6.3.2, Genesis Energy proposes to upgrade and improve a number of local roads to provide for the safe two way movement of HCVs. These road upgrades will improve road safety through wider carriageways, improved pavement surfaces and larger shoulder areas. In conjunction with these upgrades, Genesis Energy also proposes to consult with MDC and TDC to
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 227 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects establish a review programme for the assessment and potential upgrade and maintenance of warning signs, road markings and delineation of the External Road network where this coincides with works related to the CHWF.
Construction Traffic Management Plan
A CTMP will be prepared to provide an appropriate set of managed controls and protocols specific to the CHWF. It will be prepared by a Chartered Professional Engineer with specialist skills in traffic engineering and transportation planning, appointed by Genesis Energy. Preparation of the CTMP will involve input from the principal civil contractor, Turbine transport contractor, Tararua and Masterton District Councils, key stakeholders on the transport route who wish to be involved, emergency services and local transport operators (such as the school bus operator and livestock transporters). The CTMP Framework will set out the purpose, objectives, and specific standards required for the CTMP and is outlined further in Section 6.3.2.
5.5.4 Operational Traffic Effects Traffic generation during the operation of the CHWF will occur once all or part of the CHWF has been commissioned. It is expected that 40 FTEs will be employed to undertake routine operational maintenance of the Turbines. Up to 40 FTEs each travelling independently to and from the site will add 80 vehicle trips per day to the local roads and wider network. An increase in 80 vehicle trips per day will not be discernable on the road network and as such the effects will be less than minor.
In general terms, the coincidence of these movements generates an additional demand equivalent to about that which occurs on the roads east of Alfredton at present. By way of a comparison with the current traffic flows, the addition of these movements may increase the carriageway utilisation levels to between about 10 and 20%. This is well below the practical and efficient carrying capacity of the roads, some of which will have been significantly upgraded as a consequence of the CHWF. Having regard for the more likely distribution of travel across the network, the timing of travel and the frequency of demands requiring a presence On-site, it is expected that the travel effects due to this activity will be negligible
From time to time, larger items may need to be transported to and from the site as part of replacements and repairs of Turbine and transmission infrastructure. Where large loads are over-dimension or over-weight, specific transport permit applications will be made on a case by case basis. However, loads which are within the normal transport provisions will occur as part of ordinary operations and will not affect background traffic movements.
Driver Distraction
A new or moving object near the road (such as a Turbine) can potentially cause a distraction to a driver. In respect to the CHWF, drivers will have a gradually increasing
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 228 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects view of the wind farm as they approach it, regardless of their approach route, as opposed to a sudden “new” view.
As detailed in Section 5.3.3, ZTV by Turbine Cluster show that drivers:
West of the ranges, travelling along SH2 will have minimal if any views of the CHWF. This applies from Woodville through to Eketahuna and Masterton.
Travelling north along Whangaehu Valley Road to Alfredton, will similarly have minimal viewing of the Turbines right through to Alfredton.
Approaching from the north on Route 52 will have intermittent views of the Turbines from about 20 km from the Site. More predominant and frequent viewing will occur about 5 km – 10 km from the Site.
Travelling outside of about the 5 km zone will generally have minimal views of the Turbines.
The Turbines will be an established feature of the environment by the time drivers reach the CHWF itself, and in this context, the Turbines are not expected to be viewed by drivers as a new object.
TDG (2011) considered three factors (novelty, incongruity and complexity) to determine if any adverse orientation reactions or distractions could occur as a result of the CHWF being visible from the local road network. Based on these factors it is concluded that while the CHWF may provide an interesting feature for drivers travelling through the area, it will not cause an adverse distraction.
5.5.5 Cumulative Traffic Effects Contact Energy’s Waitahora Wind Farm is the only other consented wind farm project in the vicinity of the CHWF. The Waitahora Wind Farm lies to the north of CHWF on the Puketoi Ranges with access most likely provided by the northern road network from Dannevirke. Given their respective positions, there is minimal coincident demand for transport activity on the local road network and any cumulative effects will be less than minor.
There is a possibility that Contact Energy will also utilise the Port of Napier for receiving over-dimension loads and truck these to site which could produce periods of common demand on the State Highway network. As noted above, the permits for the transport of over-dimension loads is andled through a separate application and any cumulative traffic effects arising from over-dimension loads will be addressed through that process.
5.5.6 Summary Traffic volumes will increase as a result of the CHWF project, with most increases occurring during the construction phase of the project. These increases will include large numbers of HCV movements and some OW/OD loads. Three different
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 229 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects construction programmes are being investigated (low, medium, and high intensity activity) ) for each of the Turbine Configurations. The peak daily traffic activity of any of the programmes is expected to generate total additional traffic volumes of between 205 and 451 vpd (two way). Peak hour demands can be expected to generate up to between 96 to 133 movements (two way total). Traffic generation during the operation of the CHWF will involve up to 80 vehicle trips per day, which will not be discernable on the road network.
Analysis of the local road network has shown that in a capacity sense, the increase in traffic movements can be readily accommodated within the network. However, given that a significant portion of these traffic movements will be HCV’s a number of management and mitigation measures have been proposed by Genesis Energy including:
Local road improvements and upgrades.
Development of a CTMP in consultation with Councils, Contractors, and Stakeholders.
Provision of On-site parking and Central Laydown Areas.
With traffic management, road improvements and mitigation measures, it is predicted that the safe and efficient operation of the road network will continue with less than minor effects arising as a result of the CHWF.
5.6 Potential Effects on Water Resources 5.6.1 Introduction Baseline surveys of the watercourses within and downstream of the CHWF Site identified no notable aquatic values, aside from the presence of two threatened species (freshwater crayfish and longfin eel). This reflects the predominantly agricultural land use in the catchments at the Site, the general lack of riparian protection and the steep and erosion-prone, soft-sedimentary soils overlaying the Site. This results in high levels of sediment run-off, particularly during and immediately after high rainfall events.
The aquatic communities present near, or within, the Site have been highly modified by the agricultural land use in the catchment, and are therefore likely to have a degree of resilience to further disturbance.
PDP has undertaken an assessment of the potential effects of the construction and operation of the CHWF on water resources, including effects on surface water hydrology (PDP 2011b), water supply (PDP, 2011c), and groundwater (PDP, 2011a). Ryder Consulting (2011) has assessed the potential effect of the CHWF on aquatic communities and habitats at the Site. The Hydrology Effects Assessment and Water Supply Assessment is provided in Volume 3 (Sections 8 and 7 respectively), and the Groundwater Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 1) of this document. The Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 2). The results of each of these assessments are summarised below.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 230 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.6.2 Surface Water Effects The potential effects of the construction and operation of the CHWF on surface water are grouped under the following interrelated headings:
Effects on water quality through increased erosion and sedimentation from earthwork activities.
Changes to surface water hydrology due to proposed water abstractions.
Effects on aquatic ecology due to changes in water quality and flow regimes.
Effects on flood risk due to the introduction of new structures in the catchment.
Each of these is discussed below.
Water Quality
Construction Effects
The establishment of infrastructure during the construction of the CHWF will require up to 9.3 million m3 of earthworks. These earthworks will require careful management to avoid adverse effects on the receiving environment associated with erosion and sediment discharges, or the discharge of contaminants such as fuel, oil and cement.
The following activities in particular have the potential to result in increased erosion and therefore the discharge of sediment to waterbodies:
Removal of vegetation including pasture increases the risk of erosion of exposed earthwork surfaces.
Down-cutting and incision of constructed drainage measures.
Channel instability, such as slumping caused by erosion around drainage outfalls.
Elevated concentrations of sediment may occur in discharges to watercourses downstream of any constructed drainage systems as a result of erosion, the level of treatment of construction related run-off provided, and through concentrating discharges at point outfalls.
Potential effects from sediment discharges include:
Deterioration of water quality.
Sediment deposits covering stream beds and therefore affecting aquatic habitat.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 231 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Discolouration to and/or additional treatment required for drinking water taken from downstream waterbodies.
The nature and magnitude of any adverse effects on water quality due to mobilisation of sediments depends on:
The extent of earthworks and increase in sediment loads at a catchment scale.
The soil properties and erosion potential where the earthworks are situated.
The proposed slope/grade of earthworks and the local extent which could give rise to more erosion or a higher sediment load.
The sensitivity of the receiving environment.
Aquatic receiving environment values vary across the site. Many of the monitoring sites are identified “poor” or “fair” quality (24 out of 35 sites) and this is consistent with streams through pasture catchments. The risk assessment does not therefore differentiate management approaches based on receiving environment sensitivity. As the Turbine Corridor avoids high and medium value terrestrial ecological areas, buffers between work areas and streams within high and medium value areas are inherently provided.
Particular soil types are more prone to erosion and the potential for erosion increases with the length and slope of exposed soil. In this regard, erosion is likely to be higher where there are:
Soils with silt or sand sized particles and little or no clay content.
Steeper, uninterrupted slopes.
Long, steep sections of road.
Discharges into steeply graded watercourses.
Existing instability.
Elevated concentrations of sediment may occur in discharges to watercourses downstream of any constructed drainage systems as a result of erosion, the level of treatment of construction related run-off provided, and through concentrating discharges at point outfalls.
For the CHWF, the highest potential increases in sediment load are expected within parts of Turbine Clusters D and G, with moderate increases in the western parts of Turbine Clusters A, B and E. Given the geology and soil types present, there will be a particular focus on erosion control in Turbine Clusters E (and adjacent parts of Turbine Clusters D and G) and sediment control in Turbine Clusters A and B, as well in ecologically higher value areas in Turbine Clusters D and G. This will be achieved by
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 232 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects adherence to Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (“ESCPs”) prepared for each phase of development and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction, and utilisation of the proposed tool-box of management methods relevant to the particular situation as outlined in Section 6. Assessment at a local scale will identify in the ESCPs any topography likely to generate higher sediment loads given the consideration of roading grades and catchment size which will apply at particular sites. Drainage Management Plans will outline the proposed design for long-term structures such as culverts and channels.
The potential risk of concentrated sediment discharges increases where soils have higher proportions of clay and fine silt and treatment device retention times are shorter. Higher loads of sediment are also possible in areas of greater disturbance. PDP (2011b) have undertaken an erosion and sediment control risk assessment for each Turbine Cluster within the Site, and this is summarised in Table 5.17. As shown in Table 5.17, some Turbine Clusters are more susceptible to erosion than others, and risk management to protect water quality in these locations would focus in particular on either minimising erosion, managing sediment or both. For example fine, sandy soils expected to be prone to erosion, are found around Turbine Cluster E and therefore higher rates of erosion could be expected in that area with the potential for higher loads of coarse sediment in discharges. Erosion control will be more intensive in these areas to prevent or minimise potentially adverse effects.
Turbine Cluster B is identified in Table 5.17 as having a higher potential for mobile sediments that are slow to settle out. The northern part of this Turbine Cluster was used to determine the level of detail to be provided in ESCPs for the project. The “Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation” has been used to determine relative sediment loads generated during construction, with and without erosion and sediment control practices in place (see Table 5.18). These types of calculations will be used in the ESCPs to assist in the identification of local high risk areas and the controls required in specific locations throughout the CHWF Site to prevent or minimise any adverse effects. Examples of erosion and sediment control measures that will be undertaken during the construction of the CHWF are shown in the COMR provided in Appendix A (Volume 2) of this document.
It is noted that the average extent of earthworks disturbance per sub-catchment in this part of Turbine Cluster B is 1.4% of the total sub-catchment area. The catchments that would be receiving any discharges are also typically steep and are therefore expected to have high natural sediment loads during rainfall events. With appropriate controls and management of construction activity in accordance with the ESCPs using the methods outlined in Section 6, sedimentation and erosion effects on waterways throughout the Site will be minimised as far as practicable.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 233 Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.17: Erosion and sediment control risk assessment by Turbine Cluster.
Risk of erosion indicators Settlement time indicators Expected Expected Settlement time Turbine Soil particle Risk of SS load sediment Risk of erosion erosion control Settlement from Cluster sizes erosion of from control from soil measures time from Soil underlying underlying existing measures particle size particle sizes geology geology land particle sizes A Silt Medium Higher Standard Medium Finer Lower Standard B Clayey silt Lower Higher Standard Slower Finer Higher Intensive Silt to clayey silt Lower to Medium to Standard to C in parts Higher Standard Finer Lower medium slower intensive
Silt to clayey silt Standard (to Lower to Medium to Higher in D in north Lower Standard Medium intensive in medium slower north north) Sandy silt E Higher Higher in north Intensive Faster Finer in north Lower Standard F Clayey silt Lower Higher Standard Slower Finer Higher Intensive Silty sand to silt Lower in east Standard to Faster in east G Higher in east Finer in west Lower Standard Higher in west intensive Slower in west Key to Higher = Higher = sand Faster = sand rating tertiary Finer = tertiary Higher = > sized particles sized particles the risk mudstone/ mudstone/ 2000 Medium = silt Slower = silty factor siltstone/ siltstone/ t/km2/year sized particles clay sized sandstone sandstone particles
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 234
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.18: Sediment loads from high risk areas.
Construction Construction period Construction period annual Pre-construction Construction period annual Exposed period annual annual sediment load, sediment load, with controls annual sediment sediment load, with controls Works Type earthwork sediment load, no with controls tonnes/year tonnes/year (90% removal load tonnes/year (75% removal area (ha) controls (60% removal with using pond with chemical (tonnes/year1) with standard pond) (tonnes/year) decanting earth bunds) flocculation)2 Internal Road 0.63 7 103 41 26 10 and batters Internal Road 1.42 14 326 131 82 33 and batters Internal Road 0.66 7 135 54 34 13 and batters Internal Road 0.45 5 65 26 16 7 and batters Turbine 0.17 2 66 26 17 7 Platform Excess Fill 3.40 36 493 197 123 49 Area Excess Fill 3.91 41 567 227 142 57 Area Combined 4.03 43 596 238 149 60 works Combined 1.59 16 393 157 No room available for sediment control ponds- Internal Road and works batters within a steep gully adjacent to watercourse
Note: 1. Niwa Sediment Loading. 2. ARC/NIWA Albany Study confirmed 95%+ sediment removal efficiency with careful pond design and addition of a flocculent. It is not known whether flocculation will be effective on the site’s soils at this stage. 3. The works shown in Figures E4, E5 and E6 all only comprised one type of works, and hence a combined total was not required.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 235
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The key erosion and sediment control measures that will be required to avoid, remedy or mitigate potential water quality effects arising during the construction of the CHWF from earthworks activities include:
Appropriate sediment control pond and decanting earth bund designs.
Appropriate culvert design, including inlet and outlet protection.
Chemical treatment in settlement ponds.
Appropriate channel design and erosion protection concepts.
Appropriate stream crossing methodology.
Staging of works to avoid, where practicable, concentration of activities in individual catchments.
Appropriate provision for winter works.
Each of these measures is described in more detail in the Hydrology Effects Assessment provided in Volume 3 (Section 8). All stormwater management measures will be designed in general accordance with the Erosion and Sediment Control guidelines for the Wellington region (GWRC, 2002, reprinted 2006). Erosion and sediment control methods for specific project elements, including large earthworks areas, Internal Roads with steep gradients or in steep topography, Internal Roads adjacent to or crossing small watercourses, Internal Roads crossing large watercourses, Internal Transmission Line and EBoP components, and quarries, are detailed in Section 6.3.1 of this document.
Appropriate erosion and sediment controls, as outlined above and detailed further in Section 6 of this document, will be prepared in advance of construction activities at each earthworks site and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction commencing. Monitoring of the receiving environment (see Section 6.5) will ensure erosion and sediment control practices are operating effectively.
There is also the potential for contaminants from accidental spills or leakages of substances used during construction works to affect surface water quality. Hazardous substances that may be present on Site during construction activities include those associated with vehicle refuelling, maintenance and cleaning, concrete manufacture, chemical treatment of sediment discharges, and waste materials and storage. Key management strategies for these activities are included in the EMP and include:
Vehicle re-fuelling will not be carried out immediately adjacent to watercourses.
Areas used for storing hazardous substances will be lined and bunded. A secure bulk storage facility (or facilities) will be provided close to site offices and/or active construction areas.
Vehicle maintenance and washing will be carried out in bunded areas and water drained from them will be treated prior to connection to the Site’s stormwater drainage systems.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 236
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Covered waste storage bins will be provided.
Waste oils and rubbish will be collected, appropriately stored and removed Off-site to an appropriately licensed facility.
A Spill Response Plan will be implemented to address any accidental spills of hazardous substances outside the secure storage areas.
With these management measures in place, the effects on surface water quality due to contamination will be minor.
Overall, with appropriate assessment, design, controls, site management and monitoring, as outlined in this document, effects on surface water quality will be, at most, no more than minor.
Operational Effects
The potential effect on surface water quality associated with the operation of the CHWF is from the diversion of runoff from existing areas of infiltration and flow paths due to the creation of new impervious surfaces (e.g. Internal Roads and Turbine Foundations).
Once earthworks areas are appropriately stabilised and distributed runoff patterns (i.e. dispersed small discharges) are in place, these effects are expected to be minor in the long-term. However, stabilisation of earthworks may not be possible where erosive potential is high. In such cases, the drainage works (channels, diversions, and stormwater treatment ponds) will need to be retained in the long-term and on-going maintenance works will be required. This will ensure that no more than minor effects on surface water quality occur during the operation of the CHWF.
Surface Water Abstraction Effects
Construction Effects
The water abstraction locations and volume of water abstraction required during construction is outlined in Section 4.3.8 of this document. By way of summary, an average volume of 300 m3 per day (3.5 L/s), and a peak requirement of 550 m3 per day is required. To service these requirements, water will be taken from four locations as shown in Figure B13 of Appendix B (Volume 2). Three abstraction points are located within the Tiraumea Catchment in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region, as follows:
Te Hoe Stream near Alfredton (WS1);
Tiraumea Stream on Haunui Road near Tiraumea (WS3); and
Tiraumea River just downstream of the confluence with the Ihuraua River (WSB).
The fourth water abstraction (WS5) is located within the Tinui River in the vicinity of the Taipo quarry in the GWRC Region.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 237
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
To complement these takes, off-line storage ponds will be constructed near the take sites to buffer the peak demand (see Figures B10 to B13 of Appendix B, Volume 2).
The One Plan includes a minimum flow requirement at Ngaturi, and a restricted core allocation block, which if complied with will ensure that the effects on the downstream rivers are minor. The One Plan Policy of allowing 10% of flows to be taken as a supplementary allocation for flows above median flow, restricts effects on the higher flows parts of the Flow Duration Curve. As outlined in the resource consent applications and Section 4.3.8 of this document, when river flows are below median flow, Genesis Energy will only abstract water in accordance with this core allocation framework. This includes only abstracting water when the minimum flow at the MWRC flow gauge at Ngaturi exceeds 2.04 m³/s, and such that the total abstraction across all three sites in the MWRC Region does not exceed 531 m³/day (the amount of core allocation available in the catchment).
In addition to complying with the core allocation framework set in the relevant plan, a take regime is proposed which is designed to ensure residual flows are left in each waterbody below the point of take to sustain in-stream values. This take regime is based on informal MWRC guidelines, and is set out in Tables 5.19 and 5.20 below.
Table 5.19: Proposed regime for taking water in the Tiraumea Catchment.
River flow at point of take Abstraction No take at Te Hoe at Q3 and Tiraumea at Haunui Rd < 95 % MALF Take up to 3.5L/s at Tiraumea at Ihuraua confluence <(95% MALF + 3.5 L/s) Variable up to 3.5 L/s < 110% Median Flow 3.5 L/s 10% of median flow (up to a maximum of 24 L/s at the > 110% Median Flow Tiraumea River site, and 12 L/s at all other sites).
Table 5.20: Proposed regime for taking water in the Tinui Catchment.
River flow at point of take Abstraction < 95 % MALF No take <(95% MALF + 3.5 L/s) Variable up to 3.5 L/s < 110% Median Flow 3.5 L/s > 110% Median Flow 10% of median flow (up to a maximum of 10.3 L/s).
A comprehensive assessment of the proposed construction water takes on the hydrology of each affected water body has been undertaken by PDP (2011c).
This included detailed modelling of the impact of the water abstraction from the proposed water abstraction sites in the MWRC Region over a period of 10 years using synthetic flows developed by MWRC for the period 2000 – 2010, and for a period of 30 years for the proposed Tinui River abstraction site in the GARC Region. This includes a critical dry period that occurred in the summer of 2007/08, as outlined in Section 3.3.5. The results of the hydrological assessment are presented as flow duration
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 238
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects curves for each site, as well as flow versus date record for the critical dry period in the summer of 2007/2008.
Effects on flows and flow variability are assessed at the following stages of the flow duration curve:
Large floods (in the order of mean annual maximum flow) responsible for channel forming and significant sediment transport.
Smaller floods and freshes (in the order of three to six times median flow) which flush fine sediment and nutrients.
Low flows (below MALF) which provide minimum habitat requirements.
The length of time where flows are at or below MALF.
The results of those assessments for each potentially affected water body are set out below.
Te Hoe Stream (WS1)
Effects on Hydrology
The effects of the proposed water abstraction on the hydrology of the Te Hoe Stream is shown on Figure 5.10, and effects on key river flow and abstraction regime values are summarised in Table 5.21.
Figure 5.10: Flow duration curve for Te Hoe Stream showing effect of proposed take on flow frequency.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 239
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.21: Effects of the proposed water abstraction on key values of Te Hoe Stream.
Percentage of Days within Flow Take Flow Rate Stream Flow Band Band over Modelling Period (L/s) Original Flow Residual Flow Less than 95% of MALF 4.9% 4.9% 0.0 (5.3 L/s) Less than MALF (5.6 L/s) 4.9% 11.7% Variable up to 0.3 Less than (95% of MALF + 10.8% 16.3% 0.3 to 3.5 3.5 L/s) (8.8 L/s) Less than 110% Median 50.0% 50.4% 3.5 Flow (132 L/s) Above 110% of Median 51.4% 52.5% 12 Flow (132 L/s)
As shown in Figure 5.10, the modelling shows the greatest difference between the original flow and the residual flow will occur when the river flow rate is at 9.1 L/s, at which time 39% of the river flow is abstracted under the proposed regime. The change in channel forming flows and freshes flows (three to six times the median flow) is about 2% or less. Using the more restrictive definition of freshes (three to six times MALF) gives a reduction in the flow size at this duration of about 15 to 20%.
The modelling of the 2007/2008 dry period showed that during that time, the proposed water abstraction would have caused no additional periods of low flows. The main effects would have been restricted to an additional 31 days during the period 1 November 2007 – 31 April 2008 when the flow would have been at (but not below) 95% of MALF instead of up to 3.5 L/s higher. The flow record shows a period of 18 days in December 2007 where flow would have been at 95% MALF (5.1 L/s) instead of about 8 L/s followed by two events greater than median flow. Two natural low flow periods less than MALF of 4 to 5 weeks then occurred – a small amount of flow would have been taken during the second period which removed two very minor peaks of less than 10 L/s. Overall the regime reduced flow available during the early part of summer for a period of about 18 days, but had limited effect during later summer, as flow was less than 95% MALF.
A tributary of about 3 - 4 km2 catchment supplements flow into the stream about 2.5 km below the take point and will increase flow variability and limit the length of stream affected by the take.
Effects on Other Water Users
Five consented surface water takes were identified in the Te Hoe Stream Catchment of the proposed take site. However, four of those are located on tributaries to the main channel and therefore abstraction from the proposed site will not have any effect on the flow regime at these locations.
The one consented take on the main channel is approximately 25 km downstream of the proposed take site, and below the confluence of the Te Hoe Stream with the Ihuraua River and Tiraumea River. Due to the distance involved and the number of additional rivers and tributaries that join between the two sites, it is considered unlikely that the proposed take will have any effect on the consented take.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 240
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
There may be unidentified takes of up to 15 m3/day per property or for stock watering (permitted activity limit) and to the extent that such takes exist for the temporary construction period during which the CHWF will take water, there could be a reduced amount of flow available for these uses while the water abstraction is in operation.
One property is located downstream of the water abstraction site, before a tributary of approximately 3 - 4 km2 joins the stream. A take for one property of 15 m3/day is equivalent to 0.2 L/s, and as such is well within the minimum residual flow of 95% MALF (or 5.3L/s). Downstream of the tributary joining the Te Hoe Stream (and other tributaries further downstream), the effect of the take on other water users is expected to reduce. Consultation is proposed to identify any specific permitted activity uses or stock watering taking place immediately downstream of the take to confirm this.
Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Road (WS3)
Effects on Hydrology
The effects of the proposed water abstraction is shown on Figure 5.11, and effects on key river flow and abstraction regime values are summarised in Table 5.22.
Figure 5.11: Flow duration curve for the Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Rd showing effect of proposed take on flow frequency.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 241
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.22: Effects of the proposed take on key values of Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Rd.
Percentage of Days within Flow Take Flow Rate Stream Flow Band Band over Modelling Period (L/s) Original Flow Residual Flow Less than 95% of MALF 4.2% 4.8% 0.0 (45.5 L/s) Less than MALF (47.9 L/s) 4.7% 5.4% Variable up to 2.4 Less than (95% of MALF + 4.9% 5.7% 2.4 to 3.5 3.5 L/s) (49 L/s) Less than 110% of Median 50.0% 50.2% 3.5 Flow (287 L/s) Greater than 110% of 52.7% 53.8% 12 Median Flow (287 L/s)
As shown in Figure 5.12, the proposed water abstraction will have minimal effects on the flow frequency for Tiraumea Stream at Haunui Road, with the main discernable effect being a minor increase (less than 1%) of the period when flows are at lower levels. With respect to an instantaneous difference, the largest difference between the original flow and the residual flow occurs when the river flow rate is at 49 L/s where 7% of the river flow is abstracted under the proposed regime. The modelling also showed the reduction in flow due to abstraction over the critical dry period to be minimal.
Effects on Other Water Users
This proposed water abstraction site is located in the same catchment as the Te Hoe Stream, however it is on a different river branch. The abstraction site is located approximately 30 km upstream of the one consented take site on the main channel and therefore is unlikely to have any effect on this consented take.
Tiraumea River at Confluence with Ihuraua (WSB)
Effects on Hydrology
The effect of the proposed water abstraction is shown on Figure 5.12, and effects on key river flow and abstraction regime values are summarised in Table 5.23.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 242
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 5.12: Flow duration curve for the Tiraumea River at its confluence with Ihuraua showing effect of proposed take on flow frequency.
Due to the large flow of the Tiraumea River at its confluence with Ihuraua relative to the proposed abstraction volumes, as shown in Figure 5.13 and Table 5.23, the proposed take for back-up supply had no discernable effect on the flow regime over the modelling period.
Table 5.23: Effects of the proposed take on key values of Tiraumea River at its confluence with Ihuraua.
Percentage of Days within Flow Take Flow Rate Stream Flow Band Band over Modelling Period (L/s) Original Flow Residual Flow Less than 95% of MALF 4.2% 4.2% 0.0 (253 L/s) Less than MALF (266 L/s) 4.7% 4.7% Variable up to 0.3 Less than (95% of MALF + 4.3% 4.3% 0.3 to 3.5 3.5 L/s) (256 L/s) Less than Median Flow 50.0% 50.0% 3.5 (1448 L/s) Less than 110% of Median 52.7% 52.7% 12 Flow (1593 L/s)
To retain additional security of supply it is proposed to allow for the potential of taking water from the back-up take when flow is less than MALF at the take point up to 3.5 L/s. While not modelled, this flow is a small proportion of the flow in the River and the potential effects would be managed by ceasing to take if the flow at Ngaturi dropped below the core allocation limit or amending the take regime if adverse effects in the immediate downstream environment were identified by monitoring.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 243
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Effects on Other Water Users
The proposed site is approximately 15 km upstream of the one consented take on the main channel in this catchment, and therefore it is considered unlikely to have any effect on this consented take.
There may be takes of up to permitted activity limits of 15 m3/day per property or for stock watering. However, the proposed take is a small proportion of the MALF (about 1.3%) and is for a temporary duration, therefore effects on those takes would be no more than minor.
Tinui River at Taipo (WS5)
Effects on Hydrology
The effect of the proposed water abstraction is shown on Figure 5.13, and the effects on key river flow and abstraction regime values are summarised in Table 5.24.
Figure 5.13: Flow duration curve for the Tinui River at Taipo showing the effect of proposed take on flow frequency.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 244
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.24: Effects of the proposed take on key values of the Tinui River at Taipo.
Percentage of Days within Flow Take Flow Rate Stream Flow Band Band over Modelling Period (L/s) Original Flow Residual Flow Less than 95% MALF Tinui (2.8 11% 11% 0.0 L/s) Less than MALF Tinui (3.6 L/s) 11.5% 17.0% Variable up to 0.6 Less than (95% MALF Tinui + 16.8% 19.9% 0.6 to 3.5 3.5 L/s)( 6.3 L/s) Less than 110% Median Flow 50.0% 50.6% 3.5 (114 L/s) Greater than 110% of Median 51.6% 52.8% 10.3 Flow (114 L/s)
As shown in Figure 5.13, the proposed water abstraction will have minimal effects on the flow frequency for Tinui River at Taipo, with the main discernable effect being a decrease in the frequency of flows between 2.8 L/s and 6.3 L/s. The change in flows at channel forming stage (2 year ARI approx) and freshes flows (3 to 6 times the median flow) is about 2% or less. Using the more restrictive definition of freshes (3 to 6 times MALF) gives a reduction in the flow size at this duration of about 20%. The proposed take would not change the frequency of flows being less than 95% of MALF. With respect to an instantaneous difference, the largest difference between the original flow and the residual flow occurs when the river flow rate is at 6.3 L/s, where 54% of the river flow is abstracted under the proposed regime.
During the 2007/08 dry period, there were no additional periods of low flows caused by the proposed water abstraction (as no flow was taken below the MALF) and there were an additional 24 days during the period 1 Nov 2007 to 30 April 2008 when the flow would have been at 95% MALF instead of up to 3.5 L/s higher. The 2007/2008 flow record shows that there would have been a reduction in in-stream flow during the early part of summer but this occurs while flows are well above MALF. The regime does would not have extended low flow periods during the rest of the summer as flows were generally less than 95% MALF.
A tributary of about 3 – 4 km2 catchment supplements flow into the stream at Tui Glen, about 3.5 km below the take point. Smaller tributaries feed additional flow into the stream about every 0.5 to 1km above and below this point. These additional flows will increase flow variability and reduce potential downstream effects.
Effects on Other Water Users
Two consented surface water takes were identified in the catchment of the proposed take site, however, both of those are located above the proposed take site and therefore abstraction from the proposed site will not have any effect on the flow regime at these locations.
There may be unidentified takes of up to permitted activity limits of 20 m3/day per property or for stock watering, and to the extent that such takes exist for the temporary construction period during which the CHWF will take water there could be a reduced amount of flow available for these uses.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 245
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
There are four properties located downstream of the water abstraction site, before a tributary of approximately 3 - 4 km2 joins the stream. A take of 80 m3/day (four properties at 20 m3/day) is equivalent to 0.9 L/s and as such is within the minimum residual flow (95% MALF or 2.8L/s). Downstream of the tributary joining the Tinui River (and other tributaries further downstream) the effect of the take on other water users is expected to reduce. Consultation is proposed to identify any specific permitted activity uses or stock watering taking place immediately downstream of the take.
Operational Effects
No surface water takes are proposed during the operation of the CHWF.
Potential Effects on Aquatic Ecology
Baseline surveys of the watercourses in the vicinity of the CHWF Site have been undertaken by Ryder Consulting (2011) (see Section 3.3.5 and the Aquatic Ecology Effects Assessment (Volume 4, Section 2) of this document). By way of summary, no notable aquatic values were identified as being present in streams within and downstream of the CHWF Site aside from the presence of two threatened species (freshwater crayfish and longfin eel). This reflects the predominantly agricultural land use in the CHWF Site, the general lack of riparian protection, and the steep and erosion-prone, soft-sedimentary soils overlaying the Site.
Potential effects on aquatic ecology values during the construction and operation of the CHWF are from:
Decrease in water quality by erosion and sedimentation from On-site and Off-site earthworks;
Accidental discharge of contaminants;
Changes in the flow regime caused by the abstraction of water;
Effects on fish passage; and
Introduction of pest species.
On-site Earthworks and Watercourse Crossings
On-site earthwork requirements for the CHWF are detailed in Section 4.4.4 of this document, and include Internal Roads, Road Pavements, Turbine Foundations, Turbine Platforms, Lay-bys, Central Laydown Area(s), Concrete Batching Plants, Substation(s), O&M facilities and other service areas, and EBoP cable trenching. Earthworks associated with the installation of this infrastructure could expose surfaces to erosion, mobilising sediments and leading to increased sediment run-off to watercourses. Works associated with Turbine construction will be minimised somewhat by the location of Turbines mostly on high points along ridgelines and spurs, and these are therefore likely to be some distance from most watercourses.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 246
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The amount and duration of earthworks, and the potential effects, will vary within each catchment. For example, the Tauweru River catchment originates in the middle of the CHWF Site and drains through the wind farm to the southwest, with parts of its catchment included in four Turbine Clusters C, D, E, and G. Existing aquatic communities indicate ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ quality habitat in parts of this catchment, especially under winter conditions, although this generally decreases to ‘fair’ to ‘poor’ quality habitat during summer low flow conditions. Potential effects of construction on watercourses in this catchment include those associated with On-site watercourse crossings and Turbine Foundation construction. In contrast, there are no watercourse crossings within the Mataikona River catchment and only a small area of the catchment headwaters contained within the CHWF Site of Cluster B. Potential effects of construction on watercourses in this catchment are therefore limited to the risk of sediment run-off from construction works on ridgelines that fall within the catchment.
Internal Road alignments generally follow ridgelines and therefore avoid watercourses however, in places, watercourse crossings will be necessary. Internal Road construction, particularly the excavation or addition of fill, could expose surfaces to erosion, mobilising sediments and leading to increased sediment run-off to watercourses (especially during periods of heavy rainfall).
A total of 18 watercourse crossings have been identified on Internal Roads for Turbine and Substation access. It is estimated that a total length of 570 m of culvert could be required for Turbine and Substation access. Only 140 m of this culvert length is applicable to catchments of greater than 200 ha in size. Six culverts with total length 155 m are existing culverts or ford crossings that need replaced and six culverts with total length 415 m are new culverts, including one 270 m long culvert at the Main Substation Option 1 (discussed below).
A total of 16 watercourse crossings have also been identified on to provide access to Internal Transmission Line Towers. Access for Internal Transmission Line Tower maintenance requires a 3 m road width (plus 1 m for drainage and crossings) and will be used infrequently. The majority of the crossings are located on existing roads or farm track so have some form of crossing already, upgrades may be required though to improve access. The catchment area above most of the proposed water crossings is small (<200 ha) so culvert crossings are likely to be adequate, however six crossings have larger upstream catchments and bridge crossings may therefore be required here. It is estimated that a total length of 75 m of new culvert could be required for access to the Internal Transmission Line towers, giving a total culvert length for the Site of 645 m.
Existing aquatic values in watercourses near the Main and Satellite Substation sites have been assessed. Substation construction effects will be higher at the location of Main Substation Option 1 than at Option 2, with the installation of an approximately 270 m long culvert in one watercourse and modifications to the bank profile of a second watercourse required at the site. The watercourses at the site of Main Substation Option 1 have diverse macroinvertebrate communities indicative of ‘good’ to ‘fair’ quality habitat. The presence of native riparian vegetation in the area of Main Substation Option 1 contributes to the quality of the aquatic habitat and its removal during substation construction will therefore compromise this. The watercourse in the vicinity of Main Substation Option 2 also has a diverse macroinvertebrate community, however, the potential for adverse effects is smaller, with only an Internal Road crossing required. Fish community values are not high at either site, as the waterfall at the site of Option 1 limits fish access somewhat and the watercourses at both sites
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 247
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects have minimal flow at times. If Main Substation Option 1 is chosen, additional mitigation will be required to minimise adverse effects of culvert installation and bank modification.
Watercourses within the CHWF already experience naturally high sediment levels due to agricultural land use, and the steep and erosion prone, soft-sedimentary land type. Existing aquatic communities are therefore expected to be somewhat resilient to sediment influx. Mitigation is, however, required to ensure that potential increases in sediment run-off as a result of CWHF construction works do not further degrade habitat and adversely affect aquatic communities. The installation of new culverts at watercourse crossings may also result in the loss of some natural in-stream habitat and potentially the direct removal of some macroinvertebrates and fish during excavation. Appropriate design of crossings will be undertaken (as detailed in the COMR attached as Appendix A (Volume 2), to ensure they do not create a barrier to fish movement where suitable habitat is present upstream. In some cases, this could be an improvement over the existing situation, as there are several existing culverts that currently limit fish passage.
Without appropriate mitigation, construction earthworks could affect watercourses within and possibly downstream of the works area by increasing sediment inputs, and through improper road crossing design preventing fish passage. Existing aquatic communities are generally dominated by taxa that are tolerant of a range of conditions, being characteristic of the existing modified environment. These communities are less likely to be effected by sediment inputs than communities comprised of sensitive taxa, despite this further degradation of the aquatic environment as a result of the earthworks associated with CWHF construction will be minimised.
The placement of Excess Fill in gullies with perennial watercourses will be avoided unless it can be demonstrated that downstream aquatic habitats will not be adversely effected. Surface discharges from Excess Fill Areas will be diverted beneath the fill to discharge at a suitable downslope location. This will be achieved by installing under- drainage beneath the Excess Fill Areas where appropriate.
A stormwater system will be constructed to manage surface water run-off from Internal Roads, Turbines and other structures associated with the CHWF (as detailed further in the Hydrology Effects Assessment provided in Volume 3 (Section 8) to this document. A well-designed stormwater management system will reduce the potential for sediment run-off to watercourses during high rainfall events.
Off-site Earthworks and Watercourse Crossings
Upgrades to External Roads, including bridges, are also required to allow construction equipment to be brought to the CHWF Site. Watercourses along the route may be affected by these upgrades. Twenty-six bridges have been identified as requiring works along the route from Alfredton to the Site. The majority of these bridges only require ‘strengthening’ or lesser works, however the associated earthworks may have the potential to increase sediment inputs to watercourses, particularly where there are multiple bridges across the same watercourse that require upgrading (e.g. Te Hoe Stream) and therefore cumulative effects are possible. Aquatic values in the immediate area of the bridges are generally not high due to the modified nature of the environment, however appropriate sediment and erosion control measures will be undertaken to minimise sediment inputs and ensure that aquatic communities
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 248
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects downstream are not affected. The maintenance of fish passage will be provide where any culverts are to be installed where suitable habitat is present upstream, however at this stage only bridges have been identified for upgrade.
Discharge of Contaminants
Construction machinery, ablution facilities for personnel, pavement binder compounds and discharges from Concrete Batching Plants can result in accidental spills or leakages of contaminants (e.g. diesel, lubricants and sewage effluent) entering watercourses, with the potential to harm aquatic life. A SEMP will be developed to describe methods to minimise the risk of potential contaminants from machinery, Concrete Batching Plants, Contractor Compounds, and wastewater entering watercourses (see Section 6 of this document).
Runoff from Concrete Batching Plants will be isolated and captured, and pass through buffers strips before discharging to land. Waste from ablution facilities will be removed from the Site or treated using an appropriate method, to ensure that untreated wastewater does enter watercourses. Through the development and implementation of an appropriate SEMP, the risk of accidental contaminant spills will be managed appropriately, remedied and mitigated, and any resulting effects on aquatic communities, will be minimised.
Water Abstraction During Construction
Potential adverse effects of water extraction on aquatic communities include short-term construction effects (e.g. increased sediment inputs), downstream flow reductions (e.g. reduced habitat, increased water temperatures), restricted passage if in-stream structures are required, and if appropriate intake screening is not installed, fish may also be drawn into intakes. Water abstraction will only occur during the construction phase of the CHWF so potential adverse effects will be relatively short-term in some catchments.
As outlined in the resource consent applications and Section 4.3.8 of this document, when river flows are below median flow, Genesis Energy will only abstract water in accordance with the relevant core allocation framework applicable to the watercourse to protect aquatic ecosystem values.
Water intakes will be screened to prevent fish being drawn in, and if necessary, provision for fish passage will be made at any in-stream structures.
Effects on Fish Passage
The installation of new culverts at watercourse crossings may also result in the loss of some natural in-stream habitat and potentially the direct removal of some macroinvertebrates and fish during excavation. As outlined in the COMR (Appendix A, Volume 2), culvert inverts will be installed so they are proud of the streambed to allow fish passage. In some cases, this will be an improvement over the existing situation as several culverts currently limit fish passage.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 249
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Introduction of Pest Species
Machinery brought to the Site may introduce pest species (such as aquatic weeds like Didymosphenia geminata if machinery is from the South Island). All machinery bought onto the Site will be cleaned to minimise the risk of introducing weed species.
Operational Effects
No potential adverse effects on surface waters associated with on-going operation of the CHWF are expected. Occasional maintenance may be required of Internal Roads and Turbines, however these activities are unlikely to affect surface waters within or downstream of the CHWF Site, if appropriate stormwater and wastewater management systems are installed and maintenance guidelines are followed, as outlined in the COMR provided in Appendix A (Volume 2).
Contaminants (e.g. diesel, lubricants) stored On-site will be bunded, and refuelling of machinery will take place away from watercourses.
Flood Hazard
Most of the infrastructure associated with the CHWF will be located on elevated land significantly above rivers and flood plains, and is therefore not expected to be at risk from flooding. Some Internal Roads and permanent structures will be located adjacent to streams. Potential flood risk scenarios include:
Structures such as culverts or ponds being hydraulically unable to cope with extreme hydrological events and being overtopped by floodwaters leading to unplanned discharges.
Locating infrastructure within flood plains or overland flow paths so that existing flood levels are exacerbated, or a building or key plant is flooded.
As outlined in Section 4.3.4, culverts will be designed to manage realistic storm recurrences to ensure water is appropriately managed. A key factor considered in identifying potential sites for buildings such as the Main and Satellite Substations, and the Switching Station, was the potential for flood risk. All buildings will be located away from potential flood areas, minimising potential effects of flooding.
Operational Effects
The potential effects on surface water flooding associated with the operation of the CHWF are:
Diversion of runoff from existing areas of infiltration and flow paths due to the creation of new impervious surfaces (e.g. Internal Roads and Turbine Foundations).
An increase in quick-flow runoff from impervious surfaces.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 250
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Once earthworks areas are appropriately stabilised and distributed runoff patterns (i.e. dispersed small discharges) are in place, these effects are expected to be minor in the long-term. However, stabilisation of earthworks may not be possible where erosive potential is high. In such cases, the drainage works (channels, diversions, and stormwater treatment ponds) will need to be retained in the long-term and on-going maintenance works will be required. This will ensure that there are no more than minor effects on surface water flooding during the operation of the CHWF.
5.6.3 Groundwater Effects The potential effects on groundwater quality and distribution during the construction and operation of the CHWF have been comprehensively assessed by PDP (2011(a)). The Groundwater Effects Assessment (PDP, 2011(a)) is provided in Volume 4 (Section 1) of this document. This section of the AEE provides an overview of the assessment methodology used to assess the potential groundwater effects, outlines the potential effects on groundwater and proposes methods to manage these effects.
The groundwater ‘Study Area’ comprises the main areas of land that will be disturbed by construction earthworks and covered by impervious surfaces as part of the CHWF. It also includes any adjacent downhill slopes extending to the nearest stream or gully bottom. A larger area comprising stream catchments that include the Study Area was considered for the stream baseflow assessment, and a second larger area (encompassing the area within 5 km of the Turbine Corridor) was investigated for the presence of existing abstraction bores consistent with best practice for assessing potential groundwater effects on other users.
No bores are located within 5 km of the Turbine Corridor in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region, while four bores are located in the Greater Wellington Region, the closest of which is 2 km from the Turbine Corridor. The main project components within the Study Area that could potentially affect groundwater are the Internal Roads, Turbine Platforms, EBoP and Excess Fill Areas. In order to be conservative, the Large Turbine Layout was used in this assessment, since it requires the largest amount of ground disturbance and impervious area formation.
Hydrogeological principles were applied to assess the potential for any effects on groundwater associated with the CHWF.
Construction Effects
Potential effects on groundwater associated with the construction of the CHWF include:
Change in recharge to groundwater in earthworks areas.
Change in groundwater quality due to earthworks and introduced contaminants.
Pumping of groundwater during construction.
Each of these issues is discussed further below.
It should be noted that the principal areas of construction earthworks are typically at or near the surface, and are generally above the groundwater table.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 251
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Reduced Recharge to Groundwater
Soil compaction for Internal Roads and fine sediment associated with ground disturbance and Excess Fill Areas can constrict naturally occurring joints/pathways in the underlying soil/rock, and this could prevent recharge of groundwater after rainfall events. For the purposes of assessment, PDP (2011(a)) conservatively assumed that no recharge to groundwater occurs in the areas disturbed by earthworks, and that this runoff is lost from the groundwater system (i.e. it does not recharge groundwater elsewhere downslope). On this basis, the small amount of rainfall that previously recharged groundwater in areas where soil is compacted will become runoff.
Groundwater components that could be affected by reduced recharge include:
Stream baseflow – stream baseflow will reduce by approximately the ratio of earthworks area (“EA”) to stream catchment area (“SCA”) upstream of where the baseflow is being assessed (EA:SCA ratio). The EA:SCA ratio was conservatively calculated for nine representative stream catchments within the CHWF. The EA included Turbine Foundations, Turbine Platforms, Internal Roads, Excess Fill Areas and substations (including Substation access tracks). The EA:SCA ratios ranged from 1 to 4%, indicating that stream baseflow reductions of between 1 and 4% could be expected. This baseflow reduction is within the natural variation in stream baseflow and is therefore determined to be a no more than minor effect.
Springs and seepage flow – discharges to the surface via springs and seepages are typically fed by shallow groundwater. Many seepages occur within the CHWF Site over a range of slope positions and at a variety of locations. Spring and seepage flows will reduce by approximately the ratio of EA to groundwater catchment area for the particular spring or seepage. Flow reduction at particular springs and seepages can therefore be expected to vary depending on the extent of earthworks within a particular groundwater catchment area. Where the extent of earthworks is small in relation to the catchment, only a negligible reduction is expected. This is expected to apply to springs and seepages at mid-lower slope locations which are remote from earthworks and have large catchment areas (see Figure 5.14). For seepages in upper slope locations where earthworks cover a larger proportion of the catchment much larger flow reductions could occur.
Wetland areas – four of the five wetland areas identified within the Site by Wildand Consultants (2011) are located in predominantly bush-clad catchments. The remaining wetland is located behind a farm dam in a minor gully. Surface water, rather than groundwater recharge, is considered to be the predominant water source for these wetlands. In addition, earthworks areas will occupy <10% of the bush-clad wetland catchments and any effect would be diluted by the small proportion of the catchment affected. Reduced groundwater recharge is expected to have a no more than minor effect on wetland water levels.
Farm dams/ponds – surface runoff is the main contributor of water to these ponds. For this reason, reduced recharge to groundwater due to earthworks in the pond catchment will only have a very minor effect on pond levels. Earthworks may increase water flow into the ponds due to the additional runoff component from the earthworks area.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 252
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 5.14: Schematic cross-section – reduced flow at mid-slope features.
Groundwater Quality Effects
Pervasive open joints extending from the near-surface down to the groundwater table allow migration of sediment entrained recharge water. This sediment is naturally filtered (trapped) by flow through joint systems that are not persistently open. In locations with open joints, recharge that contains entrained sediment could potentially affect down-gradient groundwater quality (for example, at springs or as stream baseflow). The rock mass joints in the CHWF area are unlikely to be sufficiently and persistently open to facilitate transport of sediment from surface to groundwater, and as a result, no significant sediment-related effects on groundwater quality during construction are expected.
There is also the potential for contaminants from accidental spills or leaks of substances used during construction works to affect groundwater quality. The potential for this to occur is greater for areas underlain by permeable rock types (e.g. containing open joints). The rock types in the project area have low permeability, and the risk of accidental spills or leaks which might adversely affect groundwater quality will be reduced by lining and bunding areas where spills might occur, and the implementation of a Spill Response Plan to address any accidental spills of substances outside the secure storage areas. With these mitigation measures in place the effects on groundwater quality due to contamination will be, at most, no more than minor.
Surface discharges from seepages and any springs that are covered by construction earthworks (for example, Excess Fill Areas) will be diverted beneath the Excess Fill to discharge at a suitable downslope location. This will be achieved by installing under- drainage beneath the fill areas where appropriate. The diversion of any surface discharge under the fill will have a no more than minor effect on groundwater.
Pumping of Groundwater
Some pumping of groundwater may be required from the earthworks areas (for example Turbine Foundations). Any such groundwater is likely to be perched given
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 253
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects that the excavations are relatively shallow and are in elevated locations. Some pumping of groundwater may also be required at any aggregate quarries/borrow pits that are established in the Study Area.
No groundwater supply bores are planned as part of the CHWF.
Effects on Existing Groundwater Bore Users
There are no permitted bores or consented groundwater takes within 2 km of the main earthworks areas for the project and only four users within 5 km. No effects relating to the CHWF are anticipated for the existing groundwater bore users because of the separation distance between the CHWF activities and the existing bores.
Operational Effects
The potential effect on groundwater associated with the operation of the CHWF is a localised reduction in recharge to groundwater in areas of:
Construction earthworks not covered by new impervious surface; and
New impervious surface for operations infrastructure such as sealed roads, Turbine foundations and operations buildings.
The area where recharge will be reduced during operation of the CHWF will be similar to that for construction because the additional operational areas generally coincide with areas disturbed during construction.
Key consequences of reduced groundwater recharge are reduced stream baseflow and reduced flow at some seepages. Reduced recharge to groundwater during the operational period will have a no more than minor effect on stream baseflow and seepages with flow changes will be a small proportion of the numerous seepages that form part of the groundwater resources.
5.6.4 Summary Potential effects on surface water during the construction and operation of the CHWF include effects on water quality though increased erosion and sedimentation from earthwork activities, changes to surface water hydrology from water abstraction, effects on aquatic ecology due to changes in water quality and flow regimes, and effects on flood risk from new impervious structures in the catchment.
Appropriate erosion and sediment controls will be prepared in advance of construction activities at each earthworks site and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction commencing. Monitoring of the receiving environment will ensure erosion and sediment control practices are operating effectively. Overall, with appropriate assessment, design, controls, site management and monitoring, as outlined in this document, effects on surface water quality will be, at most, no more than minor.
Proposed temporary water abstractions during construction will comply with the allocation framework set out in the relevant planning documents, and minimum and residual flows are proposed for each water abstraction site to ensure flow regimes are
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 254
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects maintained at a sufficient level to sustain in-stream ecological values and to minimise effects on other water users.
The CHWF Site has no special features with respect to water quality and aquatic communities, aside from the relatively widespread presence of freshwater crayfish and longfin eel. The Proposed WRPS identifies that the Tauweru, Whareama, and Mataikona Rivers meet one or more criteria relating to rivers with significant indigenous ecosystems. However, these features primarily relate to river reaches outside the CHWF Site. The lack of special features is not unexpected, given the predominant agricultural land use, lack of riparian protection, and the steep and erosion-prone, soft- sedimentary land type, which result in high levels of sediment run-off. Through the development and implementation of an appropriate CEMP and associated plans, effects on aquatic communities as a result of wind farm construction will be minor.
The potential effect on surface water during the operation of the CHWF is flooding from the diversion of runoff from new impervious surfaces such as Internal Roads and Turbine Foundations, and an increase in quick-flow runoff from impervious surfaces. Once earthworks areas are appropriately stabilised and distributed runoff patterns (i.e. dispersed small discharges) are in place, the effects on surface water flooding are predicted to be minor in the long-term.
Potential groundwater effects associated with the construction of the CHWF are reduced recharge, groundwater quality effects through sediment entrainment and contamination from accidental spills or leaks of substances, pumping of groundwater from excavations, and effects on existing groundwater users. These potential effects have been assessed to be no more than minor.
The potential effect on groundwater associated with the operation of the CHWF is a localised reduction in recharge to groundwater in areas of construction earthworks not covered by new impervious surface and new impervious surface for operations infrastructure such as sealed roads, Turbine foundations and operations buildings. The area where recharge will be reduced during operation of the CHWF will be similar to that for construction. Effects-related monitoring and mitigation include safe storage of hazardous substances and a Spill Response Plan. Overall, the construction and operation of the CHWF will have a no more than minor effect on the groundwater resource.
5.7 Ecological Effects 5.7.1 Introduction CHWF is located in a pastoral farming setting. Although the On-site Construction footprint comprises overwhelmingly exotic pasture or plantation forestry of low ecological value, remnant ts of indigenous vegetation are scattered across the Site as consistent with most farming districts.
Potential construction effects of the CHWF include the loss of habitat for birds, bats, lizards, and invertebrates through vegetation clearance; and the introduction of weed species. The creation of Internal Roads could also result in easier access for domestic stock into existing indigenous vegetation, and the roading network could, potentially, enhance the movement of pest animals throughout the Site.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 255
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Potential operational effects of the CHWF include collision with Turbine blades by birds and long-tailed bats. Indigenous birds recorded at the Site, that are predicted to be at risk of collision include Australasian harrier, southern black-backed gull, black shag, little shag, and little black shag, although very few little shag and little black shag are present. Kereru, tui, and paradise shelduck may also be at risk.
5.7.2 Ecological Vegetation Values Determination of ecological values took into account the composition, relative age and stage of successional development, and the relative rarity of each vegetation type or habitat, and whether the vegetation or habitat type can be re-created, how easy it is to do so, and how long it would take to re-create it, in relative terms.
The classifications applied to each of the vegetation and habitat types at the Site are set out in Table 5.25 and the process used is described below in more detail.
Table 5.25: Vegetation and habitat classifications applied at the CHWF Site.
Classification Description Legal Constraint Legally Protected natural areas, including QEII Open Space Covenants and land administered by DOC. Statutory Vegetation types of High ecological value that may trigger provisions in Regional Constraint Plans (i.e. Horizons One Plan), or areas that have been specifically identified in District Plans. RAPs within the Tararua District have been mapped and scheduled as significant habitats in the District Plan. High Ecological Mature indigenous forest and treeland has been classified as having a ‘High’ Value ecological value because it will take many decades, or longer, to re-create similar habitat. Re-creation of scrub, with a closed canopy, will take longer than the re-creation of open shrubland, although both types can be restored relatively easily and rapidly (i.e. within 5 - 10 years). Waterways with riparian indigenous vegetation have been classified as having a ‘High’ value as they are somewhat fragile ecosystems and adverse effects can also have effects downstream. Adverse effects (e.g. clearance of kanuka-dominant or broadleaved forest) require a significant level of mitigation. Moderate Early successional vegetation types dominated by manuka and/or kanuka Ecological Value (e.g. manuka-kanuka scrub), mixed broadleaved shrubland with pasture, waterways lacking riparian vegetation, and small natural wetlands (no natural wetlands will be affected). Adverse effects (e.g. clearance of manuka- or kanuka-dominant scrub) may occur, but can be mitigated/remedied. Low Ecological Manuka and/or kanuka and/or tauhinu shrubland over pasture, seepages covered Value with pasture and exotic rushes, and small streams (often intermittent) in pasture environments. Clearance or damage to low ecological value areas (e.g. clearance of tauhinu- or manuka-dominant shrubland) may have some adverse effects but effects are easily remedied/ mitigated. Negligible Pasture, exotic shrubland, exotic forest and shelterbelts, constructed stock ponds, Ecological Value buildings, and roads. Development in these areas (e.g. pasture), subject to appropriate controls (e.g. setbacks from waterways, sediment controls) will not result in adverse ecological effects.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 256
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.7.3 Vegetation and Habitat Cover at the CHWF Site Table 5.26 provides a summary of classifications for each vegetation type, and an outline of the CHWF design and management response in relation to each vegetation type.
5.7.4 Potential Vegetation Clearance GIS analysis was used to calculate the potential indigenous vegetation clearance based on the results of the detailed vegetation mapping. Calculation of the potential indigenous vegetation clearance was based on the combination of components that would give rise to the greatest clearance, i.e. the ‘worst case scenario’. It includes all infrastructure components including On-site and Off-site activities plus an allowance for disturbed area around components where earthworks will be undertaken.
The resulting potential indigenous vegetation clearance, based on the classifications assigned for relative ecological value (and legal and statutory constraints), is outlined in Tables 5.27 and 5.28, by vegetation type and relative ecological value in Tables 5.29 and 5.30. Four examples of ecological constraints and values at the CWHF Site are shown in Figures 3.15(i) to 3.15(iv). A full set of figures, including the detailed and broad vegetation type mapping is provided in the Ecological Effects Assessment in Volume 4 (Section 3) to this document.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 257
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.26: Classifications assigned to vegetation and habitat types at the CHWF Site.
Habitat Code Habitat Name Reasons Design and Management Response Legal Constraint - DOC land, QEII Legal constraints Avoid. Statutory Plan Constraint 1.2.1 Podocarp/broadleaved forest27 Avoid or mitigate, to ensure a net indigenous biodiversity 1.2.2 Tawa forest1 gain 1.2.3 Kamahi forest1 Horizons One Plan; High ecological value 2.4 Podocarp treeland1 Avoid or mitigate, to ensure a net indigenous biodiversity gain (subject to further site assessment). High Ecological Value 1.2.4 Mixed broadleaved forest High ecological value. Avoid clearance, mitigation will be required. 1.3 Manuka-kanuka forest High ecological value. Potential to trigger Avoid construction within area (or additional mitigation will constraints in Horizons One Plan for kanuka be required). forest. 2.2 Broadleaved treeland Potential to trigger constraints under Horizons Avoid clearance (or additional mitigation will be required). One Plan; High ecological value. 5.1 Rock outcrops High ecological value - confirmed lizard habitat. Avoid clearance (or lizard relocation required and additional mitigation will be required). 6.1 Natural wetland (Indigenous) Potential to trigger constraints under Horizons Avoid clearance (or additional mitigation will be required). One Plan, and High ecological value. 7.1 Rivers with indigenous riparian vegetation High ecological value. Avoid clearance, mitigation will be required. Moderate Ecological Value 2.3 Manuka-kanuka treeland 3.1 Manuka-kanuka scrub Minimise clearance, mitigation required 3.4 Mixed broadleaved scrub
3.5 Manuka-kanuka scrub mixed broadleaved scrub Moderate ecological value 4.4 Mixed broadleaved shrubs/pasture grass Site rehabilitation, as required. shrubland 4.5 Manuka-kanuka shrubland/mixed Site rehabilitation, as required broadleaved shrubland
27 These types only have a Statutory Constraint classification within the Horizons Manawatu-Wanganui Region. Note: RAPs also have a Statutory Constraint classification, but only within the Tararua District.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 258
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Habitat Code Habitat Name Reasons Design and Management Response 6.2 Natural wetland with some indigenous Not affected species 7.2 Rivers without indigenous vegetation Avoid Low Ecological Value 4.1 Manuka-kanuka/pasture grass shrubland 4.2 Manuka-kanuka shrubland tauhinu/pasture Site rehabilitation, as required grass shrubland Low ecological value 4.3 Tauhinu/pasture grass shrubland 6.3 Lakes and ponds (natural) Avoid Seepage Mitigation required for Excess Fill Areas that cover Potential cumulative adverse effects Stream seepages Negligible Ecological Value 6.4 Stock ponds (artificial) 8.1 Exotic forest/indigenous understory 8.2 Exotic forest or shelter belts 9.1 Gorse-broom scrub Very low ecological value Site rehabilitation, as required 9.2 Gorse-broom/pasture grass shrubland 10.1 Pasture grassland 11.1 Buildings 121 Roads Ecologist Visit Required Prior to Work Commencing 5.2 Road cuttings Very low ecological value Site rehabilitation, as required
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 259
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.27: Ecological classifications of vegetation and habitats associated with potential On-site*** total vegetation clearance and potential indigenous vegetation clearance.
Potential Total Vegetation Potential Indigenous Classification Clearance Vegetation Clearance Area (ha) % Area (ha) % Legal Constraint* 0 0 0 0 Statutory Constraint** 0.95 0.1 0.95 1.5 High Ecological Value 5.89 0.7 1.95 3.1 Moderate Ecological Value 41.98 4.7 41.90 66.3 Low Ecological Value 18.44 2.1 18.39 29.1 Negligible Ecological Value 820.85 92.4 Total 888.11*** 100 63.19 100 * Legally protected (e.g. DOC or QEII). ** Statutory Constraint only applies in the MWRC where clearance of ‘rare’ or ‘at risk’ or ‘threatened’ vegetation is a discretionary activity (0.923 ha off this vegetation is located within MDC and is therefore not a Statutory Constraint. Only 0.027 ha is located within the MWRC. *** Includes vegetation clearance associated with External Road works (c.35 ha) that occur On-site. These works exceed the boundary of the Council road reserve and occur On-site.
Table 5.28: Ecological classifications of vegetation and habitats associated with the potential Off-site total vegetation clearance and potential indigenous vegetation clearance at the CHWF Site.
Potential Total Vegetation Potential Indigenous Classification Clearance Vegetation Clearance Area (ha) % Area (ha) % Legal Constraint* 0 0 0 0 Statutory Constraint** 0.54 1.0 0.54 19.3 High Ecological Value 0.60 1.1 0.17 5.9 Moderate Ecological Value 1.83 3.3 1.77 62.7 Low Ecological Value 0.45 0.8 0.34 12.1 Negligible Ecological Value 51.78 93.8 Total 55.20 100 2.82 100 * Legally protected (e.g. DOC or QEII). ** All of this vegetation is within MDC and GWRC and therefore does not trigger any consent requirements under the One Plan.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 260
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.29: Vegetation and habitat types potentially affected by On-site construction activities for the CHWF.
Potential Total Relative Potential Indigenous Vegetation Ecological Vegetation Type Broad Class Vegetation Clearance Clearance Value Area (ha) % Area (ha) % High Podocarp/broadleaved forest* Forest (indigenous) 0.05 <0.1 0.05 <0.1 Kamahi forest* Forest (indigenous) 0.90 0.1 0.90 1.43 Mixed broadleaved forest Forest (indigenous) 1.24 0.1 1.24 1.96 Manuka-kanuka forest Forest (indigenous) 0.49 <0.1 0.49 0.77 Broadleaved treeland Treeland (indigenous) 0.22 <0.1 0.22 0.36 Rock outcrops** Rock outcrops 3.94 0.4 Rivers with indigenous riparian Waterways <0.01 <0.1 <0.01 <0.1 vegetation Moderate Manuka-kanuka treeland Treeland (indigenous) 0.01 <0.1 0.01 <0.1 Podocarp treeland* Treeland (indigenous) <0.01 <0.1 <0.01 <0.1 Manuka-kanuka scrub Scrub (indigenous) 27.28 3.1 27.28 43.17 Mixed broadleaved scrub Scrub (indigenous) 0.55 <0.1 0.55 0.88 Manuka-kanuka scrub 8 mixed Scrub (indigenous) 13.58 1.5 13.58 21.49 broadleaved scrub Mixed broadleaved Shrubland 0.19 <0.1 0.19 0.30 shrubs/pasture grass shrubland (indigenous) Manuka-kanuka shrubland 8 Shrubland 0.28 <0.1 0.28 0.45 mixed broadleaved shrubland (indigenous) Natural wetland with some - - - - indigenous species Wetland Rivers without indigenous Waterways 0.08 <0.1 vegetation Low Manuka-kanuka/pasture grass Shrubland 18.18 2.0 18.18 28.76 shrubland (indigenous) Manuka-kanuka shrubland 8 Shrubland 0.05 <0.1 0.05 <0.1 tauhinu/pasture grass shrubland (indigenous) Tauhinu/pasture grass Shrubland 0.16 <0.1 0.16 0.26 shrubland (indigenous) Road cuttings Rock outcrops** 0.06 <0.1 Negligible Stock ponds (artificial) Wetland 3.10 0.3 Exotic forest/indigenous Forest (exotic) 1.51 0.2 understory Exotic forest or shelter belts Forest (exotic) 21.37 2.4 Gorse-broom scrub Scrub or shrubland 3.07 0.3 (exotic) Gorse-broom/pasture grass Scrub or shrubland 15.29 1.7 shrubland (exotic) Pasture grassland Pasture grassland 756.75 85.2 Buildings Buildings 0.03 <0.1 Roads Roads 19.74 2.2 High Ecological Value - Total 6.84 0.8 2.90 4.59 Moderate Ecological Value - Total 41.98 4.7 41.90 66.31 Low Ecological Value - Total 839.29 94.5 18.39 29.10 Total for All Ecological Values 888.11*** 100 63.19 100 Potential Indigenous Vegetation Clearance as % of the On-site Construction Footprint 7.1 * Most of this vegetation is located within the MDC (GWRC). Podocarp/broadleaved forest and Podocarp treeland are only listed in the MWRC One Plan. Only 0.02 ha of podocarp/broadleaved forest, 0 ha of kamahi forest, and 0.007 ha of podocarp treeland are in TDC/MWRC and require resource consent. ** Rock outcrops may not have a cover of indigenous vegetation. *** Included in this table is vegetation clearance associated with External Road works (c.35 ha) that occur On- site because they have exceeded the boundary of the council road reserve.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 261
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.30: Vegetation and habitat types potentially affected by Off-site construction activities for the CHWF.
Potential Total Relative Potential Indigenous Vegetation Ecological Vegetation Type Broad Class Vegetation Clearance Clearance Value Area (ha) % Area (ha) % High Podocarp/broadleaved forest* Forest (indigenous) <0.01 <0.1 <0.01 <0.1 Kamahi forest* Forest (indigenous) 0.54 1.0 0.54 19.20 Mixed broadleaved forest Forest (indigenous) 0.15 0.3 0.15 5.27 Manuka-kanuka forest Forest (indigenous) 0.01 <0.1 0.01 0.46 Broadleaved treeland Treeland <0.01 <0.1 <0.01 <0.1 (indigenous) Rock outcrops** Rock outcrops 0.43 0.8 Rivers with indigenous riparian Waterways <0.01 <0.1 <0.01 <0.1 vegetation Moderate Manuka-kanuka treeland Treeland - - - - (indigenous) Podocarp treeland* Treeland - - - - (indigenous) Manuka-kanuka scrub Scrub (indigenous) 0.41 0.7 0.41 14.45 Mixed broadleaved scrub Scrub (indigenous) 0.86 1.6 0.86 30.65 Manuka-kanuka scrub mixed Scrub (indigenous) 0.25 0.5 0.25 8.88 broadleaved scrub Mixed broadleaved shrubs/pasture Shrubland 0.04 <0.1 0.04 1.51 grass shrubland (indigenous) Manuka-kanuka shrubland mixed Shrubland 0.20 0.4 0.20 7.24 broadleaved shrubland (indigenous) Natural wetland with some - - - indigenous species Wetland Rivers without indigenous Waterways 0.06 0.1 vegetation Low Manuka-kanuka/pasture grass Shrubland 0.34 0.6 0.34 12.10 shrubland (indigenous) Manuka-kanuka shrubland tauhinu/ Shrubland - - - - pasture grass shrubland (indigenous) Tauhinu/pasture grass shrubland Shrubland - - - - (indigenous) Road cuttings Rock outcrops** 0.10 0.2 Stock ponds (artificial) Wetland - - - - Exotic forest/indigenous understory Forest (exotic) 2.11 3.8 Exotic forest or shelter belts Forest (exotic) 5.60 10.1 Gorse-broom scrub Scrub or shrubland 0.25 0.4 (exotic) Gorse-broom/pasture grass Scrub or shrubland 0.24 0.4 shrubland (exotic) Pasture grassland Pasture grassland 15.95 28.9 Buildings Buildings 0.06 0.1 Roads Roads 27.56 49.9 High Ecological Value - Total 1.14 2.1 0.71 25.15 Moderate Ecological Value - Total 1.83 3.3 1.77 62.74 Low Ecological Value - Total 52.23 94.6 0.34 12.10 Total for All Ecological Values 55.20 100 2.82 100 Potential Indigenous Vegetation Clearance as % of the Off-site Construction Footprint 5.1
* All of this vegetation is within MDC and GWRC and therefore does not trigger any resource consent requirements under the One Plan. ** Rock outcrops may not have a cover of indigenous vegetation.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 262
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Protected Areas
Protected areas (i.e. DOC-administered reserves and QEII covenants) have been avoided in the development process of the CHWF. Some legal boundaries may still require confirmation by land survey, but there are no legally-protected conservation areas within the On-site and Off-site Construction Footprint.
RAPs and ABIs
Indigenous vegetation clearance could occur in two RAPs: Neds Hill Bush-Tauweru Extension (<0.1 ha) and Patitapu Bush ridge block (2.63 ha). At Patitapu Bush this includes 0.19 ha of kamahi forest (High ecological value), 0.29 ha of broadleaved forest (High ecological value), and 1.89 ha of manuka/kanuka scrub (Moderate ecological value). The remaining areas are shrubland. The parts of Patitapu Bush to be affected are within Masterton District (Patitapu Bush falls within both Masterton and Tararua Districts and the part within Tararua District, which will not be affected, is scheduled in the Proposed TDP).
Vegetation and Habitat Types Potentially Affected
On-site Vegetation
Table 5.20 shows that, of the predicted maximum 888 ha that could be affected, the predominant vegetation types are Pasture (85%), Indigenous Scrub (4.6%), Exotic Forest (2.5%), Indigenous Shrubland (2.1%), and Exotic Scrub and Shrubland (2.0%). All other vegetation types cover less than 1% of the potential On-site Construction Footprint, including indigenous forest (0.3%).
The vast majority of the area likely to be disturbed comprises vegetation and habitat types dominated by exotic species (or are human-made), and are of low or negligible ecological value. Some indigenous vegetation will be affected, but this predominantly comprises early successional low scrub and shrubland types of limited ecological value.
Indigenous vegetation types that could be most affected by On-site construction of the wind farm comprise indigenous scrub or shrubland dominated by kanuka and/or manuka (see Table 5.20). Most (60 ha or 95%) of the indigenous clearance proposed is manuka-kanuka scrub (41 ha) or shrubland (18.5 ha), being early successional and having only limited diversity. Shrubland types, in particular, are relatively young, with a simple open structure and very limited ecological values. There is no strong justification to protect such open shrubland from clearance.
It should be noted that Turbines (including Turbine Foundations and Platforms) comprise only c.6.35 ha (0.71%) of the proposed clearance, with the balance comprising Internal Roads (c.25.4 ha, 2.9%), Excess Fill Areas (c.17.5 ha, 2.0%), and other infrastructure.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 263
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Off-site Vegetation Clearance
Table 5.21 shows that, of the 55 ha to be potentially affected by the Off-site Construction Footprint, only 2.82 ha is indigenous vegetation, mostly comprising secondary scrub and shrubland of low or moderate value (2.11 ha, 75%). Small areas have been ranked as being of High ecological value, with the largest comprising kamahi forest (0.54 ha) adjacent to Castle Hill Road. Other types include mixed broadleaved scrub and shrubland (0.9 ha) and minor areas of manuka-kanuka forest (0.01 ha), mixed broadleaved forest (0.15 ha), and a very small area of podocarp/broadleaved forest (<0.1 ha).
Potential Effects of Vegetation Clearance
Overall, indigenous vegetation clearance, amounting to 10.14 ha, may occur in up to eight ABIs (four of which could be affected by both On-site and Off-site construction works), with most of this clearance (8.28 ha) involving manuka/kanuka scrub and shrubland (Moderate ecological value), and kamahi forest along Castle Hill Road (1.22 ha, High ecological value). Most of the manuka/kanuka scrub and shrubland clearance (7.19 ha) will occur in one ABI (EW0413 - Waterfalls Shrubland, Beadel et al., 2004). At this site, scrub types are predominant on the ridges, where infrastructure is to be located, and have already been subject to considerable modification for grazing, vehicle tracks and vegetation clearance along most ridges.
Potential adverse effects on existing ecological values have been minimised by avoiding, as much as possible, high value indigenous vegetation through the design of the CHWF.
Potential On-site vegetation clearance required for the construction of the CHWF comprises a maximum total area of 66.01 ha of indigenous vegetation. Of this, shrubland vegetation of Low ecological value comprises 18.4 ha (29%), scrub vegetation with Moderate ecological values comprises 42 ha (66%), and vegetation with High ecological value comprises only 2.9 ha (4.6%).
Potential Off-site vegetation clearance required for the construction of the CHWF comprises 2.82 ha of indigenous vegetation. Of this, Low ecological value indigenous vegetation comprises 0.34 ha (12%), Moderate ecological value indigenous vegetation comprises 1.77 ha (63%) and High ecological value indigenous vegetation comprises 0.71 ha (25%).
Clearance of 66.01 ha is a reasonably large area of indigenous vegetation and has the potential to have a significant adverse effect (prior to any mitigation, as outlined in Section 6). However, overall effects on indigenous vegetation are not considered to be major because of the fragmented state and secondary and early successional character of much of what is to be cleared and because it is also feasible to mitigate for this scale of clearance (of these secondary vegetation types) in this environment.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 264
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.7.5 Birds Potential Construction Effects
During construction, birds may be disturbed by construction activities and noise, and experience loss of habitat due to vegetation clearance. While construction-related disturbance effects are temporary, it is inevitable that some construction will coincide with breeding season activities. Disturbance of vegetation, including pasture, and the construction of access roads and tracks, has the potential to increase use of such areas by species such as New Zealand pipit and North Island fantail, which may be attracted to invertebrates in open sites and on forest and shrubland margins.
Potential Operational Effects
The avifauna assemblage at the Site consists mainly of introduced bird species such as Australian magpie, which are not of conservation concern. The high proportion of introduced birds is indicative of the predominance of highly modified, pastoral habitats at the Site. About one-quarter of the total number of birds recorded (including species recorded at systematic observation points and incidental observations) were indigenous species, but most of these are classified as ‘Not Threatened’. Nevertheless, some relatively common indigenous species may be at risk of collision with Turbines. Kereru, which are classified as ‘Not Threatened’ but are nevertheless considered to be ‘regionally threatened’, and tui, which are also ‘Not Threatened’, may be vulnerable to collision.
Whilst effects on avifauna are predicted to be of no more than minor significance, it is proposed that an Avifauna Monitoring Plan is prepared and implemented pre- and post- construction, to address this assessment. An intensive pest control programme is also recommended within indigenous forest at the Site, to improve the productivity of these habitats for indigenous fauna.
Black shag, little black shag, and little shag are classified as ‘At Risk-Naturally Uncommon’, and may be at risk of collision. Potential effects on dabchick (‘Threatened-Nationally Vulnerable’) have been assessed to be no more than minor, given their very low numbers at the Site. The presence of New Zealand falcon (‘Threatened-Nationally Vulnerable’) has not been confirmed by field surveys, nevertheless, observations during pre- and post-construction monitoring are predicted to confirm, or otherwise, the use of the Site by this species. If any effects are identified as a result of monitoring undertaken for the Avifauna Monitoring Plan then protocols and mechanisms to mitigate such effects are recommended, to be implemented in consultation with the appropriate agency (see Section 6).
All other species are considered to have ‘Low’ or ‘Very low’ risk of collision, due to being only infrequent or itinerant visitors to the Site, being present in only very low numbers, or due to behaviours that reduce the likelihood of interaction with Turbine blades and other infrastructure.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 265
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.7.6 Bats Potential for Bat Collision
Most records of long-tailed bats in New Zealand are from indigenous forest, although exotic plantation forest is also now known to be an important habitat in some locations (Borkin and Parsons, 2009). Activity of long-tailed bats in New Zealand farmland landscapes tends to be associated with forest remnants and related edges (O'Donnell 2001), with foraging concentrated on linear landscape features such as forest edges (O'Donnell 2001).
Little information is available on the effects of wind farms on bats in New Zealand. Eleven hypotheses have been raised by Kunz et al. (2007) to explain bat deaths at wind farms, but not all of these may be applicable to bats in New Zealand.
The further that Turbines are located from bat habitats, the less likely it is that adverse effects on bat populations will occur. Where practicable, to reduce the potential collision risk for bats, Turbine towers could be set back from forest habitats where bats are known to be present. In addition to Avifauna Monitoring Plan recommended above, a Bat Monitoring Plan is recommended for implementation in conjunction with the Avifauna Monitoring to be undertaken at the Site. Should impacts on bats be detected, an active management approach is recommended to protect and enhance the local long-tailed bat population (see Section 6).
Potential for Bat Displacement
Bats could, potentially, be affected by construction works, but any such effects are expected to be minor as clearance of indigenous forest will generally be avoided. Additionally, there is only limited habitat (if any) that would be affected due to the predominance of manuka-kanuka dominant vegetation which does not typically afford adequate roosting opportunities for bats due to the small stem diameters in these early successional stands. Long-tailed bats are known to forage for flying insects above and along the margins of these vegetation types, but the proposed clearance is not expected to significantly affect their foraging opportunities.
Bats may also roost in exotic trees, utilising the bark of dead standing, or hollow trees, including pines and macrocarpa (Daniels 1982, Borkin and Parsons 2009, 2010). A bat expert will assess any indigenous or exotic forest or treeland prior to any vegetation clearance.
5.7.7 Lizards and Frogs Potential Effects on Lizards and Frogs
Potential adverse effects on lizards will result from disturbance and loss of habitats through earthworks, and vegetation clearance. Some lizard habitats in indigenous scrub and shrubland, and rock outcrops, will be affected by construction works, and lizards may be affected during construction works due to clearance of indigenous vegetation. Additionally, potential quarry and crushing facility sites for rock and gravel for CHWF construction may remove some rock outcrops. These sites have been assessed and largely do not comprise lizard habitat. Three of the 10 quarry sites have been assessed as having marginal lizard habitat, and these three sites will need
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 266
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects additional assessment prior to quarry development. Based on a worst-case scenario, c.4.37 ha of rock outcrops (assessed to comprise marginal lizard habitat) could be disturbed during construction activities.
No on-going effects on lizards or lizard habitat are anticipated during the operation of the CHWF.
Introduced frogs are largely confined to stock ponds and are not of conservation concern.
5.7.8 Terrestrial Invertebrates Potential Effects on Terrestrial Invertebrates
Most construction works will be undertaken in pasture habitats which are predominantly utilised by introduced invertebrates. Effects on indigenous invertebrate communities are considered to be of negligible significance because high value habitats such as indigenous forest will generally be avoided and intensive pest control to be implemented as part of the Predator Control Plan will enhance invertebrate habitats.
5.7.9 Summary Overall, taking account of all potential ecological effects, the CHWF Site is an appropriate location for the construction and operation of a wind farm, as the majority of the vegetation and habitats within, and adjacent to the Site, are of negligible or of Low ecological value, and are dominated by exotic species, being mainly pasture and smaller areas of exotic plantation forest. There are no indigenous fauna species or habitats present that could, potentially, suffer adverse effects. Adverse effects have been, and will continue to be, minimised by avoiding, as far as practicable, High value indigenous vegetation and habitat. During the construction phase, site rehabilitation, and appropriate controls on earthworks and other construction activities will also minimise adverse effects.
There are areas of indigenous vegetation and habitats worthy of protection and enhancement within the Site. Unavoidable adverse construction effects, such as vegetation clearance and loss of fauna habitat, can be fully mitigated, as discussed further in Section 6.
5.8 Cultural Effects
As outlined in Section 3.2, Genesis Energy has been consulting with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne on the CHWF project. This has also included consultation with hapu / marae affiliated to both Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne. As a result of this consultation, the following organisations have either prepared, or are currently preparing, a CIA or CVA as it relates to the CHWF project:
Rangit ne o Wairarapa: CIA (Volume 4, Section 4).
Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua: CVA (in prep.).
Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa: CIA (Volume 4, Section 4).
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 267
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui a Rua: CIA (in prep).
Rangit ne o Wairarapa has identified the following matters of interest in respect to the CHWF:
High importance on the development and use of envionmental monitoring and management plans to understand and predice potential effects.
Health and protection of the mauri of the environments resources, both within, and outside the CHWF Site, specifically freshwater environments.
Landscape and visual impact – the overshadowing by the introduction of Turbines and supporting infrastructure.
Noise effects during construction and operation, potential discharges to air from dust, and increase in traffic during construction.
Clearance of indigenous vegetation, although it is acknowledged that this has been avoided where possible through the development process undertaken by Genesis Energy (see Section 4.2).
Disturbance of archaeological sites.
Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa has identified the following areas of concern:
Visual impacts on the Castle Point Block or Rangiwhakaoma (traditional homelands.
Economic impacts through employment opportunities, improved electricity supply in the Region and sponsorship opportunities.
Change in character of their homelands and the potential impact on their culture.
Adverse effects on indigenous fauna, flora and waterways.
Noise effects from Turbines.
Construction effects from earthwork activities (dust, sedimentation and discovery of archaeological artefacts).
The potential effects of the CHWF is respect to the above effects have been comprehensively assessed in the remainder of Section 5 of this document, and in the environmental assessments provided in Volumes 3, 4 and 5. Monitoring and mitigation are specifically discussed in Section 6 of this document. Consultation with tangata whenua are detailed in Section 7, and have included a meeting with the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to present the key findings of this assessment.
Clough and Associates (2011) have carried out a detailed archaeological assessment of the CHWF Site (see Section 5.9). During this process no particular archaeological sites have been recorded within, or in the vicinity of the CHWF Site. Two potential pa sites were identified from anecdotal evidence in McFadgen (2003). However, Clough
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 268
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects and Associates (2011) did not find any evidence to corroborate these sites. In consultation with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne and as outlined in the four CIA’s and CVA’s either completed, or being complete, no evidence has been found relating to these pa sites or any other sites of cultural significance located within the CHWF Site.
As outlined further in Section 5.9 and Section 6.3.3, an Accidental Discovery Protocol is being developed with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne to ensure that if koiwi (human remains), taonga or sub-surface archaeological evidence is uncovered during the construction period, work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the remains so that appropriate action can then be taken.
5.9 Archaeology and Heritage 5.9.1 Introduction Clough and Associates (2011) has carried out a detailed archaeological assessment of the CHWF Site, to assess the potential effects of the construction, operation and maintenance of the CHWF on any archaeological values of the Site. The assessment did not purport to interpret the cultural significance of any sites; rather to identify the sites and describe their characteristics and features. The Archaeological Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 5) of this document and is summarised below.
The archaeological survey of the CHWF Site included desktop analysis and field surveys. The desktop analysis included a review of the following:
NZAA site record database for recorded archaeological sites within or near the CHWF;
New Zealand Historic Places Trust (“NZHPT”) register of historic places, historic areas, waahi tapu and waahi tapu areas;
Schedules of Historical Resources and Historic Features within the relevant District planning documents (including along OW/OD Route);
Background literature and archaeological reports for the area;
Land Information New Zealand (“LINZ”) for early survey plans;
Genesis Energy’s GIS database of buildings in and around the CHWF Site;
Aerial photographs to identify potential archaeological sites; and
Previous archaeological surveys and investigations undertaken in the wider area.
The locations of all archaeological and built heritage sites identified through the desktop survey were overlaid on high resolution aerial imagery and cadastral maps of the area to determine potential field survey sites.
Archaeological field surveys were undertaken in July and August 2010 to confirm whether any potential archaeological sites identified during the desktop survey were
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 269
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects present in or near the CHWF Site. During these field surveys a representative sample of Turbine sites within each Turbine Cluster was also surveyed. A full survey of all proposed Turbine sites was not considered necessary due to the low probability of archaeological sites and the lack of any previously recorded archaeological sites within the Site.
During the field surveys visual inspections at selected locations of potential archaeological interest identified during the desktop analysis were undertaken. The ground surface was examined for evidence of occupation (in the form of shell middens, depressions, terracing or other unusual formations within the landscape), or indications of 19th century European settlement. Particular attention was paid to the spur and ridge lines as archaeological sites are often found on these topographical features.
Discussions were also undertaken with CHWF Landowners and/or farm managers during the field surveys to obtain additional information in respect to potential archaeological sites on their land.
A summary of the field survey within each of the Turbine Clusters is set out below:
Cluster A The area at the top of Turbine Cluster A between Rimu Road and Mangatiti Stream tributaries to the east of the Pahiatua Road was inspected. During the examination of high resolution aerial photographs of this cluster, an area of interest showing possible terracing and pits was observed in the vicinity of an airstrip in that area. During the ground inspection, the vicinity of the airstrip was carefully inspected for any archaeological features, but it was found that the terracing related to the construction of vehicle access to the strip area and general flattening for a crop duster and/or helicopter pad. No archaeological features were identified within the area surveyed in Turbine Cluster A.
Cluster B The area between Makoura Stream and a tributary of the Waitawhiti Stream to the northeast of the Station homestead was inspected, including the rugged ridgelines as well as a bulldozed dam area along the ridge top. No archaeological features were identified within the area surveyed in Turbine Cluster B.
Cluster C Much of the area in Turbine Cluster C has been modified by farming, including by dam and road construction, fencing, wind breaks, and general paddock maintenance. No archaeological features were identified within the area surveyed in Turbine Cluster C.
Cluster D The ridgeline running off Castle Hill Road at the boundary between TDC and MDC was searched for evidence of archaeological activity. A wind monitoring mast is located along this ridgeline. No archaeological features were identified within the area surveyed in Turbine Cluster D.
Cluster E High resolution aerial photographs suggested the possibility that there were archaeological features along the ridgelines within the Te Awa Station within Turbine Cluster E, but a ground investigation along these ridgelines did not locate any features of archaeological interest.
Cluster F Substantial farming and modification has occurred within Turbine Cluster F between Tanawa Road at Tirohanga to the east and Manawa Road to
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 270
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
the west. No archaeological features were identified within the area surveyed within this cluster.
Cluster G The ridgeline to the south-west of Wairiri Road in Turbine Cluster G was inspected. The western area has been deforested and the main ridgeline has been modified by farming activities. No archaeological features were identified within the area surveyed in Turbine Cluster G.
5.9.2 Potential Effects on Archaeological and Heritage Sites As noted in Section 3.2.2, few archaeological sites, particularly relating to Maori occupation and activities, are found on sites located distant from the coast and at higher altitudes, such as the CHWF. Although there are some anecdotal indications of pre-European Maori settlement in the area, these could not be identified or confirmed during the field surveys.
No archaeological sites have previously been recorded within, or in the general vicinity of, the CHWF Site, and no archaeological sites were identified within the Turbine Corridor during the archaeological survey undertaken at representative areas. While two possible pa sites in the CHWF area have been referred to (identified through anecdotal information in McFadgen (2003)) and considered during the desktop study, these were not located nor their existence confirmed during the field survey. No evidence of any possible pa sites were found at the locations indicated in that document. It is possible that the area was visited and used by Maori in the past as it would have been rich in forest resources (plants and birds), and the upper ridgelines may have been used as travelling routes through the area. No information or evidence is available to confirm this.
The Turbine Corridor has no known archaeological significance. No archaeological sites were identified within it and there is only low potential that any unrecorded sites or subsurface archaeological deposits would be present. The CHWF Site is a considerable distance away from the locations of any recorded archaeological sites and was clearly not a focus of settlement in pre-European times.
The Turbine Corridor is located on areas that would have been unfavourable for occupation, being at high altitude and in exposed windy locations many kilometres away from the coast where Maori settlement was more likely to occur.
The potential for unidentified archaeological remains within the Turbine Corridor is considered to be low, based on the lack of archaeological sites identified during the desktop review and field survey, the considerable distance of the CHWF Site from any recorded archaeological sites, the level of modification across the Site, and other environmental variables such as altitude and exposed conditions at the Site.
Although no sites of archaeological significance were identified during the archaeological investigation, it is possible for unrecorded subsurface remains to be exposed during earthworks associated with the CHWF project. To minimise any potential impact on an accidentally discovered site, taonga (treasured or prized possessions) or koiwi (human remains) that might be exposed during the construction of the CHWF, Accidental Discovery Protocols will be put in place. Genesis Energy is developing these protocols in consultation with Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui a Rua, Rangit ne o Wairarapa, Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa and Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 271
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
A Rua, and these will be finalised prior to the commencement of any earthworks activities at the Site.
The Accidental Discovery Protocols will be in place for any earthmoving or ground modification that occurs during the construction and operation of the CHWF. If any archaeological site, taonga or koiwi are discovered during works associated with the CHWF, Genesis Energy will immediately cease work at the affected site, and will notify Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui a Rua, Rangit ne o Wairarapa, Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa and Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua, the NZHPT and, in the case of koiwi, the Police. Works will not recommence in the area of the discovery until the relevant approvals to damage, destroy or modify such sites have been obtained, and TDC and MDC (in consultation with MWRC and GWRC) has given authorisation to recommence the activities.
There are two buildings on Annedale Road and Manawa Road that have recognised heritage significance. Annedale Station Woolshed (Annedale Road) is identified as a Heritage Item in the Combined Plan (Appendix 1.7), and is registered as a Category 1 Historic Place under the Historic Places Act 1993. Manawa Station Woolshed (Manawa Road) is also identified as a Heritage Item in the Combined Plan. Manawa Station Woolshed is located on the OW/OD Route but is located sufficiently back off the road and will not be affected by construction activities associated with the CHWF.
5.9.3 Summary The CHWF will have no adverse effects on any known archaeological sites during the construction phase, and is unlikely to have any significant effects on unidentified archaeological sites. The likelihood of unrecorded subsurface remains being exposed during construction is low. To minimise any potential impact on an accidentally discovered site, taonga or koiwi that might be exposed during the construction of the CHWF, Genesis Energy is developing Accidental Discovery Protocols that will be put in place prior to the commencement of any earthworks activities at the Site. There will be no operational effects on archaeological sites at the CHWF.
The CHWF will not affect any historic buildings in the area, including the two historic woolshed buildings that are identified as ‘Heritage Items’ in the Combined Plan.
Overall, the effects on archaeology and heritage will be no more than minor.
5.10 Shadow Flicker and Blade Glint 5.10.1 Introduction The Shadow Flicker Effects Assessment (Boffa Miskell (2011(b)) undertaken for the CHWF is provided in Volume 4 (Section 6) of this document and is summarised below.
Shadow flicker is caused by the rotation of wind Turbine blades, which cast intermittent shadows that appear to ‘flicker’ as the sun passes behind the blades. This is most apparent when the shadow passes across a vertical receptor, such as a window in a house. The duration of this effect can be calculated using the geometry of the wind Turbine and the relative locations of the wind Turbine and the receptor. The likelihood of the effect occurring, and the duration and intensity of such an effect, depends on a number of variables including:
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 272
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Distance of the dwelling from the wind Turbine;
Orientation of the dwelling relative to the wind Turbine;
Height and rotor diameter of the wind Turbine;
Time of day and time of year;
Prevailing wind direction;
Frequency of sunshine hours (i.e., cloud free days);
Nature of the intervening terrain between dwelling and wind Turbine; and
Impact of any intervening vegetation and/or structures.
5.10.2 Shadow Flicker Assessment International guidelines state that the practical extent to which shadow flicker should be assessed is to a distance of ten times the rotor diameter away from any wind Turbine, and that the minimum altitude of the sun to be considered is 3º above the horizon. Based on these guidelines, the shadow flicker effects assessment for the CHWF has considered all External Dwellings located outside of the CHWF Site within 1,100 m from the edge of the Turbine Corridor (referred to as the “zone of influence”). The Large Turbine Configuration (110L), based on a hub height of 155 m and a density of 242 Turbines, was selected and used for this assessment (referred to as the “assessed layout”).
Windfarm 4 software has been used to calculate the number of hours and days per year at which the shadow from a specific wind Turbine rotor (which is treated as a disc) will fall across a receptor (window) of a specified size and orientation (an “event”), and the maximum number of minutes per day per event. The shadow flicker calculation using this software requires the specification of a window against which the passage of the sun and the shadow of the rotor can be measured. Each External Dwelling within the zone of influence was assigned a theoretical window oriented towards the direction of the nearest Turbine. In reality, dwellings may not have any windows facing the Turbines, may have more than one room facing in this direction, or may be screened by vegetation.
A “butterfly map” for individual Turbines based on the 110L Turbine layout has also been prepared. A butterfly map displays the footprint of the shadow cast by a wind Turbine onto the adjacent ground, over the period of a solar year. Accordingly, a butterfly map can be used for determining where the effects of shadow flicker may occur. Figure B43 of Appendix B (Volume 2) shows the shadow flicker zone of influence of the assessed layout for the CHWF.
The results of the shadow flicker calculations are mathematically derived and are therefore theoretical worst case scenarios. In practice, the shadow flicker effects would occur on considerably less days than predicted by the modelling. This is due to the numerous variables (listed above, such as the number of cloud free days, or the impact of intervening vegetation) that need to coincide in order to create a shadow flicker effect.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 273
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.10.3 Effects of Shadow Flicker on External Dwellings International guidelines and publications28 confirm that acceptable levels of shadow flicker are either:
Acceptable Level - 30 hours/year (modelled);
Acceptable Level - 30 minutes per day – actual (measured).
Results from the calculations of potential shadow flicker undertaken using the Windfarm 4 software and based on the assessed layout are summarised in Table 5.31. The location of the External Dwellings referred to in Table 5.31 are shown in Figure 3.1.
Table 5.31: External Dwellings located within the zone of influence.
Potential Area of Influence External Dwelling ID Total External Dwellings that fall within the Turbine Corridor 171, 265, 396, 397, 403, 8 + 1,100 m 407 External Dwellings that fall within the 110L layout + 171, 265, 396, 397, 407 5 1,100 m External Dwellings that fall within the 110L butterfly 265, 396, 397, 407 4 footprint
Of the eight External Dwellings that fall within the zone of influence, and are therefore theoretically subject to shadow flicker, no External Dwelling would be exposed to shadow flicker for more than 30 hours per year and/or 30 minutes per day based on the assessed layout (see Table 5.32). Field checking and On-site verification confirm that some External Dwellings (for example 171 and 265) are well screened by mature vegetation that will either eliminate or assist in mitigating any effects of shadow flicker.
Table 5.32: Exposure to shadow flicker at dwellings within the zone of influence.
External Total hours Max minutes Dwelling Situation per year per day ID 171 0 0 Nil exposure (some screening at dwelling) 265 28.1 30 Largely screened by vegetation to the west 396 11.2 26 Views to the west 397 15.4 29 Views to the northeast 403 0 0 Nil exposure (no screening at dwelling) 407 12.6 27 Views to the west 408 0 0 Nil exposure (some screening at dwelling) 409 0 0 Nil exposure (some screening at dwelling)
28 Danish Wind Industry Association (2003); Planning for Renewable Energy – A Companion Guide to PPS22, issued by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, (UK, 2004); Australian National Wind Farm Development Guidelines (Draft-Oct 2009, EPHC); and Onshore Wind Energy Planning Conditions Guidance Note (REB/BERR – Oct 2007).
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 274
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure B44 of Appendix B provides an example of shadow flicker analysis on External Dwelling 265, where the predicted exposure is 28.1 hours per year and 30 minutes per day. It is anticipated that vegetation will either eliminate or assist in mitigating any effects of shadow flicker.
5.10.4 Risks to the Public Potential effects to the public associated with shadow flicker relate to:
Blade glint (the reflection of light off moving Turbine blades);
Driver distraction; and
Epilepsy.
The potential effect of the CHWF on each of these is outlined below.
Blade Glint
The use of a low reflectivity treatment on the surfaces of the Turbines will minimise the effect of blade glint. As a low reflectivity finish will be used on Turbines at the CHWF, there will be negligible blade glint effects.
Driver Distraction
No references to motor vehicle accidents directly attributable to shadow flicker have been found (see Transportation Effects Assessment (TDG 2011), Volume 3 (Section 6) of this document) for further details on the effects of driver distraction. Driver distraction is also addressed in the analysis of traffic effects in Section 5.5 of this document.
Epilepsy
Epileptics that are photo-sensitive are sensitive to frequencies of between 2.5 and 3 Hz. As the level of blade passing frequency of large wind Turbines is typically below 1 Hz, the risk of epileptic seizure due to shadow flicker is negligible.
5.10.5 Summary The shadow flicker effects assessment has determined that there will be no significant exposure to shadow flicker for any External Dwelling to the CHWF Site. This conclusion is based on both mathematical calculation and On-site inspection of dwellings. Relocation of specific Turbines within the Turbine Corridor will not cause a significant increase in exposure to shadow flicker, however new calculations will be required to confirm the amount of change once the final Turbine model is selected and the layout confirmed. A resource consent condition limiting shadow flicker to no more than 30 hours per year and 30 minutes per day for External Dwellings will ensure that adverse effects are no more than minor.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 275
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.11 Radio-communication and Telecommunication Services 5.11.1 Introduction The potential effects of the operation of the CHWF on radio-communication services (including broadcast analogue and digital television and radio, fixed radio linking and aeronautical RADAR), have been assessed by Kordia (2011). The assessment also included a range of telecommunication services, such as land mobile VHF, cellular services and licensed and unlicensed broadband wireless access services. The Radio Services Effects Assessment is provided in Volume 4 (Section 7) of this document and is summarised below.
The MED has a register of radio frequency licences, and this database was assessed to determine which could potentially be affected by the CHWF. It is noted that the search also considered licenses that are designated as ‘confidential’. The types of license service that were assessed included: broadcast analogue television and radio, fixed radio linking, aeronautical RADAR, land mobile VHF, cellular services and broadband wireless access services.
5.11.2 Possible Interference Effects Wireless communication systems use radio waves to relay information from a transmitter to a receiver. There are four potential mechanisms by which a wind Turbine or a wind farm could cause interference to a radio link:
Electromagnetic interference (“EMI”) – can occur when a wind Turbine generates and/or radiates radio frequency energy that causes a conflict with radio signals.
Near-field effects – can occur where a wind Turbine is located so close to an existing antenna that it modifies the radiation characteristics of the antenna. Likely services to be affected are those with mobile receivers within a few metres of a Turbine tower. Diffraction – can occur where a wind Turbine blocks the path of the radio wave and causes signal power loss. The service most affected by diffraction is fixed radio linking.
Reflection (or ‘scattering’) – can occur where radio waves are reflected in various directions by a wind Turbine. Scattering can cause interference to nearby radio services by multi-path propagation, whereby delayed “echo” signals arrive at a receiver via indirect paths relative to the direct path signal; and frequency reuse, whereby scattered echoes arrive at a receiver having originated from other transmissions using the same channel frequency in the same geographical area.
The effect of these interference mechanisms were assessed for the CHWF, by measurement of signal strengths and computer modelling of possible effects, and a literature review of current research and case studies to identify wind farm radio interference effects and solutions.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 276
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.11.3 Potential Radio Interference Effects of the CHWF The potential for, and level of, interference risk to radio-communication services arising from the CHWF are summarised in Table 5.27. For the potential of high and medium risk effects, various solutions have been identified to resolve any issues. For the low risk effects, the risks are considered to be so low that they do not require any specific actions, and /or are unlikely to be detectable.
As outlined in Table 5.33, three areas of radio and telecommunications service activities are potentially affected by the CHWF. These services are analogue television, fixed radio linking and VHF mobile radio.
Analogue Television
Analogue television is the most likely transmission service to experience interference. In September 2010 the Minster of Broadcasting and Minister for Communications and Information Technology announced that from late 2012, analogue television signals will be progressively switched off around the country, with the progression to digital transmission completed by 29 September 2013. The construction of the CHWF will not be completed by the time analogue television is switched off in the area, meaning that potential effects to analogue television reception will not be relevant to this proposal.
Notwithstanding this, the potential for analogue interference effects has been considered in case analogue television transmission continues beyond September 2013. Any such interference would only occur within a limited distance from the CHWF (conservatively estimated as a maximum 20 km radius around the Turbine Corridor for this assessment). Within this area, up to 26 dwellings (11 CHWF Landowner Dwellings and 15 External Dwellings) in the vicinity of the CHWF could experience sporadic, mildly impaired analogue reception. Ten of these dwellings receive television by satellite and will not be affected, reducing the number of potentially affected dwellings to 16. The interference would appear as a periodic disturbance resulting in “ghosting” of the picture, with some sound and Teletext disturbance also possible.
The level of reflection from a Turbine blade will fluctuate as the blades rotate, with only a small chance that the blade will reflect perfectly to any location at any given time. If interference does occur, it can readily be remedied by upgrading the receiver antenna at any affected property, or installing alternative reception options, such as digital satellite or digital terrestrial service.
It is noted that the Internal Transmission Line and associated pylons are located on lower lying terrain relative to the surrounding peaks, therefore reflection effects on television reception are not predicted to occur.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 277
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.33: Services likely to be interfered with and the level or risk that interference will occur due to the CHWF.
General Type of Service Cause Effect Case Specific Castle Hill Wind Farm Risk Mitigation Risk Analogue Reflected or Impairment of TV High Medium – up to 26 dwellings could experience mildly Upgrade receiver antenna systems. Terrestrial scattered images by ghosting impaired analogue reception, although this will be Television signal sporadic in nature. It is known that 10 of these dwellings Receive an alternative service such as (Wide Area receive television by satellite. digital satellite or digital terrestrial if Coverage Service) available. Note, in this region, analogue television is planned to be switched off by September 2013.
No effects are expected from the Internal Transmission Line and associated pylons.
Fixed Radio Linking Towers Degradation or loss of High High – there are many fixed radio linking services Genesis Energy has contacted Chorus impinge on received signal operating within the general vicinity, with some passing (on behalf of Telecom) and Teletronics ray path strength through the CHWF Turbine Corridor. (on behalf of JNL), and received letters between agreeing with the Kordia (2011) report transmitter It is likely that four radio links may be subjected to findings and proposed mitigation. and receiver interference from the Turbines in certain conditions. Mitigation strategies range from replacing the existing antennas with more Scattering Degradation in fade No effects are expected from the Internal Transmission directional narrow beam-width antennas, margin due to Line and associated pylons. replacing the entire system with an scattering interference alternative system, to relocating the from Turbine proposed Turbines during the detailed reflections design phase to avoid the path of the link.
Other Wide Area Towers, Degradation to the Medium Medium – There are four licensed mobile repeater Genesis Energy has approached the Coverage Services nacelle, or coverage area or loss services operating within the co-ordination contour of the licence holders to discuss possible effects (Broadband blades cause of signal received from proposed wind farm corridor. Each has a potential for to these services and their actual proximity Wireless Access – degradation subscriber their service to be affected. to proposed Turbines. A letter was BWA, Mobile of signal received from Teletronics on behalf of JNL communications outlining mitigation options. These options including cellular will be addressed for all four repeater and emergency services during the detailed design phase. services)
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 278
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Table 5.33: Services likely to be interfered with and the level or risk that interference will occur due to the CHWF (cont).
General Type of Service Cause Effect Specific Castle Hill Wind Farm Risk Mitigation Case Risk RADAR Towers, False traces or Medium Low – there are aeronautical RADAR systems in sight Not required. Airways New nacelle, or impairment on of the CHWF. Zealand (“Airways”) has advised blades cause RADAR readings Genesis Energy that the CHWF reflection of The closest aeronautical radio service is 9 km away at will not affect their aeronautical RADAR signal Rangitumau, with the nearest aeronautical RADAR RADAR or VHF radio services. service located at Ballance, over 35 km away. These Genesis Energy is already in services are not expected to be affected. discussions with the CAA. AM/FM Broadcast Reflected Degradation to the Low Low – any interference caused is unlikely to be Not required. Radio signal coverage area or detectable. interferes with loss of signal signal received from demodulation, subscriber or diffracted signal causes signal loss
Digital Terrestrial Reflected or Impairment of TV Low Low – interference is unlikely to occur. Not required. Television scattered picture or sound signal from uncorrected (Wide Area bit-errors Coverage Service)
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 279
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Fixed Radio Linking
The two main factors that control whether diffraction or scattering will result in an effect on a radio service are the operating radio frequency and the distance of the closest transmitting or receiving antenna to the diffracting/scattering object.
A search conducted over a radius of 150 km from the CHWF Site identified 4,372 fixed radio links, with some links propagating directly through the CHWF Site (see Figure 5.15). Four radio links (two microwave links and two UHF radio links) have been identified as being at risk of experiencing interference from Turbine blades through diffraction, two of which also are potentially affected by reflection effects. Telecom operates three of these links while JNL operates the other.
Microwave link paths have the potential to be obstructed if Turbines are not sited appropriately to allow for sufficient vertical clearance, causing what are known as “bit- errors”. Turbines located 500 m away from a link path are unlikely to cause any degradation to the links. If the Turbines are positioned too close to an existing antenna, effects will include degradation or loss of received signal strength, or fade margin.
There is a risk of scattering interference to two links when combined with factors such as wind direction, but such effects can be readily mitigated. The actual effects of diffraction and reflection can only be determined once the final Turbine selection, design and location are confirmed.
As outlined further in Section 7.2.7, Genesis Energy has consulted with Chorus (on behalf of Telecom) and Teletronics (on behalf of JNL) to discuss the potential effect on their fixed radio linking services and potential mitigation strategies. Proposed mitigation options include, locating Turbines to avoid the link path, modifying the antenna servicing the link, and/or improving the reception capability of the link by using directional antennas. Letters have been received from both Chorus and Teletronics accepting Kordia’s findings, and agreeing with the potential mitigation options. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with both of these parties through the detailed design of the CHWF to address potential effects, and will ensure that appropriate measures are adopted to address effects on these links.
Effects of the Internal Transmission Line and associated pylons on fixed radio linking services are primarily from corona discharge from insulators at the line-terminals on the pylons. The discharge generates white-noise which can be potentially picked up by the linking receivers. For the CHWF, no pylons are proposed within 100 m of any licensed radio linking receivers and transmission lines are located in lower-lying terrain, meaning that effects on the links from this source are unlikely to occur.
With respect to EMI from the Internal Transmission Line, it is predicted that fixed radio linking services within the general vicinity of the CHWF will not be affected. The CHWF will use fully enclosed generators that will further reduce the potential for EMI interference effects.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 280
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 5.15: All fixed radio linking services operating near the CHWF.
VHF Mobile Radio
Licensed services in the general vicinity of the CHWF include VHF mobile radio, cellular and wireless broadband access (fixed or mobile). Within a 600 m co-ordination contour around the Turbine Corridor29 there are four licensed radio wide-area coverage services, which are all VHF land mobile repeaters used for voice communications (see Figure 5.16). Mobile repeaters associated with these licensed services are likely to be sited upon hilltops to allow for maximum coverage and have the potential to be affected by the operation of the CHWF.
Three of these repeaters are used by local residents (located at Smith Hill, Tintock and Tanglewood), the remaining one is operated by JNL (located at Castle Hill).
29 Locations beyond this distance will have a low likelihood of interference problems and are not considered further.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 281
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Figure 5.16: Protection of wide area coverage services.
The repeaters identified carry voice traffic that can accommodate higher levels of interference compared to data traffic without significant degradation of the service. In addition, mobile services have roaming receivers, making it difficult to determine if any signal degradation is caused by the Turbines or by the natural environment. It is possible to locate Turbines close to a land mobile repeater without affecting the service.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 282
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbines proposed at Smith Hill are approximately 150 m from the mobile repeater site. One proposed Turbine is located at the same site as the Castle Hill mobile repeater operated by JNL. Two Turbines are proposed to be located within 100 m of the mobile repeaters at Tintock and Tanglewood.
As outlined in Section 7.2.7 of this document, Genesis Energy has consulted with JNL and the other three landowners to discuss potential effects of the CHWF on their VHF mobile repeater services. Genesis Energy has received a letter from Teletronics (on behalf of JNL) regarding the mobile repeater on Castle Hill. They have recommended that Turbines and associated transformer and switching equipment should not be located within 100 m of their site. In addition, Teletronics have also raised the possibility of shadows cast from a Turbine affecting the reliability of their solar power supply. These effects can be addressed most effectively through consultation with the service operator as the detailed design is developed to ensure that location and shadow effects are appropriately addressed.
If interference occurs during the operation of the CHWF, the affected mobile repeater site could be relocated so it is a sufficient distance from any Turbines. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with these operators through the detailed design stage to ensure that any adverse effects are appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated.
5.11.4 Summary The assessment of potential effects of the operation of the CHWF on telecommunication and radio-communication services identified analogue television, fixed radio linking and VHF mobile radio as the only licensed radio services at risk of experiencing interference. No other significant effect on radio-communication and telecommunication services in the area has been identified.
Analogue television will be switched off by 29 September 2013 and replaced by digital transmission, therefore there is unlikely to be any effect on television reception in the area from the CHWF. The Internal Transmission Line is not expected to affect the reception of analogue television. In the unlikely event that analogue television transmission continues beyond September 2013, any impairment to reception for 16 analogue television receptors potentially affected by the CHWF is predicted to be mild and sporadic in nature. Mitigation options include upgrading receiver antennas or providing alternative reception options if interference does occur.
Four fixed radio links have been identified as being at risk of experiencing interference from the Turbines but none were found to be at risk of experiencing effects from the Internal Transmission Line and pylons. Mitigation options to minimise potential effects include modifying the antenna and/or linking transmission equipment to increase the design reception margins, restricting the location of proposed Turbines or selecting alternative Turbine locations. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with the individual service operators to ensure that the CHWF avoids, remedies or mitigates adverse effects on these links.
Four VHF mobile repeater sites are located within the Turbine Corridor and could potentially be affected by the CHWF. These services operate in the same band and are used by private landowners and JNL. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with the individual licence holders to determine if the CHWF is having any adverse effects on their VHF mobile repeater services. If interference is shown to occur after the
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 283
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Turbines are installed, relocation of the affected mobile repeater site to areas sufficiently isolated from the Turbines will be considered.
Overall, any potential effects of the CHWF on radio services can be mitigated to the extent that the effects are no more than minor.
5.12 Aviation 5.12.1 Introduction The operation of a wind farm can influence aviation services in terms of affecting defined flight paths and approaches to airports, affecting radio / RADAR services and affecting agricultural aviation (primarily aerial top dressing of fertiliser). The CAA and Airways are responsible for undertaking aeronautical studies to determine whether a specific proposal constitutes a hazard in navigable airspace (CAA) and whether RADAR and aircraft operations (Airways) will be affected. Comment has therefore been sought from both organisations.
5.12.2 Potential Effects on Aviation Navigable Airspace Hazard
Genesis Energy has advised the CAA of the CHWF, and the CAA is considering the navigable airspace effects in terms of Part 77 of the Civil Aviation Act. As noted in Section 4.3.2, any structure higher than 120 m above the surrounding ground level is determined to be a hazard in navigable airspace. For the CHWF, this hazard will be mitigated by appropriate lighting and by identifying the hazard in aeronautical charts available to all pilots, in accordance with CAA requirements. The CHWF will therefore not cause an adverse effect in terms of navigable airspace.
Radio and RADAR Services
As noted in Section 5.11 of this document, Airways has confirmed that the CHWF is not predicted to affect the Airways VHF Radio and Radar services at Rangitumau (9 km to the south-west of the CHWF) and Ballance (35 km to the north-west of the CHWF).
Aircraft Operations
Airways has undertaken an assessment of the CHWF on aircraft operations, with a particular focus on Instrument Flight Rules (“IFR”) operations in and out of the Hood aerodrome in Masterton. Their assessment established that the following IFR procedures set out in the New Zealand Aeronautical Information Publication (“AIP”) will be affected by the CHWF:
RNAV RWY 24 approach – Holding at SADUN.
RNAV departure URDAL3B.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 284
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
As outlined further in Section 7.2.7, Airways sent a letter to Genesis Energy on 23 March 2011 advising that the CHWF can be accommodated with minimal changes to the published IFR procedures for the Hood aerodrome. Section 6.4.3 of this AEE provides the timing requirements of Airways to ensure that amendments are made to the AIP prior to any Turbines being erected on the Site.
Agricultural Aviation
Fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters can be used for fertiliser application and weed control on farm and forest areas, particularly on hill country land. Aircraft operation is governed by the Rules established by the CAA, with Part 91 of the Rules setting out the general operating and flight rules applicable to all aircraft operators. In particular, Rule 91.311 requires that a pilot of an aircraft must not operate an aircraft at a height less than 500 feet above ground level or any obstacle or structure that is within a horizontal radius of 150 m (approximately 500 feet) from the point immediately below the aircraft.
These specific rules apply to agricultural aviation except where the aircraft is undertaking a specific agricultural operation. For these activities, Part 137 of the Rules provides an exception to Rule 91.311, such that an agricultural pilot may operate below 500 feet as long as the flight is necessary for the agricultural operation and is performed without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface. In this regard, an aircraft undertaking fertiliser spreading (topdressing) may operate at altitudes less than 500 feet above the ground or obstacles. The pilot then becomes responsible for their own judgements as to personal safety and in meeting the requirements not to create a hazard to people or property on the ground.
To be able to operate under the exceptions that Part 137 allows, the industry has adopted a series of certification requirements. In this regard, pilots must have an agricultural rating of Grade 1 (higher) or Grade 2 to operate under the Part 137 exceptions. It is noted that as well as training and experience with aircraft and the industry, pilots also rely on familiarity with the area within which they are working, and tend to work within a region, rather than nationally. Navigational charts provided by the CAA will also be used to identify potential hazards. The effects on agricultural aviation in the vicinity of the CHWF are mitigated by operating in accordance with the CAA rules and regulations.
Tall structures such as Turbines and transmission lines can physically affect where aerial topdressing activities can be undertaken. While improved application methods, such as the use of GPS systems, variable rate technologies (relating application rate to aircraft speed and nutrient requirement), or venturi effect spreaders, are widely used in the industry to improve efficiency and to target specific areas requiring application of fertiliser, the presence of tall structures will limit low level flight paths. However, these are matters that can be provided for in planning particular fertiliser application projects.
The visibility of tall slender obstacles and wires means that they can be difficult to see, while Turbines tend to be more visible. Similarly, in certain light conditions, a transmission line, towers or Turbine may be more difficult to see. In this regard, it is important that pilots know about the relevant characteristics of the area, and incorporate this into their planning for any fertiliser application project.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 285
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
5.12.3 Summary During construction of the CHWF, Genesis Energy will regularly update the aviation industry with progress in relation to staging and timing of construction. This will be achieved through regular advice to the CAA and through public advice channels, and will include advice to particular service providers as provided for during consultation.
It is concluded that while the presence of the CHWF and its associated structures (including Turbines, transmission towers and Internal Transmission Line) could affect agricultural aviation services in the vicinity of the Site, the effect can be managed through provision of appropriate information and planning of fertiliser application projects. Overall, the effects on aviation are considered to be no more than minor.
5.13 Electric and Magnetic Fields 5.13.1 Introduction The potential health effects from EMFs associated with the CHWF, and proposed methods for minimising and mitigating potential health and safety effects of EMFs were assessed by Enviromedix Limited. The Assessment of Health Effects Arising from Electromagnetic Fields at the Castle Hill Wind Farm (Enviromedix Limited, 2011) is provided in Volume 4 (Section 8) of this document. The assessment included a desktop literature study, a review of all project documents and a site visit in April 2011.
As outlined in Section 1.1, RMA approvals for the External Transmission Line to connect the CHWF to the national grid are not part of this application and will be sought separately. Accordingly, potential health effects from EMFs from the External Transmission Line were not considered in this assessment.
5.13.2 Electric and Magnetic Fields When passing electricity, alternating current power lines are surrounded by EMFs, made up of electric fields and magnetic fields. Electric fields are present whenever a conductor is charged, irrespective of whether or not current is flowing. Magnetic fields are present whenever current is flowing and increase in strength as the current increases.
Of most interest in respect to potential health effects from EMFs, is the density of the magnetic field strength (magnetic flux density). The standard measurement of magnetic flux density is the microtesla (T). Both electric and magnetic field strengths decrease rapidly with distance from a conductor, with small increases in distance resulting in very large decreases in intensity.
The frequency of mains electricity in New Zealand is 50 Hz, while radiation capable of human or animal absorption occurs at much higher frequencies. Because of this difference in frequency, there is no biologically significant radiation from a transmission line or a wind Turbine.
When electricity is transmitted by overhead lines, both electric and magnetic fields are found around the conductors (lines). When transmission cables are underground, electric fields are effectively screened by conductive ground and earthed cable
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 286
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects armouring sheaths. Only magnetic fields are found above ground for underground cables.
Electric fields at electricity substations are screened by the shielding of the underground cables through enclosure within an earthed (grounded) metal sheath, design of the transformers and Substation construction. Magnetic fields will be detectable around a substation but due to the rapid decrease in field strength with distance, levels at the substation boundaries will be very small.
Electrical energy generated by a Turbine is transmitted down conductors inside the tower and underground by buried cables or across ground by overhead cables. For Turbines, a steel tower structure is electrically conductive, which forms an effective shield for electric fields. Therefore, electric fields are unlikely to be encountered in the space around wind Turbine towers. Magnetic fields are not screened by conductors and therefore will probably be detectable adjacent to the Turbine towers, with magnetic field strength falling off very rapidly within a relatively short distance from the conductor.
5.13.3 Potential Health Effects of Electric Magnetic Fields Electric fields at 50 Hz generally have a surface effect on the human body and at sufficient levels this can be felt as causing movement of hairs at low levels and electric stimulus at higher levels. Where electric fields are carried into conductive tissue, they can be the source of internal electric fields which can cause stimulation of electrically sensitive tissue such as nerves and muscle.
Magnetic fields from high voltage transmission lines have the potential to affect humans or animals indirectly through induction of voltages on conductive farming equipment (such as farm fences). Magnetic fields are capable of entering the body and are resolved by conductive tissue to internal electric fields which are similarly capable of causing electric stimulus. The lowest level effect of internal electric fields is generally stimulation of the retinal photoreceptors in the eyes and is perceived as flashing in visual fields. This is not necessarily regarded as an adverse effect and it may be regarded as no more than perception.
The ICNIRP provides a definitive guideline for the control of non-ionising electromagnetic energy which has subsequently formed the basis for most international standards. The ICNIRP Guidelines (updated in 2010) have been adopted by the New Zealand Ministry of Health, and are generally and widely accepted as providing useful and evidence based thresholds for public health protection. The ICNIRP Guidelines have been established to prevent any biological effects resulting from exposure to magnetic and electric fields as outlined above.
Reference levels in the ICNIRP Guidelines are widely accepted as providing complete protection against all known adverse health effects of electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields. These levels are conservatively set and include a large safety margin, ensuring the protection of all members of the public, including those often considered more “vulnerable”, such as children and the elderly.
For general public exposure at a frequency of 50 Hz, the ICNIRP Guideline limits to ensure any biological or health effects are avoided are 0.2 V m-1 for the central nervous system tissue in the head, and 0.4 V m-1 for all other bodily tissue. Associated safety
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 287
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects threshold levels of EMFs (referred to as “reference levels”) at 50 Hz for the general public is 200 T and 1,000 T for occupational exposure.
Compliance with the ICNIRP Guidelines will eliminate the potential for any direct adverse biological or health effect arising as a result of EMFs.
The potential effect of EMFs associated with the CHWF is summarised below.
Main and Satellite Substations
There will be no electric fields in the immediate vicinity of the Main or Satellite Substations due to the design of the transformers and cabinets, as well as the armouring and shielding of underground cables. Compliance with the ICNIRP Guideline levels for magnetic flux density will be easily achieved. Magnetic fields of low magnetic flux density may be detectable using sensitive instruments immediately above the underground cables and below overhead lines, but these will be well under the limit for general public exposure set out in the ICNIRP Guidelines.
The highest electric fields measureable at the substation boundary will be those from underground and overhead lines, and these will be comparable to those found in association with electricity transmission lines found throughout the country. Levels at the boundaries of similar installations are generally in the order of 0.01 T to 10 T. This level is less than 5% of the ICNIRP Guidelines for the general public and 1% of the occupational exposure levels, and can be readily achieved with standard designs.
Internal Transmission Line
Electric fields associated with the Internal Transmission Line (220 kV) will result from the electrically charged conductors and will be proportional to the voltage, which will be virtually constant as long as the line is on. There will also be magnetic fields which are proportional to the current flowing through the line and which will vary with the load carried by the conductor.
Given the voltage on the line and the potential load, the expected currents will be well below 500 A. This is a relatively low current for a transmission line and will therefore result in a relatively low magnetic field compared to other commonly encountered sources of magnetic fields found throughout New Zealand, including in both domestic and urban environments. Appropriate design for the EBoP components (such as circuits being at least 7.5 m above the ground at the lowest point) will ensure that even if a person is standing directly below the line, the ICNIRP Guideline levels for both electric fields and magnetic flux density will be complied with, with a considerable margin of safety.
The Internal Transmission Line will be located at least 300 m from any residential dwellings, ensuring neglible levels of EMFs at these locations. These levels will be well below those associated with any conceivable health concern.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 288
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Underground Cables and Overhead Lines
The 33 kV underground cables and overhead lines will run at a higher current for a given load compared with the Internal Transmission Line. The overhead lines will be designed and built to international standards to ensure EMF levels are below the relevant levels specified in the ICNIRP Guidelines.
5.13.4 Summary All EMFs from the CHWF will easily comply with the relevant limits for general public and occupational exposure set in the 2010 ICNIRP Guidelines (and endorsed by the New Zealand Ministry of Health) by a considerable margin. Minimisation of EMFs can be readily achieved by conventional engineering techniques.
The magnetic field exposure levels to the community from the CHWF will be minor.
Compliance with limits set in ICNIRP Guidelines will ensure that there will be no risk to public health and safety from EMFs associated with the CHWF project. Overall, the Health Effects Assessment concluded that the design of the CHWF will result in no biological or health effects from EMFs, and there are no specific design or mitigation requirements other than compliance with the ICNIRP Guidelines to ensure that there are negligible public health effects.
5.14 Summary of Environmental Effects
Socio-Economic Effects
The CHWF will make a material contribution to the electricity sector, at both the national and regional level. Electricity related benefits include: contributing towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand via renewable energy, the diversification of generation supply options, assisting with the reduction in carbon emissions associated with electricity generation, and providing a local supply of electricity to the Central Electricity Region. Overall, the CHWF will provide positive benefits to the electricity supply system in New Zealand.
The CHWF will have a positive effect on the economies of the Masterton and Tararua Districts. Throughout the construction and operation/maintenance phases of the project, the CHWF will make a material contribution towards GDP and employment in the Tararua and Masterton Districts. It will also diversify the industry base in both districts, which relies heavily on the primary sector as part of its economy.
A number of indirect economic benefits would occur with the increase in employment, and the subsequent increase in population and include an increase in population-based services, such as medical facilities and schools. Furthermore, roading infrastructure in the vicinity of the Site will be improved as this is required to accommodate construction traffic.
Effects on Recreation and Tourism Activities
Recreation and tourism activities within a 15 km radius from the Turbine Corridor are generally small-scale, and are often a diversification of farming activities (such as on-
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 289
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects farm backpackers, gardens and motorcycle tours). Castlepoint is the most significant visitor setting in the area, with Tinui benefiting from the associated traffic. Route 52 has limited presence as a tourism route, but has appeal as a back-road motorcycle, driving and cycling route.
Given the relatively low level of use of existing tourism and recreational activities in the general area, and the fact that all current recreational activities will retain almost all of their setting and experience characteristics during the construction and operation of the CHWF, the net effect of the CHWF on current recreation and tourism activities will be, at most, no more than minor.
Landscape and Visual Effects
From a landscape and visual perspective, the northern Wairarapa hill country landscape is an appropriate location for the CHWF. The CHWF does not impinge upon or compromise any outstanding natural features or landscapes within the northern Wairarapa area. The inland hill country landscape of the northern Wairarapa can accommodate the proposed CHWF without adversely affecting or compromising its rural character or its associated rural activities.
From public roads and rural settlements within 30 km of the CHWF, the visual effects will be minor. Of the 109 rural dwellings within 5 km and external to the CHWF Site, from 61 of these dwellings there are no visual effects due to landform and/or vegetation screening (56%), or the potential visual effects are assessed as being low (33%). From seven (6%) of the dwellings the potential visual effects have been assessed as being moderate and from five30 (5%) of the dwellings the potential visual effects have been assessed as being high. Discussions on visual effects and possible landscape mitigation is continuing with respect to four External Dwellings on three External Landowner properties.
The landscape effects of the CHWF relative to earthworks associated with Internal Roads, Turbine Platform construction and other earthworks will generally not be visible from locations beyond the CHWF Site. Where visible these activities can be effectively managed and mitigated.
From public roads and rural dwellings in the northern Wairarapa area, the cumulative visual effects of the Tararua – Ruahine Range wind farms and the consented Waitahora Wind Farm will not generally be apparent due to the screening effects of intervening landforms and existing vegetation, as well as distance and orientation relative to potential viewpoints.
Noise Effects
Noise generated during the construction of the CHWF can comply with the provisions of construction noise standard NZS6803, as required by the TDC and MDC District Plans. Construction noise from upgrades to External Roads will, in some cases, exceed the noise limits in NZS6803 for temporary periods, and mitigation measures have been proposed to address this where necessary.
30 A written approval form from the landowner of one of these dwellings is being signed, as outlined in Section 1.5. The dwelling has only been included to assist the assessment of visual and landscape effects overall and in particular with respect to visibility and rural character effects in general.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 290
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
NZS6808 provides the noise performance standard for wind farms and establishes a noise limit of 40 dBA L90 or 5 dB above the existing ambient background sound level, whichever is the higher. The CHWF can be designed so that noise effects from Turbines will comply with NZS6808 at all External Dwellings. At one External Dwelling the noise level from the loudest Indicative Turbine Layout exceeds 40 dBA, but complies with NZS6808 on the basis of a higher noise limit due to high existing background noise level. The final design will ensure that compliance with NZS6808 will be achieved by design of the CWHF, or by establishing that the elevated noise limit is appropriate over a variety of seasonal variations.
Noise from the Main and Satellite Substations, and the Internal Transmission Line can comply with noise standards set in the TDC and MDC District Plans. Road traffic noise from Internal Roads during the operational stage will be 46 dB LA10 or less at all External Dwellings, consistent with those anticipated by NZS6803 and are considered reasonable in this context of their limited duration.
A Construction Noise Management Plan and an Operational Noise Management Plan will be prepared to ensure that the construction and operation of the CHWF complies with all relevant noise standards, and that measures are in place to avoid, remedy or mitigate situations where those standards are breached. Conditions of consent will ensure that the noise emissions from the CHWF project will comply with the relevant noise standards.
While noise from the CWHF may be audible outside External Dwellings at times, the noise level is sufficiently low to avoid sleep disturbance and will not result in adverse amenity effects, therefore it is concluded that noise effects are no more than minor.
Traffic Effects
Traffic volumes will increase as a result of the CHWF project, with most increases occurring during the construction phase of the project. The peak daily traffic activity of any of the programmes is expected to generate total additional traffic volumes of between 205 and 451 vpd (two way). Peak hour demands can be expected to generate up to between 96 to 133 movements (two way total). The maximum increase in average daily vehicle movements during the construction phase will be between 221 and 359 movements, depending on what construction programme is adopted. Analysis of the local road network has shown that in a capacity sense, the increase in traffic movements can be readily accommodated within the network. However, given that a significant portion of these traffic movements will be HCV’s, a number of mitigation and management measures will be required to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the road network.
Numerous improvements and upgrades to the External Roads between Alfredton and the Site will be necessary to safely accommodate the increase in vehicle movements, and ensure that through-traffic is not unduly restricted by HCV and OW/OD Vehicles accessing the Site. Such improvements include the straightening of horizontal and vertical alignments, the widening of the carriageway and the upgrading (or in some cases replacement) of bridge structures.
A CTMP is proposed that will provide an appropriate set of managed controls and protocols specific to the CHWF. The CTMP will be a live document that can be amended to account for changes in the project schedule and to address matters that
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 291
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects arise during the construction process. CHWF contractors, stakeholders, the TDC and the MDC will all contribute towards the preparation of the CTMP.
Traffic generation during the operation of the CHWF will involve up to 80 vehicle trips per day, which will not be discernable on the road network.
With traffic management, road improvements and mitigation measures, it is expected that the safe and efficient operation of the road network will continue with less than minor effects arising as a result of the CHWF.
Potential Effects on Water Resources
Baseline surveys of the watercourses in the vicinity of the CHWF Site identified no notable aquatic values being present aside from the presence of two threatened species (freshwater crayfish and longfin eel). This reflects the predominantly agricultural land use in the catchments, the general lack of riparian protection, and the steep and erosion-prone soft-sedimentary soils that dominate the site. This results in high levels of sediment run-off in the catchment, particularly during and immediately after high rainfall events. The Proposed WRPS identifies that the Tauweru, Whareama, and Mataikona Rivers meet one or more criteria relating to rivers with significant indigenous ecosystems. However, these features primarily relate to river reaches outside the CHWF Site.
Potential effects on surface water during the construction and operation of the CHWF include effects on water quality though increased erosion and sedimentation from earthwork activities, changes to surface water hydrology from water abstraction, effects on aquatic ecology due to changes in water quality and flow regimes, and effects on flood risk from new impervious structures in the catchment.
Appropriate erosion and sediment controls will be prepared in advance of construction activities at each earthworks site and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction commencing. Monitoring of the receiving environment will ensure erosion and sediment control practices are operating effectively. Overall, with appropriate assessment, design, controls, site management and monitoring, effects on surface water quality will be, at most, no more than minor.
Proposed temporary water abstractions during construction will comply with the allocation framework set out in the relevant planning documents, and minimum and residual flows are proposed for each water abstraction site to ensure flow regimes are maintained at a sufficient level to sustain in-stream ecological values and to minimise effects on other water users, and to ensure flow regimes are maintained at a sufficient level to sustain in-stream ecological values. All in-stream structures will also incorporate appropriate screening, and provisions for fish bypass to ensure fish passage is not affected.
Reduced recharge to groundwater during construction is expected to cause a reduction in stream baseflow that is within the natural variation, and will have a no more than minor effect. Flow reduction at springs and seepages will vary depending on the extent of earthworks within the catchment area, with larger flow reductions expected in upper slope locations where earthworks cover a large proportion of a small groundwater catchment. Seepages in this latter category will be a small proportion of the numerous seepages that form part of the ground water resources in the area.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 292
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
No sediment-related effects on groundwater quality during construction are expected as rock mass joints in the CHWF area are unlikely to be sufficiently and persistently open. The potential for contaminants from accidental spills or leaks of substances used during construction works to affect groundwater quality will be reduced by lining and bunding areas where spills might occur, and the implementation of a Spill Response Plan. Reduced recharge to groundwater during the operational period is expected to have only a minor effect on stream baseflow and spring/seepage flows.
Ecological Effects
Potential construction effects on the ecology of the CHWF Site include the loss of habitat for birds, bats, lizards, and invertebrates through vegetation clearance; and the introduction of weed species. The creation of Internal Roads could also result in easier access for domestic stock into existing areas of indigenous vegetation, and the roading network could, potentially, enhance the movement of pest animals throughout the Site.
Vegetation clearance is necessary to enable construction of the CHWF project. Potential adverse effects on existing ecological values have been minimised by avoiding, as much as possible, high value indigenous vegetation through the design of the CHWF. The total area of potential vegetation clearance is c.943.3 ha. Most of this (93%) comprises vegetation and habitats of Low or negligible ecological value (largely pasture). Indigenous vegetation clearance comprises c.66 ha.
Potential operational effects include collision with Turbine blades by birds and long- tailed bats. Indigenous birds recorded at the Site, that are predicted to be at risk of collision include Australasian harrier, southern black-backed gull, black shag, little shag, and little black shag, although very few little shag and little black shag are present. Kereru, tui, and paradise shelduck may also be at risk. The ecological effects assessment has found that there are no indigenous fauna species or habitats present that could, potentially, suffer adverse effects.
Overall, taking account of all potential ecological effects, the CHWF Site is an appropriate location for the construction and operation of a wind farm, as the vast majority of the vegetation and habitats within and adjacent to the Site are of negligible or Low ecological value and are dominated by exotic species, being mainly pasture and smaller areas of exotic plantation forest.
Shadow Flicker and Blade Glint Effects
The shadow flicker effects assessment has determined that there will be no significant exposure to shadow flicker for any External Dwelling to the CHWF. The predicted maximum exposure to shadow flicker would not exceed 30 hours per year or 30 minutes per day at any External Dwelling within 1,100 m of the edge of the Turbine Corridor, in accordance with international guidelines for acceptable levels of shadow flicker. Some External Dwellings are screened by mature vegetation that will either eliminate or assist in mitigating any effects of shadow flicker. A low reflectivity finish will be used for all Turbines for the CHWF to ensure the potential for blade glint is avoided, and to ensure adverse effects on External Dwellings are no more than minor.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 293
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Cultural Effects
Genesis Energy has been consulting with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne on the CHWF project. This has also included consultation with hapu / marae affiliated to both Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne. As a result of this consultation, Rangit ne o Wairarapa, Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua, Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa and Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui a Rua have either prepared, or are currently preparing, a CIA or CVA for the CHWF project.
No evidence has been found relating to any sites of cultural significance being located within the CHWF Site.
Effects on Archaeology and Heritage
No particular archaeological sites have previously been recorded within, or in the general vicinity of, the CHWF Site, and no archaeological sites were identified within the Turbine Corridor during the archaeological survey undertaken at locations of potential archaeological interest for this application. While it is possible that the area was visited and used by Maori in the past (for the forest resources), and the upper ridgelines may have been used as travelling routes through the area, no information is available to confirm this. Overall, the CHWF has no known archaeological significance.
The proposal will not affect any historic buildings in the area, including the two historic woolsheds on Annedale and Manawa Roads classified as ‘Heritage Items’ in the Combined Plan.
The potential for unidentified archaeological remains within the Turbine Corridor is low based on the lack of archaeological sites identified during the desktop review and field survey, the considerable distance of the CHWF Site from any recorded archaeological sites, the level of modification across the Site, and other environmental variables such as altitude and exposed conditions at the Site. Should any archaeological sites be exposed during construction, an Accidental Discovery Protocol will be followed and the provisions of the Historic Places Act 1993 will be complied with. Overall, effects on archaeology and heritage are considered to the no more than minor.
Effects on Radio-communication and Telecommunication Services
The three areas of radio-communication and telecommunication service activities that are potentially affected by the CHWF are analogue television, fixed radio linking and VHF mobile radio. No other significant effect on radio-communication and telecommunication services in the area has been identified.
Analogue television in the district will be switched off by 29 September 2013 and replaced by digital transmission, therefore there is no predicted effect on television reception in the area from the CHWF. Four fixed radio links have been identified as being at risk of experiencing interference from the Turbines, but none were found to be at risk of experiencing effects from the Internal Transmission Lines. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with the individual service operators to ensure that the CHWF avoids, remedies or mitigates adverse effects on these links.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 294
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Four VHF mobile repeater sites are located within the Turbine Corridor and could potentially be affected by the CHWF. Genesis Energy will consult with the individual licence holders to determine if the CHWF is causing any adverse effects on their VHF mobile repeater services, and if interference is shown to occur after the Turbines are installed, it may be possible to relocate any affected mobile repeater site so that it is sufficiently isolated from the Turbines.
Overall, any potential effects of the CHWF on radio-communication and telecommunication services can be mitigated, to the extent that they are no more than minor.
Aviation Effects
Turbines are considered to be a navigation hazard (higher than 120 m above surrounding ground level) and will therefore be appropriately lit and identified on aeronautical charts, in accordance with CAA requirements. During the construction phase, Genesis Energy will provide regular updates to the CAA in respect of progress and staging of the overall development. The CHWF will therefore not cause an adverse effect in terms of navigable airspace.
The potential effect of Turbines and the Internal Transmission Line on fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters used for fertiliser application and weed control in the CHWF Site can be managed through the provision of appropriate information and fertiliser and herbicide application planning.
Electric and Magnetic Fields Effects
All electromagnetic fields from the CHWF will comply by a considerable margin with the relevant limits for general public and occupational exposure, set in the 2010 ICNIRP Guidelines (as endorsed by the New Zealand Ministry of Health). Minimisation of electromagnetic fields can be readily achieved by conventional engineering techniques.
Compliance with ICNIRP Guidelines will ensure that there will be no risk to public health and safety from electromagnetic fields. Overall, the design of the CHWF will have no biological or health effects from electromagnetic fields, and there are no specific design or mitigation requirements other than compliance with the ICNIRP Guidelines to ensure that the effects are no more than minor.
Assessment of Environmental Effects Section 5 – page 295
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
6. PROPOSED MONITORING AND MITIGATION 6.1 Introduction
As detailed in Section 5 of this AEE, the CHWF is a significant development with a range of potential environmental effects. Areas of environmental sensitivity have been identified and considered during the design of the CHWF, and potentially significant adverse effects have been avoided as far as is practicable. As not all potential adverse effects can be avoided or remedied, mitigation will be achieved by implementing the range of monitoring and mitigation methods set out below. When taking account of the project as a whole, overall mitigation of environmental effects will be achieved.
6.2 Management Plans 6.2.1 Overview In addition to the selection of appropriate design criteria and the locations of individual components, environmental effects management and mitigation will be augmented through the development and implementation of an Environmental Management Plan (“EMP”) and associated Supplementary Environmental Management Plans (“SEMPs”). These are detailed in the COMR attached as Appendix A (Volume 2) to this document.
The EMP and associated SEMPs will be prepared during the detailed design phase and will take into account the final CHWF layout and relevant resource consent conditions. The EMP and the various SEMPs will augment the mitigation measures proposed in the AEE and will be provided to the appropriate consent authority for approval prior to construction commencing.
The EMP and SEMPs are live documents that can be updated over time to address any issues that arise. This enables an adaptive environmental management approach to be taken, whereby the environmental management of the particular location, activity, or effect can evolve and improve with advances in technology, knowledge, On-site experience and good practice as required. This adaptive management mechanism enables a “plan-do-check-act” approach to be undertaken whereby the ongoing monitoring and reporting that will be undertaken creates a continuous feedback loop from the effects being created, allowing for the most appropriate solution to be utilised or change of method made for any particular environmental effect.
6.2.2 Environmental Management Plan The EMP will be the primary management tool for addressing the potential effects associated with the CHWF, with specific locations, activities or effects being addressed through more specific SEMPs as supplements to the EMP. The EMP and SEMPs will be prepared by personnel appropriately qualified in the particular matter being addressed by the particular plan.
The EMP will provide practical environmental management measures for the CHWF project, during both construction and operation phases. More specifically, it will include practical management actions, performance requirements, and systems of monitoring, reporting and auditing, and corrective action requirements.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 296
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
A draft EMP is included as Appendix D of the COMR and also includes the outline approach to SEMPs. The purpose of providing a draft of the EMP and appropriate SEMPs is to enable the public and decision makers to have the opportunity to access, review and comment on the objectives and outline approach to managing environmental effects through the duration of the consent process. This will also allow Genesis Energy to consider relevant feedback arising out of the consenting process, the requirements of the conditions of consents, and for these to be incorporated in the EMP.
The EMP will cover the following topics:
The Castle Hill Wind Farm Project
Purpose and Scope
Statutory Requirements
Genesis Energy’s Approach to Environmental Management
Environmental Management Framework
Revisions and EMP Evolution
EMP Roles and Responsibilities.
Construction Environmental Management
Erosion and Sediment Control Measures
Water Management
Site Rehabilitation and Reinstatement
Air Quality
Construction Noise Management
Traffic and Transport Management
Concrete Batching Plant Management
Management of Quarries and Crushing Facilities
Archaeology and Heritage Management
Biodiversity Management
Visual Mitigation
Hazardous Material Management
Operations and Maintenance Environmental Management
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 297
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Incidents
Inspection, Monitoring and Auditing
Enquires and Complaints – communications management protocol / process by Genesis Energy and Contractors.
EMP Documentation
6.2.3 Supplementary Environmental Management Plans The SEMPs will ensure that a suitable level of environmental management is adopted for specific locations, activities, or effects that result from the project, as set out in the COMR. The specifics of the SEMPs will be determined in consultation with the appointed contractor, relevant specialists, Genesis Energy staff (e.g. environmental manager, project manager), and Council representatives. This is expected to involve the review of detailed designs, site visits and provision of other information required to determine the extent of management required On-site. For each SEMP proposed, an outline of the purpose, objective(s) and proposed content is provided within the EMP. Proposed SEMPs include those set out below.
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (“ESCP”)
Drainage Management Plan (“DMP”)
Quarry Management Plan (“QMP”)
Concrete Batching Plant Management Plan (“CBPMP”)
Baseline Aquatic Monitoring Plan (“BAMP”)
Construction Aquatic Monitoring Plan (“CAMP”)
Biodiversity Management – Revegetation Plan
Biodiversity Management – Weed Hygiene and Surveillance Plan
Construction Noise Management Plan (“CNMP”)
Construction Traffic Management Framework (“CTMF”)
Draft Archaeological Accidental Discovery Protocol
Biodiversity Management – Habitat Management Plan(s)
Biodiversity Management – Riparian Protection Plan
Biodiversity Management – Goat Control Plan
Biodiversity Management – Avifauna Monitoring Plan
Biodiversity Management – Bat Monitoring Plan
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 298
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Biodiversity Management – Lizard Monitoring Plan
Biodiversity Management – Predator Control Plan
Biodiversity Management – Vegetation Management Plan
Operational Noise Management Plan (“ONMP”)
Spill Response Plan (“SRP”)
Genesis Energy, as the consent holder will have ultimate responsibility to provide for the implementation of the EMP and SEMPs. Implementation of the SEMPs will also be a contractual responsibility of the contractor, and Genesis Energy will comprehensively monitor the construction works to ensure the contractors works are in accordance with the EMP and SEMPs. All construction works will require formal notice to proceed, which will not be issued to the contractor unless Genesis Energy is satisfied that appropriate compliant measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate potential adverse effects are either in place, or are planned to occur during the works.
Regular reports (i.e. monitoring as per the EMP and SEMPs) are to be provided by the contractor to Genesis Energy and then to Council representatives outlining details of management solutions implemented, and also identifying any improvements or adaptations to the SEMPs required to address site-specific issues that have arisen. Reports to Council’s will outline monitoring and compliance requirements as set out in resource consent conditions.
All activities undertaken On-site shall be carried out in accordance with the EMP and relevant SEMP’s as part of a Site-wide environmental management process. The following sections detail the proposed environmental monitoring and mitigation for specific elements of the proposed wind farm.
6.3 Construction Activities 6.3.1 Earthworks and Sedimentation A number of stormwater management controls are required during the construction phase to manage potential environmental effects associated with erosion and sedimentation arising from earthworks and exposed surfaces. All stormwater management measures will be designed in general accordance with the Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for the Wellington Region, a document produced by the GWRC. All such measures will be encapsulated within the ESCP(s), which will be finalised prior to construction. The proposed monitoring and mitigation measures listed here are based on the examples provided in the Hydrology Report (PDP 2011b) and the description in the COMR (attached as Appendix A, Volume 2).
Turbine Platforms, Turbine Foundations, Central Laydown Areas and Contractor Compounds
Primary sediment control around the Turbine Platforms, Turbine Foundations, Central Laydown Areas and Contractor Compounds will involve the use of silt fencing and stormwater diversion channels to control the flow of both clean and contaminated
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 299
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects water. Where a number of disturbed areas are close together, or in areas of significant disturbance, cut off drains will convey stormwater to appropriate treatment facilities. Assisted flocculation (treatment with alum or other flocculants) may be used to ensure that settling is achieved where appropriate.
Excavations will be backfilled and graded to fit a terrain profile which relates to the natural landform and then revegetated as soon as practicable after earthworks. Excavation activities will be managed through compliance with the relevant management plans.
As outlined in Section 4, Central Laydown Areas are required to provide for some activities associated with the development of the CHWF. These areas will mostly be temporary features and appropriate sediment control mechanisms will be put in place during their establishment and operation. All temporary construction sites will be rehabilitated once they are no longer required for construction activities. Rehabilitation will normally involve the placement of topsoil, seeding and possibly watering to return to pasture.
Internal Road Construction
Internal Road construction will upgrade and expand existing farm tracks wherever practicable. The construction method will use cut and fill slopes, and benching as appropriate for the On-site soil conditions. Exposed surfaces will be stabilised using geotextiles, jute matting, hydro-seeding, or aggregates as appropriate. Internal Roads will be finished with aggregate material as a running service with edge drains to minimise water ingress into the pavement.
In steeper sections, asphalt may be used as a running surface to provide additional traction for vehicles, and to minimise the potential for the pavement to erode. To further maintain the integrity of both the road and drain construction, pipes, inlet protection and rock-lined stormwater channels or pipes will be constructed to convey stormwater down steep batters.
Edge drains may use bunds or silt fences to retain stormwater and sediment. Within the stormwater collection channels, closely spaced rock check dams will dissipate the energy arising from the flow of stormwater thereby reducing its potential for erosion. To further control water flows, multiple outlets to flow dispersion devices (to sheet flow across vegetated slopes) will be provided to minimise discharges at single points. Where necessary, settlement ponds and decanting earth bunds will be established to treat water prior to flows entering watercourses.
In some instances, the Internal Roads will cross permanent watercourses. During the detailed design phase of the project, consideration will be given to each of these watercourses to determine whether a culvert or bridge is the most appropriate structure to prevent adverse effects such as scour occurring as a result of the construction.
PDP (2011b) has considered Internal Roads crossings of streams and designed a five step method to manage each stream crossing. During construction, temporary diversions will be installed, or water pumped around the construction area depending on what represents the most appropriate method to ensure that no flowing or ponded water sits within the construction area. All installed culverts will have an invert level below the stream channel to allow for fish passage. Provision will be made to
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 300
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects accommodate extreme flow events such that infrastructure maintains its integrity with minimal nuisance or damage sustained.
All activities and effects will be managed through compliance with the relevant management plans.
Excess Fill Areas
Within the identified fill areas erosion and sediment control will be similar to that of the Turbine Platforms and Central Laydown Areas with the use of silt fencing and settlement ponds or earth bund decant systems. Excess Fill Areas will be stabilised with geotextiles, jute matting, hydro-seeding or aggregates where appropriate and discharges will be via multiple outlets and flow dispersion devices to minimise discharge from single sources. Stormwater collection channels will have closely spaced rock check dams where required to dissipate hydraulic energy and minimise erosion.
Cut-off drains will be established within the working area to convey stormwater to a decanting earth bund for treatment. Where there are a number of disturbed areas in close proximity, a decanting pond may be used instead. All activities and effects will be managed through compliance with the relevant management plans (e.g. ESCPs).
Electrical Balance of Plant
The EBoP is required to connect not only the individual Turbines but also each Turbine circuit to the relevant substation. The EBoP will be installed in a staged manner to enable the connection and operation of Turbines as they are commissioned, and to minimise the amount of area disturbed at any one time.
Measures to be implemented to minimise the potential for erosion and treat sediment discharge arising from construction of the EBoP include:
Minimising the area disturbed by construction activities.
Progressively completing construction activities on a stage by stage basis.
Revegetating and rehabilitating areas disturbed as soon as possible after earthworks have been completed.
Sediment control mechanisms will be established in accordance with the ESCPs and decanting earth bunds may be used to treat water captured within the disturbed areas prior to discharge to the surrounding water courses. All activities and effects will be managed through compliance with the relevant management plans as set out above and summarised in the COMR (Appendix A) Volume 2 of this document.
On-site Quarries and Aggregate Processing
Areas that have been identified for aggregate extraction and processing will be isolated from adjacent land areas by topography, earth bunds, or diversion channels. This will enable the activities involving water use to be contained at such locations and to drain
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 301
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects to a separate stormwater treatment system. The use of a separate stormwater treatment system will enable the recycling of water, or the discharge of treated water to the surrounding environment via a floating decant or weir (as appropriate) once sediment has been removed.
A primary settling sump will be established at the bottom of any rock extraction area to manage groundwater and surface water inflow. Stormwater from the sump will be pumped to a ‘process water pond’ for sedimentation and storage. Water from the process water pond will be pumped and recycled for aggregate washing and supplemented with freshwater as required. Water used for aggregate washing will drain back to the process pond for reuse.
Concrete Batching Plants
Where concrete production occurs On-site, the area surrounding the batching plant, concrete loading areas, sediment drying and wash-bays (the ‘activity’ area) will be isolated from adjacent land by kerbs, nibs or diversion channels. Any access roads or stockpile areas will be treated as ‘non-activity’ areas and drain to a separate stormwater treatment system. Water from the stormwater treatment system will pass through a vegetated organic buffer strip, wetland, or rain garden to reduce residual pH levels and discharge to land via a dispersal trench. The discharge will be monitored to ensure the level of treatment received is sufficient.
Stormwater and wash down water collected from within the activity area will be directed to a wash water settling pond for storage and reuse. The recycled water from the wash water settling pond will be used for concrete manufacture and wash down, with freshwater supplementing supply as required.
It is anticipated that many (or potentially all) concrete batching pants will be adjacent to, or contained within a quarry. Where this is the case, then the environmental measures taken in the quarry and concrete batching plant will be closely interlinked. The Quarry Management Plan SEMP will set out and incorporate environmental management measures for the concrete batching plant.
Post Construction Reinstatement
The construction of the CHWF will be progressive in nature and post construction reinstatement of all disturbed areas will also occur in a progressive manner, and in accordance with the measures proposed within the EMP and relevant SEMPs. This sequential reinstatement process will occur from upstream areas moving through to downstream areas. The reinstatement process will ensure that all areas, including any earthworks batters, internal roads, channels and sedimentation ponds are appropriately stabilised before the Contractor demobilises from that particular area within the Site.
Revegetation and Rehabilitation Approach
The revegetation and rehabilitation approach will be detailed in the EMP and associated SEMPs as described in the COMR. Techniques such as low-angled slopes and protected drainage channels, will minimise the potential for both wind based and runoff based erosion occurring on exposed surfaces, while also preventing surface
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 302
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects ponding of water occurring. Excess Fill Areas will be contoured to re-create previous water flow patterns as far as practicable.
Retention of topsoil for use in rehabilitation will form an integral component of the rehabilitation process. In all areas of excavation, topsoil will be removed and stockpiled for later use in the rehabilitation of disturbed areas. Rehabilitation of all disturbed areas will occur as soon as practicable.
The objective of revegetation and rehabilitation will (apart from where there are non- vegetated solutions proposed) be to replace vegetation as like-for-like. Revegetation will use pasture grasses and native vegetation as is appropriate for the areas being rehabilitated. As outlined in Section 3.3.7, the majority of the disturbed area is currently pasture grass, therefore it will be rehabilitated back to pasture grass at the end of construction. Pasture grasses will be seeded onto a rough soil surface using an appropriate method such as direct drilling, hydro-seeding, or hand sowing, to promote rapid vegetative cover and to minimise the potential for erosion. Appropriate application methods and timeframes will be developed within the EMP and SEMPs.
A range of species will be used for revegetating the site, with pasture grasses including brown top and ryegrass, where appropriate. In order to reinstate or provide establishment phase indigenous vegetation cover, species such as kanuka, toetoe, manuka, karamu, ti kouka, piripiri and coprosma will be used initially. Secondary phase indigenous species will be planted (known as enrichment) in the appropriate areas once the initial canopy cover has been established and to provide a representative indigenous cover. Slow release fertiliser and water crystals may be used to assist vegetation establishment. The areas proposed to be revegetated shall be determined and set out in the relevant SEMP.
To assist vegetation establishment, stock will be excluded from recently established grass and indigenous plantings, with measures for control of pest animals and weeds undertaken to improve establishment success. The control of pest animals and weeds will be provided for within the relevant SEMPs set out in the EMP.
6.3.2 Construction Traffic Construction Traffic Management Plan
A detailed CTMP will be prepared in order to provide an appropriate set of managed controls and protocols specific to the CHWF. This will ensure the safe and efficient performance of the road network, and will serve to minimise adverse effects on the existing community arising from construction traffic. The CTMP will be a live document designed to be prepared with input from the principal civil contractor, turbine transport contractor, TDC and MDC, key stakeholders on the transport route who wish to be involved, emergency services and local transport operators (such as the school bus operator and livestock transporters). This will be regularly updated to incorporate changes in the project schedule or address matters that may arise during construction. A framework for developing the detailed CTMP has been prepared setting out the purpose, objectives and specific standards to be applied when preparing the CTMP at the detailed design stage.
The CTMP will be prepared by a Chartered Professional Engineer with specialist skills in traffic engineering and transportation planning, appointed by Genesis Energy. It is
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 303
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects proposed that the CTMP will be submitted to the Councils to be assessed and certified by them as meeting the requirements of the Framework.
The Construction Traffic Management Framework (“CTMF”) will provide the guidelines for such matters as:
Purpose and objectives of the CTMP.
The process and approach for development of the CTMP.
Construction programme and traffic flows.
Travel routes, site access points, contractor parking.
Travel plans and passenger transport to minimise contractor vehicles on the local roads.
Management of road safety including such measures as driver protocols, monitoring and reporting requirements.
Recording and accounting for road improvements and pavement maintenance.
Planning for OW/OD transport movements.
Incident reporting.
Emergency services.
Performance monitoring.
Contingency planning and response provisions.
Temporary traffic management planning.
Communications protocols, including those relating to the equipping of school buses with radio telephones.
Information availability and reporting.
Permits for the transport of OW/OD loads to the Site are being applied for from the NZTA separately to this application; however recommendations for the transport of OW/OD loads will be included within the CTMP.
External Road Management
Traffic Volumes
Movement of OW/OD Vehicles on SH2 and SH50A between the Port of Napier and Links Rd will be avoided, where practicable, during the following higher volume and holiday travel periods:
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 304
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
On weekdays between 7:00am and 9:00am and between 3:00pm and 6:00pm.
Easter weekend commencing 12:00pm on the preceding Thursday and ending midnight on Easter Monday.
From 6:00 am 23 December through to midnight on 2 January in any year.
The provision for this type of management is most appropriately established in the OD/OW Vehicle permit, which is separately required, and to be approved by the NZTA and Local Authorities.
Construction personnel will also be expected to coordinate, share and plan travel to and from the Site to minimise additional travel demands on External Roads. A ‘Travel Plan’ provision within the CTMP will provide guidance to contractors on how this can be achieved. Additionally, contractor parking and loading provision will be made prior to the commencement of any construction activity. All contractor parking is to be contained wholly On-site.
Cumulative Traffic Effects
Cumulative traffic effects assessments have established that there is minimal coincident demand for transport activity on the local road network. There is a possibility that other wind farm developers may utilise the Port of Napier for receiving over-dimension loads and truck these to site which could theoretically produce periods of common demand on the State Highway network. Permits for the transport of OW/OD loads is being handled through a separate application and any cumulative traffic effects arising from OW/OD loads will be addressed in that process.
School Bus Movements
In conjunction with the CTMP, all school buses which operate in the vicinity on the CHWF area will be offered radio communications to enable contact with the CHWF gate and CHWF drivers using the same roads. A protocol for communications will be established to maintain a measure of control and clarity between contractor staff and school bus drivers, for school bus routes located between Pahiatua, Hamua, Eketahuna, Masterton and the Wind Farm Access Points.
Road Closures, Events and Cyclic Activities
The CTMP will make provision for coordinated traffic management planning with event organisers and Councils at the event planning stage. This will ensure that cyclic farming activities such as fertiliser application and stock movement, or other temporary events can safely and efficiently operate in unison with the construction activities of the CHWF. If necessary, a temporary traffic management plan can be prepared for approval by the relevant Council, when construction traffic has the potential to conflict with such regular rural industry activities.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 305
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Road Safety
The consent holder will coordinate with Council’s to establish road safety projects on the principal Site access roads where these coincide with identified mitigation works and also have a relevance to construction traffic associated with the CHWF.
Genesis Energy will engage with school bus operators and Council’s about the location and safety arrangements relating to school bus collection points. Where particular local conditions identify a potential frequent or significant effect, this shall be assessed to identify an appropriate response to mitigate road safety risks.
Local Road Upgrades
Upgrades to the local road network have been proposed in order to ensure that the increased traffic flows associated with the CHWF can be appropriately provided for. Upgrading of roads will take place under three main categories:
Maintenance of existing pavements;
Structural pavements and widening of unsealed roads; and
Structural pavements and widening of sealed roads.
Where significant earthworks are proposed on external roads, the design will be developed in consultation with the appropriate Council and Genesis Energy will engage with the Council and affected landowners to develop appropriate communication channels, and property access solutions. The proposed upgrades are summarised below.
Maintenance of the Existing Road Network
The following carriageways have been identified where maintenance of the current pavement surface is required to provide for the construction traffic flows:
Route 52 – Site Access Points to Whangaehu Valley Road;
Castle Hill Road – Alfredton to Site Access Points;
Alfredton Road – Mangaone Valley Road to Alfredton;
Kaitawa Road, Hamua Rongomai Road and Mangaone Valley Road – subject to the sections used to provide access for the OW/OD vehicles;
Whangaehu Valley Road – Te Ore Ore Bideford Road to Route 52; and
Te Ore Ore – Bideford Road and Glendonald Rd.
A partnering agreement with the Council having jurisdiction over the particular roads will be considered where maintenance of the pavement as a result of increased traffic flows is likely to be required.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 306
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Structural Pavements and Widening of Unsealed Roads
Given the rural nature of the Site, a number of unsealed roads need to be utilised for the development of the CHWF. To ensure the integrity and continuity of access for construction purposes, the following road sections will be upgraded by Genesis Energy to ensure that the carriageway cross section and design pavement depth meet the demands generated by the CHWF HCV traffic:
Waihoki Valley Road – Route 52 to the Site Access Points;
Waitawhiti Road – Route 52 to the Site Access Point and including Puketawa Road;
Castle Hill Road and Alfredton – Tinui Road – from about 2 km west of Ngarata Road (200 m west of the one lane bridge) to Manawa Road and including Ngarata Road; and
Manawa Road – from Alfredton – Tinui Road to the Site access to Cluster F.
Once upgraded these roads will be maintained by Genesis Energy for the duration of their use in the construction of the CHWF to enable any construction related effects to be remedied.
A number of other existing local roads, or parts of them, are located close to the Site, have very low volumes, are relatively short in length and/or have a minimal or no thoroughfare function. It is appropriate in these cases to form the road carriageways to the minimum width necessary to accommodate OW/OD loads. It is noted these may not necessarily require forming to a full two lane width. These roads can be managed by way of temporary traffic management controls and the establishment of comprehensive temporary traffic management plan(s).
Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management
These traffic management plans will be established in accordance with the Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (COPTTM). Plans are currently able to be established for up to 1 year duration, after which they will require renewal. These roads include all or parts of the following:
Pahiatua Road – between Rimu Road and the Site Access Point;
Rimu Road – from Route 52 to the first Site Access Point and from the second Site Access Point to Pahiatua Road ;
Rakaunui Road – from Route 52 to the Site Access Points;
Puketawa Road;
Ngarata Road;
Daggs Road;
Wairiri Road;
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 307
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Maringi Road; and
Tinui Valley Road – between the Tinui Quarry and Turbine Cluster F Access Point.
Once constructed, Genesis Energy will maintain these roads for the periods that they are to be used for construction purposes.
Structural Pavements and Widening of Sealed Roads
While no generalised widening of sealed roads has been identified as necessary, a number of route inspections will be carried out during the detailed design phase of the CHWF. These route inspections will occur in conjunction with the Councils and record the existing state of the roads prior to the commencement of construction activities. The results of the route inspections will guide decisions on whether or not the roads should be upgraded prior to construction, maintained, or rehabilitated following construction activities. Repeat surveys will be undertaken on a case by case basis.
6.3.3 Cultural, Archaeological and Heritage The Archaeological Effects Assessment (Clough and Associates, 2011) concluded that there are no known archaeological features within the Site, and no unrecorded sites are predicted to be exposed during construction. While no specific features have been identified or are expected to be found within the Site, an Accidental Archaeological Discovery Protocol will be developed and finalised in consultation with tangata whenua prior to construction commencing. The protocol will mean that if koiwi tangata (human remains), taonga or sub-surface archaeological evidence is uncovered during the construction period, work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the remains so that appropriate action can then be taken.
While unlikely, if modification of an archaeological site does become necessary, an Authority to modify an archaeological site will be sought under Section 11 of the Historic Places Act 1993 prior to any further work being carried out that will affect the site.
Through Genesis Energy’s engagement and consultation with tangata whenua prior to the lodgement of the AEE, Genesis Energy has discussed the cultural relationship that tangata whenua has with the natural resources in the CHWF area and the potential environmental effects or values that require consideration in relation to the CHWF project.
Genesis Energy is committed to ongoing relationships with tangata whenua and has established Memorandum’s of Understanding with the relevant tangata whenua authorities, outside of the Resource Management process.
Within Cultural Impact Assessments prepared by tangata whenua, several topics were identified as recommendations, matters to be mitigated or suggested conditions of consent. These are summarised below:
That an ongoing formal relationship between tangata whenua groups and Genesis Energy be developed.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 308
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
That the opportunity to view the final resource consent application, AEE and supporting information be made available to tangata whenua parties in order for tangata whenua to satisfy themselves that matters identified by them have been assessed by Genesis Energy and any mitigation measures established for potential environmental effects. The particular requirements identified included the need to:
o Protect indigenous flora and fauna.
o Protect freshwater ecosystems.
o Manage visual and landscape effects
o Provide for robust environmental monitoring and adaptive management measures.
o Establish protocols for accidental discovery of cultural materials.
o To be culturally inclusive and allow for traditional connections.
o Have the opportunity to view the finalised design plans as available.
Recommendations, surrounding the requirements above are made for conditions of consent. These included conditions relating to the following matters:
Establishment and implementation of a robust and effective sedimentation and stormwater capture programme.
Establishment and implementation of a water quality and sedimentation monitoring programme.
Establishment of a process to avoid, reduce or limit the removal of native flora and fauna
Establishment of a protocol relating to the accidental discovery of cultural materials (Archaeological Accidental Discovery Protocol)
That provision is made for management and monitoring measures, results, assessment and analysis to be reviewed at appropriate times.
It is noted that the above matters are addressed in various sections of this AEE and will be covered in more detail in the EMP and SEMPs.
6.3.4 Surface and Groundwater Resources Surface Water
Together with the erosion and sediment control measures described in Section 6.3.1, Genesis Energy is also proposing to maintain minimum flows in water courses that water is taken from, in accordance with Regional Council Plans.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 309
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Water Quality
In order to determine any impacts from the construction of the CHWF a comprehensive management programme for avoiding or mitigating effects on in-stream values is proposed. This comprises a baseline aquatic monitoring plan (BAMP); and a construction aquatic monitoring plan (CAMP).
The BAMP will be developed to collect pre-construction information on aquatic communities within the Site and will provide a comparison with subsequent monitoring during construction.
The CAMP will then be developed, based on the BAMP, and will include compliance standards and measures to be implemented if standards are not met. Any potential effects will be minimised by adopting best-practice erosion control measures during construction and the immediate post-construction revegetation of disturbed sites according to the ESCP(s).
Fish Passage
It is expected that there will be a combination of culverts and small bridges required on the Internal Roads to cross watercourses. Conceptual designs for water crossings have been developed and will be implemented at watercourse crossing sites to enable fish passage to be maintained as discussed in the COMR (Appendix A).
Invasive Species
Where in-stream works are required the potential exists for the accidental introduction of aquatic weeds on machinery. This risk will be managed in accordance with the Weed Hygiene and Surveillance Plan – an SEMP prepared for the CHWF. This will reduce the likelihood of an accidental introduction to the extent practical.
Temporary Water Takes
As noted in Section 4 of this AEE, the construction of the CHWF requires water for activities such as concrete production and aggregate processing. It is proposed to undertake periodic monitoring to confirm the proposed flow regime is protected, and if any unexpected significant effects on ecological values are identified, the take quantity or location would be adjusted as required to ensure that appropriate minimum flows are maintained.
In the unlikely event that surface water becomes unsuitable for its intended use, such as stock or domestic water supply, as a result of Genesis Energy’s activities On-site, an alternative water supply will be provided until such a time as the surface water in question is again fit for purpose.
The effects of construction water takes will be addressed by:
Maintaining flow regimes in accordance with Regional Council minimum flow requirements at Ngaturi.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 310
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Not taking water from Te Hoe at Castle Hill Road, Tiraumea at Haunui Rd or Tinui at Taipo when flow is less than 95% MALF at the point of take.
Not taking in excess of 6.1 L/s total (531 m3/day) in the Tiraumea catchment (up to median flows).
Monitoring of water quality upstream and downstream at each take site and (where any flow is taken below 95% of MALF).
Monitoring for potential effects on ecology downstream of the take points.
Maintaining fish passage around any in-stream structures, and installing screens on any intake structures to prevent fish ingress.
Adherence to overall project management plans and procedures relating to the control of sediment discharges, dust and traffic management associated with construction activities.
Providing an alternative water supply to the landowner for the duration of construction works should any surface water supply become unsuitable for its intended use (e.g. stock or domestic water supply) as a result of the construction activity.
Groundwater
Pervasive open joints extending from the near-surface down to the groundwater table allow migration of sediment entrained recharge water. This sediment is naturally filtered (trapped) by flow through joint systems that are not persistently open. In locations with open joints, recharge that contains entrained sediment could potentially affect down-gradient groundwater quality (for example, at springs or as stream baseflow). The rock mass joints in the CHWF area have been determined to be unlikely to be sufficiently and persistently open to facilitate transport of sediment from surface to groundwater, and as a result, no significant sediment-related effects on groundwater quality during construction are expected.
There is potential for contaminants from accidental spills or leaks of substances used during construction works to affect groundwater quality. To ensure groundwater effects associated with construction are no more than minor Genesis Energy will ensure that:
All hazardous substances stored On-site are to be contained within lined and bunded areas; and
A robust Spill Response Plan is prepared and implemented for the duration of the CHWF.
6.3.5 Noise The construction activity associated with the CHWF can readily comply with the relevant construction noise standards. To ensure that compliance is achieved, and to address noise issues which may arise upon commencement of construction, a Construction Noise Management Plan will be prepared and implemented. The plan will
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 311
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects be prepared in accordance with New Zealand Standard NZS6803: 1999 Acoustics – Construction Noise and will detail the construction activities and procedures and measures that will be carried out to ensure compliance with the Standard and to control noise effects.
A condition of consent is recommended to ensure that noise generated by the construction of the CHWF will comply with the relevant noise standards and operate within the parameters established within the AEE.
6.3.6 Ecology Having regard to ecological matters, considerable investigation has been undertaken to identify areas of ecological value to inform the project design and to avoid such areas where practicable.
The approach to biodiversity management at the CHWF Site encompasses a comprehensive suite of measures that address potential adverse ecological effects to vegetation, habitats, flora, and fauna through construction and operation of the CHWF. The ecological measures will be implemented through a series of Biodiversity Management Plans including the following:
Revegetation Plan
Habitat Management Plan(s)
Riparian Protection Plan
Weed Hygiene and Surveillance Plan
Goat Control Plan
Avifauna Monitoring Plan
Bat Monitoring Plan
Lizard Monitoring Plan
Predator Control Plan
Vegetation Management Plan
Baseline Aquatic Monitoring Plan
Construction Aquatic Monitoring Plan
These plans outlined above are summarised in more detail below and within the EMP, appended to the COMR.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 312
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Revegetation Plan
A Revegetation Plan will be prepared for the CHWF, to ensure provision is made for prompt reinstatement of vegetation cover following on from earthworks. This will set out timeframes, methods and measures to provide for revegetation.
Habitat Management Plan
A Habitat Management Plan will be prepared for the CHWF, to enhance areas of indigenous vegetation and habitat to improve the overall quality and productivity of that habitat. This shall address matters such as legal and physical protection by covenant and fencing, enrichment planting, revegetation planting (if required), natural regeneration, pest control, and monitoring and reporting. It will guide the permanent protection and ongoing improvement of an area of habitat up to 210 ha in size in a staged manner as the wind farm is constructed.
Riparian Management Plan
A Riparian Protection Plan will be prepared to guide the physical protection of stream riparian margins. It will establish the mechanism for the implementation of riparian protection in a staged manner as the wind farm is constructed.
Weed Hygiene and Surveillance Plan
A Weed Hygiene and Surveillance Plan will be prepared to promote good weed hygiene and a high standard of weed control at the CHWF Site. This will address matters such as transportation risks from vehicles or equipment and cover both terrestrial and aquatic pest species. The Weed Hygiene and Surveillance Plan will:
Insist that all contractors practice good weed hygiene, cleaning their equipment before entering the CHWF Site.
Ensure that aggregates, soil, sand other material brought onto the CHWF Site is weed-free.
Ensure that existing weeds present On-site do not have their spread exacerbated by On-site CHWF activities.
Identify measures to reduce the likelihood of an accidental introduction of pest plants to the extent practical.
Establish an annual weed monitoring programme.
Identify control measures to address invasive species as a result of monitoring.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 313
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Goat Control Plan
As a component of the approach to managing pests across the Site, a Goat Control Plan will be prepared to provide a coordinated management approach to the control of feral goats across all properties associated with the CHWF with an aim to reduce goats to very low levels over a period of five years. Genesis Energy will work with appropriate agencies to deliver this programme at the appropriate time.
Avifauna Monitoring Plan
An Avifauna Monitoring Plan will be prepared to establish the baseline situation (building on monitoring already undertaken at the Site) and also provide for the monitoring, assessment and analysis of the effects associated with the CHWF. The Avifauna Monitoring Plan will establish a mechanism for assessment and review by relevant specialists in order to determine if any effects on avifauna have arisen as a result of the operation of the wind farm and the process and proposed measures that shall be implemented to manage such effects in an adaptive manner.
Bat Monitoring Plan
Long-tailed bats have been found within the CHWF Site. A Bat Monitoring Plan will be prepared to address the potential presence of bat roost sites within the construction footprint, the process for relocating bats should the removal of their roosts be deemed necessary (including seasonal and breeding considerations) and also measures to determine collision risks, collision monitoring, and the process and proposed measures that shall be utilised to manage such effects in an adaptive manner.
Lizard Monitoring Plan
A Lizard Monitoring Plan will be prepared to provide a mechanism for managing potential effects on lizards. This will ensure that likely lizard habitat is identified and searched prior to construction and that lizards found during construction are handled correctly. If necessary, lizard translocation to an area of appropriate adjacent habitat may be undertaken. Only lizards which are officially ‘threatened ‘will be the subject of translocation efforts.
Predator Control Plan
A Predator Control Plan will be prepared and a control programme will be undertaken at the CHWF to reduce ecological impacts arising from introduced predators such as mustelids and feral cats at specific high value locations within the Site.
Vegetation Management Plan
A detailed assessment of vegetation clearance requirements and mitigation has been performed and accounted for in the AEE. Included in this is the requirement for an amount of vegetation clearance/trimming to reduce flow effects on the wind turbines
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 314
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects and to maintain transmission line clearances. Where trees will be felled, this activity will be performed by a suitably qualified tree felling contractor.
Aquatic Monitoring Plans
In order to determine any effects from construction of the CHWF, a comprehensive management programme for avoiding or mitigating effects on in-stream values is proposed. This comprises a Baseline Aquatic Monitoring Plan (BAMP); and a Construction Aquatic Monitoring Plan (CAMP).
The BAMP will be developed to collect pre-construction information on aquatic communities within the Site and will provide a comparison with subsequent monitoring during construction.
The CAMP will then be developed, based on the BAMP, and will include compliance standards and measures to be implemented if standards are not met. Any potential effects will be minimised by adopting good practice erosion control measures during construction and the prompt post-construction revegetation of disturbed sites according to the Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (ESCP’s).
It is expected that there will be a combination of culverts and small bridges required for the Internal Roads to cross watercourses. Conceptual designs for water crossings have been developed and will be implemented at watercourse crossing sites, to enable fish passage to be maintained, as discussed in the COMR. Fish located in areas of stream beds which are likely to become stranded or harmed by construction activities in and around the stream may be captured and released in a section of stream that will not be affected by construction activities.
6.4 Operational Activities 6.4.1 Landscape and Amenity Environmental considerations have assisted in determining the size and shape of the Turbine Corridor and the siting of wind farm infrastructure to minimise overall landscape effects.
For the CHWF turbines, Genesis Energy proposes the use of an off-white to light grey colour range with low reflectivity. Turbine colour is one of the most effective means of minimising the visibility of turbines. This is consistent with overseas examples and New Zealand experience showing that this is an effective colour range to mitigate visual effects. The use of low reflectivity also reduces the potential for blade glint.
The visual simulation from Viewpoint 16 on Waihoki Valley Road shows a view of the Satellite Substation without landscape rehabilitation (see Figure B37 of Appendix B). Genesis Energy plans to incorporate colour mitigation by using colours recessive in nature, and appropriate for buildings within the rural environment. Planting along the road frontage of the Satellite Substation site is proposed to improve the integration of EBoP into the landscape. In addition, these measures will screen many of the substation elements from most Waihoki Valley Road viewpoints.
The visual effects assessment from public viewpoints did not identify any particular locations from where landscape mitigation in the form of Off-site or viewpoint based
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 315
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects planting was necessary to screen the turbines or other wind farm infrastructure. Notwithstanding this, Genesis Energy will investigate and, where appropriate, implement site specific landscape mitigation from external dwellings within 5 km of the nearest turbine and from where it is considered that the occupants are likely to experience high visual effects from their dwelling area. Genesis Energy will investigate and implement agreed mitigation measures in consultation with the respective landowners.
The shadow flicker assessment (Boffa Miskell, 2011b) indicates that no External Dwellings will be adversely affected by shadow flicker. Once wind turbine positions are finalised the assessment of shadow flicker effects will be reassessed to confirm that predicted shadow flicker effects are less than the guidelines of no more than 30 hours per year and/or 30 minutes per day. Should this limit be exceeded at any External Dwelling, mitigation measures will be implemented. This may include redesign of the turbine layout or the provision of screening within the CHWF Site or externally at the affected dwelling, or restricting the operating hours of wind turbines giving rise to the potential flicker effect.
Another potential effect on rural character and rural amenity may be created by the installation of obstacle lights. Such lights are required by the CAA on the perimeter of the wind farm area to demarcate to aircraft pilots the extent of the wind farm and the location of the highest turbines. Such lights are usually placed at or above the top of the nacelle. From this position light spill can be contained, managed and directed so as to avoid and/or minimise light effects relative to specific rural dwellings and the surrounding area in general. Given the nature of the CHWF Site and its relatively isolated location, obstacle lighting can be positioned to minimise any potential adverse effects.
6.4.2 Telecommunication and Radio-communication Services As noted in Section 5, the CHWF may impact on telecommunication and radio- communication services in the vicinity of turbines and transmission infrastructure. The proposed mitigation measures for the potential effects identified are discussed below.
Analogue Television
It is noted that analogue television signals will be progressively switched off from late 2012, and the process will be completed by September 2013. The CHWF is not expected to be completed and commissioned by the time analogue television is switched off in the region therefore the potential effects identified will not be relevant and mitigation will not be required.
Notwithstanding this, should analogue television signals continue beyond the scheduled cessation date in 2013, an experienced radio engineer can readily identify any adverse effects on television reception once the wind turbines are installed by carrying out a visual inspection of the interference and an analysis of the ghosting pattern.
Should any interference effects arise from the operation of the CHWF an appropriate signal can be re-established by improving or upgrading the receiver antenna systems or use of alternative digital satellite or digital terrestrial services.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 316
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Fixed Radio Linking
Four out of the ten links identified within or crossing the Turbine Corridor could be degraded through diffraction effects from wind turbines, while two of which may also be affected by scattering interference. Telecom operates three of these links while JNL operates the other.
The degree of mitigation required will depend on the extent of the interference, and range from:
Relocating turbines to avoid the link path.
Modifying the antenna servicing the link.
Improving the reception capability of the link by using directional narrow beam-width antennas.
Replacing the entire system with an alternative system.
Letters have been received from both Chorus (on behalf of Telecom) and Teletronics (on behalf of JNL) agreeing with the potential mitigation options. These letters are provided within Volume 4, Section 7 (Radio Services Effects Assessment). Genesis Energy will continue to consult with both of these parties during the detailed design stage of the project to address potential effects, and will ensure that appropriate measures are adopted to address effects on these links.
Wide Area Coverage Services – Wireless Broadband
In the event of interference caused to unlicensed wireless broadband services after the construction of the CHWF, the following mitigation measures are available:
Relocating and/or realigning receiving antenna;
Installing a higher gain antenna and/or mast-head amplifier at the household’s receiver; or
Relocating the wireless access point or radio site.
A separation distance of 100 m from the turbines is considered to be sufficient to avoid any effect on these receivers/radio sites.
Wide Area Coverage Services – Licensed Radio Transmission Sites
Any interference on land mobile repeaters once turbines are installed can be mitigated by relocating the mobile repeater affected or by relocating a proposed turbine. These are matters best addressed through consultation with the relevant service operators at the time the design is finalised.
Four sites that would potentially be affected have been identified. Genesis Energy has consulted, and is working with the relevant operators of these sites to manage and
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 317
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects mitigate any effects. One location of the four sites was found to be incorrectly recorded and is actually located outside the range identified for potentially affected sites.
Genesis Energy has received a letter from Teletronics (on behalf of JNL) regarding the mobile repeater on Castle Hill. Teletronics have recommended that turbines and associated transformer and switching equipment should not be located within 100 m of their site. In addition, Teletronics have also raised the possibility of shadows cast from a turbine affecting the reliability of their solar power supply. These effects can be addressed most effectively through consultation with the service operator as the design is finalised to ensure that location and shadow effects are appropriately addressed.
If interference occurs during the operation of the CHWF, the affected mobile repeater site may be relocated so it is a sufficient distance from any turbines. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with these operators through the detailed design stage to ensure that any adverse effects are appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated.
6.4.3 Aviation Civil Aviation Authority Requirements
Permanent outdoor lights will be installed on wind turbines to meet CAA requirements. The CAA will make a determination on what the lighting requirements will be once the final wind farm layout has been determined. As a minimum, the following conditions and limitations will be included in the determination by the CAA:
Selected individual CHWF turbines, including the highest turbines, those at the extremities of the site, and other turbines around the perimeter of the site will be lit. The spacing between lit turbines will not exceed 1 NM (1,850 m).
Lighting will be medium intensity red as defined in CAA Rule Part 77, Appendix B10 (Objects and Activities Affecting Navigable Airspace), i.e. an effective intensity of not less than 1,600 candela of red light, and the lights will flash between 20 and 60 times per minute.
The obstruction lights will be located on or above the top of the nacelle and will be visible from all directions, except that they will be shielded below the horizontal plane.
The CHWF will be depicted on aeronautical charts.
As discussed in Section 6.4.1, to prevent any visual effects arising from safety lighting, the lights can be shielded from below the horizontal. The height of the turbines in combination with horizontal shielding will mitigate any potential for adverse visual effects.
The CAA will be notified at least 90 days prior to the proposed date of commencement of construction, and will be provided with the final design to enable the appropriate lighting requirements to be confirmed. The CAA will be kept informed with respect to the progress with construction of the wind turbines as the project proceeds.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 318
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Airways Corporation Requirements
Airways identified the CHWF proposal as having potential effects on IFR operations in and out of the Hood aerodrome in Masterton. Specifically, two IFR procedures for the aerodrome associated with the holding and departure of aircraft would be affected by the proposal. However, those procedures (which are listed in the AIP) can be amended within operationally acceptable limits to mitigate any potential effects.
Airways will require a minimum of 150 days prior notice, before any turbines are erected on Site. This is to ensure that the necessary amendments can be made to the AIP before the flight hazards (wind turbines) are established. Airways shall be advised of the final turbine layout and heights. Given possible staging of development of the CHWF, Airways will be provided with 150 days notice prior to each stage of development proceeding.
6.4.4 Operational Noise At all External Dwellings, the sound levels from operation of the CHWF will comply with the limits recommended by NZS6808:2010. To ensure that compliance is achieved for the final design layout and installed turbines, and to address noise issues which may arise upon commencement of operation of the CHWF, the following mitigation measures are proposed:
Noise associated with activities other than the operation of the wind turbines will comply with, and be assessed in accordance with, the relevant standards NZS6801 and NZS6802, and will comply with the limits in the relevant District Plans.
Noise associated with the operation of the wind turbines will comply with and be assessed in accordance with NZS6808, and will comply with the limits in the relevant District Plans.
The sound character of the selected turbines will be assessed once the first turbines are installed and commissioned, to ensure that special audible characteristics are not present, and to give the manufacturer the opportunity to rectify any such problems before the remainder of the CHWF is constructed.
A Construction Noise Management Plan and an Operational Noise Management Plan will be prepared to ensure that the construction and operation of the CHWF complies with all relevant noise standards.
A Final Noise Assessment Report will be prepared, which will supersede the current Noise Effects Assessment (Marshall Day, 2011) once a turbine model has been selected, its operating parameters are known and the turbine locations are finalised. Conditions of resource consent are recommended to ensure that the noise generated by the construction and operation of the CHWF will comply with the relevant noise standards and produce noise effects no greater than described in this AEE.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 319
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
6.4.5 Ecology As noted in Section 6.3.6, a range of measures are proposed to avoid, and otherwise mitigate the effects of the construction of the CHWF development on the ecological values of the area. These measures also serve to manage and mitigate the effects of the ongoing operation of the CHWF. The primary effect on ecology associated with the operation of the wind farm relates to the potential for birds (and possibly bats) interacting with rotating wind turbine blades.
It is predicted that the likely incidence of collision will be low, given the low numbers of birds susceptible to collision risk observed within the rotor zone. Genesis Energy proposes to monitor avifauna and avian mortality resulting from collision at the CHWF prior to operation (to establish a robust baseline) and during its operation. Should effect’s be identified to be more than minor (when accounting for the mitigation proposed), appropriate mitigation measures will be discussed with the appropriate Council’s and agencies.
In addition to collision monitoring of birds, a bat monitoring programme will be implemented to confirm the level of effect bats at the CHWF experience as a result of interacting with rotating wind turbines.
Management Plans including for Habitat Management and Predator Control are proposed to protect areas within the CHWF and will continue in perpetuity during the operation of the CHWF. Such ecological management is predicted to mitigate collision effects associated with the operation of the CHWF.
6.5 Proposed Monitoring
Water Quality
During the construction phase of the CHWF a portable weather station will be established and located within each area under construction. Rainfall will be recorded on a daily basis.
When more than 15 mm rainfall is recorded for the previous 24 hour period, and a discharge from any settlement pond is recorded, a water sample will be taken within four hours of the rainfall measurement being made. These samples will be taken from the point of pond discharge into the nearest perennial watercourse, and at upstream and downstream monitoring locations on that watercourse. The collected water samples will be analysed for turbidity and total suspended solids in accordance with the “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater” (APHA Method).
Recorded data will be compiled, and if the record is sufficient to develop a reliable relationship between turbidity and total suspended solids, only turbidity records will be collected from then on and used as the basis for compliance performance. Monitoring results will be submitted to the Council every three months.
Erosion and Sediment Control
Intensive site monitoring of erosion and sediment control practices will be carried out by the contractor’s staff and Genesis Energy representatives during construction to
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 320
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects ensure erosion and sediment control practices are operating as intended, in accordance with ESCPs.
Water quality monitoring associated with erosion and sedimentation control methods will focus on the quality of water being discharged from the representative construction areas. Baseline measurements of receiving water quality will first be established. When significant rain events result in discharges from the construction area’s sedimentation ponds, water quality measurements will be taken for representative ponds at the discharge point and in the receiving water upstream and downstream of discharge point and compared with baseline data.
Temporary Surface Water Takes
Baseline flow monitoring at the proposed take sites will occur during the consenting phase to identify five low flow events and will be undertaken at the five identified take sites for 12 months prior to construction commencing. Following this, water level gauging stations will be established at each take site on the Tiraumea River and the Tiraumea, Te Hoe and Tinui Streams. Water level gauging stations will be used in conjunction with abstraction monitoring to match the proposed take regimes. This is particularly important where the abstraction rate is expected to be close to or above 20 % MALF (as for the takes from the Te Hoe Stream and Tinui River).
Regular downstream water quality monitoring will be implemented once water abstraction begins. Monitoring will be used to identify any significant effects on ecology (in particular downstream of the back-up supply point) and should any unexpected unacceptable changes in water quality occur, changes to the abstraction regime will be considered.
Surface water takes are only required for the duration of construction activities on the site. Accordingly, surface water takes will cease at the end of the construction period and all infrastructure decommissioned such that river flows can return to their pre- construction regime.
Ecology
Baseline avifauna monitoring involving five minute bird counts and flight path monitoring is proposed for the CHWF and would commence at least one year prior to construction commencing On-site. Operational Monitoring is proposed over a period of two years following the commissioning of turbines to provide data to determine material effects (if any) that turbines may have on bird life.
Post construction monitoring will include:
Flight path monitoring.
Five-minute bird counts.
Carcass searches.
Searcher efficiency checks.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 321
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Bird removal trials (checking on rate of scavenging and decomposition).
Protocols for dealing with injured birds.
Protocols for dealing with threatened or banded birds.
Baseline and Operational Bat Monitoring is also proposed prior to construction and over a period of three years following the commissioning of turbines to provide data to determine material effects (if any) that turbines may have on bats. Should additional monitoring be deemed necessary, Genesis Energy will extend its programme in consultation with Council and relevant agencies. Bat monitoring will consist of the following:
Carcass searches.
Protocols for dealing with injured or deceased bats.
Automatic batbox deployment in lower Pati Tapu Bush during Dactylanthus flowering with the detection rate providing an indication as to how the bat population is changing.
Vegetation will be monitored through the establishment of permanent Reconnaissance (Recce) Plots in representative areas of the protected vegetation and annual walk through surveys. This will be established through the Habitat Management SEMPs.
Noise
A noise monitoring programme to ensure that sound levels produced during both the construction and operational phase of the CHWF project do not exceed the modelled values will be set out within both the CNMP and the ONMP and will be undertaken in accordance with the relevant New Zealand Standards.
Staging and Scalability of Mitigation Measures
The CHWF may be constructed in one stage or in several stages. As set out in Section 4, staged construction is likely to occur for a number of reasons including turbine and other component supply availability and allowing new generation to be introduced to the national electricity system on a progressive basis.
Whilst any stage of development will likely be of a significant scale, Genesis Energy will provide mitigation for construction and operation of the CHWF in alignment with the staging of development.
Because the spatial location and extent of environmental effects are inherently variable within the Site, certain parts of the CHWF do, by nature of their physical and ecological characteristics give rise to a greater quantum of environmental effects than other parts of the Site. Genesis Energy does not seek to delay or evade provision of mitigation, rather that mitigating measures be delivered pragmatically and in a manner which is commensurate with environmental effects created from Stages in development or operation.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 322
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
This scalability of mitigation measures will reflect the degree to which environmental effects arise from construction at specific locations.
The approach to staging of mitigation will be developed in consultation with Council once the above factors are known and the first (or several) stages can be programmed.
6.6 Summary
Genesis Energy has proposed a range of measures and environmental monitoring to appropriately address the potential adverse effects of the CHWF development in a staged, scalable and considered manner. Management of the CHWF during both the construction and operation phases revolves around the establishment of an EMP and associated SEMPs. The SEMPs will address a range of potential issues as identified in Section 6.2.2.
As a result of the comprehensive proposals for mitigation, monitoring and management of the potential adverse effects, it is considered that the CHWF is an important renewable energy development which appropriately avoids, remedies, or mitigates all its potential adverse effects.
Proposed Monitoring and Mitigation Section 6 – page 323
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
7. CONSULTATION 7.1 Introduction
Genesis Energy recognises that consultation is an ongoing and integral component of the resource consent application process, both prior to and after the formal lodging of the applications and AEE, and through the construction and operational life of the CHWF. Accordingly, a comprehensive consultation programme has been undertaken for the CHWF project that provides opportunities for all parties who have an interest in the project to identify issues of concern, and for Genesis Energy to clarify and resolve, where possible, any such issues in the development process. This is in accordance with one of Genesis Energy’s Environmental Values outlined in Section 1.2, which states the Company will foster close relationships with the community and stakeholders, so that their views can be incorporated into the environmental decision- making processes.
The consultation programme undertaken, the key parties consulted and the issues raised during consultation are discussed in Sections 7.2 and 7.3 below.
7.2 The Consultation Process 7.2.1 Overview The consultation process that Genesis Energy has followed in the preparation to lodge resource consent applications for the CHWF project has included:
Community wide consultation through public open days, project newsletters and general information provision.
Establishing early and ongoing communications with CHWF Landowners.
Identifying neighbouring landowners and residents, and undertaking ongoing consultation.
Identifying key stakeholders for the project.
Identifying and establishing consultation with tangata whenua.
Identifying parties who may be potentially affected by the project.
Identifying parties who may be interested in the project.
Preparation and continual updating of consultation material to keep all stakeholders, and affected and interested parties up-to-date with project developments.
Obtaining feedback, and identifying concerns or potential issues from all parties.
Responding to feedback and addressing concerns or issues raised throughout the project development.
Consultation Section 7 – page 324
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
In addition to the specific consultation undertaken with CHWF Landowners, neighbouring landowners and residents, key stakeholders, tangata whenua, the wider community, and other interested or potentially affected parties (outlined further below), Genesis Energy project team have been available throughout the course of the project development to any party who wishes to meet and discuss particular aspects or concerns.
Genesis Energy is committed to on-going consultation in the form of one-to-one and/or group discussions and meetings.
7.2.2 Wider Community Consultation The CHWF project was publically announced through a Genesis Energy media release on 27 July 2010. In addition to the specific consultation undertaken with those parties outlined further below, Genesis Energy has consulted more generally through public open days, project newsletters, information dissemination on the company website, and provision of a freephone number and project email address as outlined further below.
Public Open Days
Two series of public open days have been held (10 - 11 September 2010 and 1 - 2 April 2011) at the Alfredton Hall on Route 52, to which all CHWF Landowners, neighbouring landowners and residents with 10 km of the CHWF Site, tangata whenua, key stakeholders, and other interested and/or potentially affected parties known to Genesis Energy were invited to attend. The open days were also advertised extensively in local newspapers (Wairarapa Times-Age, Manawatu Standard, Wairarapa Midweek, Bush Telegraph and Wairarapa News) and the Dominion Post.
For both sets of open days, Genesis Energy arranged for key CHWF project team and the various technical specialists to take part so they could explain how their assessments had been carried out, respond to any specific queries or issues that were raised, and to ensure that the assessments each specialist was undertaking directly addressed such issues.
At the first set of open days in September 2010, the preliminary findings of the environmental assessments commissioned by Genesis Energy were presented. Information topics presented on display panels included:
Introduction to Genesis Energy.
Overview of electricity generation in New Zealand.
Contribution wind farms make to meeting electricity demand.
Site selection process for the CHWF.
Introduction to the CHWF.
Overview of Turbine technology.
Consultation Section 7 – page 325
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Resource Management Act consent process for the CHWF.
Overview of engineering and environmental assessments.
Specific information in respect to the landscape and visual, traffic and transport, ecological and noise assessments undertaken at the time.
Outline of future steps in the resource consent process for the CHWF.
Resources available to those attending the first open days included:
CHWF Newsletter One, introducing Genesis Energy and the CHWF project.
Fact sheets on wind energy generation developments, Turbine technology and noise issues, produced by the New Zealand Wind Energy Association.
Access to visual simulations from representative viewpoints within 30 km of the CHWF Site, and residential dwellings within 5 km of a proposed Turbine.
Feedback forms and ballot box.
Contact details for further information requests.
Approximately 120 people attended the first set of open days.
At the second set of public open days held in April 2011, Genesis Energy presented background and project information shown at the first open days, and updated information in respect to engineering and environmental assessments undertaken. Additional information provided on display panels included the results from environmental assessments undertaken in respect to archaeology, property valuation, tourism and recreation, economic impacts and electricity related benefits, telecommunications and aviation.
Resources available to those attending the second open days included:
Project information sheet introducing Genesis Energy and the CHWF project.
Project information sheets about the CHWF project and each environmental assessment topic area.
Genesis Energy community involvement brochure “In your neighbourhood”.
Access to visual simulations from representative viewpoints within 30 km of the CHWF Site, and residential dwellings within 5 km of a proposed Turbine.
Approximately 100 people attended the set of second open days.
The Genesis Energy Schoolgen team (outlined further below) took an interactive lesson with pupils from Tiraumea School and Alfredton School (junior and senior divisions) about renewable energy generation.
The September 2010 and April 2011 open days provided an opportunity to openly share information about the project, encouraging comments, thoughts and feedback
Consultation Section 7 – page 326
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects from those who attended. It also provided the opportunity to clarify any misinformation about the project, and resolve any issues, where possible, as they arose. Feedback forms were provided at both open days. Of the 42 people who provided feedback from both open days, 25 stated they support the CHWF project, 11 were neutral and six do not support the CHWF project.
Project Newsletters
Three CHWF project newsletters have been sent to CHWF Landowners, key stakeholders, neighbouring landowners, residents within 10 km of the CHWF Site, and potentially affected and interested parties in July and November 2010, and May 2011. The first two newsletters provided an introduction to the CHWF project, background to, and updates on, engineering and environmental assessments being undertaken and the preliminary results from this work, upcoming consultation and communications, and an outline of next steps proposed in the project development. The third CHWF project newsletter provided an update of the engineering and environmental assessments being undertaken, feedback from the two sets of public open days, and an outline of the next steps for the project.
A fourth newsletter will be prepared and circulated once the resource consent applications for the CHWF have been lodged. This newsletter will outline the RMA statutory process for the CHWF.
Website and Freephone Number and Email Address
Information regarding the CHWF project has been made publicly available on Genesis Energy’s website (www.genesisenergy.co.nz). The website provided the three CHWF project newsletters (outlined above) and downloadable project information sheets and the display board information that was presented at the two sets of open days.
A copy of the resource consent applications and AEE will be made available on the website.
A freephone number (0800 436 946 / 0800 GEN WIND) was established so that anyone could contact the CHWF project team regarding project details, or to discuss any particular concerns or queries.
An email address ([email protected]) has also been provided for any information requests or project enquiries.
7.2.3 CHWF Landowners As outlined in Section 1.4, the CHWF Site includes all properties where project infrastructure (Turbines, monitoring masts, EBoP, O&M buildings and Internal Roads) will be located. All CHWF Landowner properties are in private ownership. Genesis Energy has been in consultation with these landowners since March 2008, and has been committed to open dialogue throughout the preliminary design and project design phases of the CHWF. The owners of the properties that comprise the CHWF Site have signed land agreements with Genesis Energy and are supportive of the project.
Consultation Section 7 – page 327
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Each CHWF Landowner was provided with a draft AEE and additional assessments (noise, landscape, ecology, shadow flicker and TV and radio/telecommunications) relating specifically to their property prior to lodgement of these applications. This enabled each landowner to discuss any property specific issues they may have, and ensured they clearly understand the potential effects of the CHWF development on their property.
After reviewing this documentation, all CHWF Landowners signed a RMA written approval form, in accordance with section 95E of the RMA and Form 8A of the Resource Management (Forms, Fees and Procedure) Regulations 2003. This stated that they had read the resource consent applications, AEE and the additional assessments that related specifically to their property, and that the consent authority will no longer consider them an affected party.
A number of properties originally selected for the placement of Turbines are not included within the CHWF Site that forms this application, due to insufficient wind resources or unsuitable terrain. Genesis Energy communicated with the specific landowners the reasons for excluding their particular property from the CHWF. Consultation with these parties has continued as neighbouring landowners and residents, as outlined below.
7.2.4 Neighbouring Landowners and Residents Neighbouring landowners and residents have been identified as those landowners and/or residents who are located near the CHWF Site (within 2 km of the Turbine Corridor), but are not CHWF Landowners with wind farm infrastructure located on their property.
Consultation with neighbouring landowners and residents began in July 2010 and has involved contacting each landowner/resident directly to introduce the CHWF project, to provide the opportunity for a meeting to talk about the project, and to discuss any particular concerns they may have. During these meetings, the general nature of the project was discussed, including potential locations of Turbines and the effects assessments that were being undertaken by the technical consultants.
Specific consultation has been undertaken with some neighbouring landowners and residents, where requested or appropriate. In these instances, either a suitable time was arranged for a one-to-one meeting with the Genesis Energy team, additional material and information was provided (either by hard copy or in electronic form), or the issue was discussed via email or telephone.
Genesis Energy has had an on-going commitment to meeting with neighbouring landowners and residents to discuss specific concerns or issues. The visibility of the CHWF from all neighbouring landowners and residents dwellings was undertaken. In some instances, where specifically requested, additional visual simulations were prepared. Where Turbine visibility has the potential to be prominent, visual analysis, wire frame models, and in some cases computer visual simulations prepared by Boffa Miskell have been made available to assist neighbouring landowners and residents understand the potential views of the CHWF from their particular property.
Genesis Energy identified neighbouring landowners and residents with potential effects and has provided some information relating to their specific property, such as proximity of the CHWF to their property; potential landscape and visual, noise, shadow flicker
Consultation Section 7 – page 328
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects and property valuation effects; or information about the transportation of over- dimension loads.
7.2.5 Tangata Whenua Genesis Energy has undertaken consultation with tangata whenua on a range of aspects in relation to the CHWF project. Consultation has been undertaken with the following:
Rangit ne o Wairarapa;
Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa;
Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua;
Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua;
Te Hika O Papauma Marae;
Te Kohanga Whakawhaitii Marae; and
Aohanga Incorporation.
The process of consultation with the above parties has included:
Approaching the various groups separately;
Determining each group’s preference for how the consultation process should be undertaken;
Presentations and meetings;
Site visits;
Discussions regarding the specific provisions being proposed; and
Opportunity (where relevant) to provide a CIA or CVA.
Consultation has also included providing CHWF project newsletters and extending an invitation to the two open days held in September 2010 and April 2011, to give all tangata whenua an opportunity to be a part of discussions.
Genesis Energy is committed to on-going consultation in the form of one-to-one discussions and meetings on matters of particular interest to tangata whenua.
Rangit ne o Wairarapa
An initial meeting was held with Rangit ne o Wairarapa representatives on 12 November 2009 at their offices in Masterton to introduce the CHWF project and key Genesis Energy staff involved in the project. A second meeting was held on 22 July 2010 to provide an update on the project. Representatives of Rangit ne o Wairarapa
Consultation Section 7 – page 329
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects ttended the first open day at Alfredton Hall on 10 September 2010 and a site visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken on 16 October 2010.
A meeting was held on 13 December 2010 in which Genesis Energy arranged the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to attend. The purpose of this meeting was to provide a project update and to discuss any visual simulation requirements for the preparation of the CIA being prepared by Rangit ne o Wairarapa. Five further meetings were held on 28 January, 21 April, 11 May, 27 May and 22 June 2011 to provide further project updates and to discuss the preparation of the CIA and the development of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MoU”) between Genesis Energy and Rangit ne o Wairarapa.
At the 11 May and 22 June 2011 meetings, Genesis Energy arranged for the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to attend to present the key findings of this assessment. An additional site visit was undertaken on 24 May 2011 to Rangitumau with Genesis Energy’s Landscape and Visual specialist and Rangit ne o Wairarapa representatives.
Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa
An introductory meeting was held on 22 July 2010 with Genesis Energy to introduce the CHWF project team. A site visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken with representatives of Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa on 6 October 2010.
A second meeting was held on 13 December 2010 in which Genesis Energy arranged the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to attend. The purpose of this meeting was to provide a project update and to discuss any visual simulation requirements for the preparation of the CIA being prepared by Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa. Five further meetings were held on 27 January, 21 April, 26 May, 17 June and 7 July 2011 to provide an update on the project and to discuss the preparation of the CIA, and the development of a MoU between Genesis Energy and Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa. At the 26 May 2011 meeting, Genesis Energy arranged for the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to attend to present the key findings of this assessment.
Representatives of Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa attended both sets of open days at Alfredton Hall.
Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua
An introductory meeting was held with Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua at their Dannevirke offices on 23 July 2010 to outline the CHWF project and to introduce the CHWF project team. A visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken with representatives of Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua on 18 October 2010 and 26 July 2011
A second meeting was held on 14 December 2010 with Genesis Energy and the Landscape and Visual specialist for the CHWF project. The purpose of this meeting was to provide a project update and to discuss any visual simulation requirements for the preparation of a CVA. Seven further meetings were held on 27 January, 15 February, 21 April, 19 May, 10 June, 7 July and 18 July 2011 to provide Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua with an update on project developments and to discuss the
Consultation Section 7 – page 330
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects preparation of the CVA and development of a Memorandum of Partnership (“MoP”) between Genesis Energy and Rangit ne o Tamaki Nui A Rua. At the 19 May 2011 meeting, Genesis Energy arranged the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to attend to present the key findings of this assessment.
Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua
Genesis Energy initiated contact with Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua in July 2010. An introductory meeting was held on 6 September 2010 to introduce the project and to meet the Genesis Energy project team, and a visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken with representatives of Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua on 16 October 2010. A second meeting was held on 14 December 2010 to provide a project update and to discuss any visual simulation requirements for the preparation of a CIA.
Genesis Energy representatives met with Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua again on 26 January 2011 to gain an understanding of the history of the CHWF project area, to inform the CIA. Two further meetings were held on 22 June and 7 July 2011 to provide Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua with an update on project developments and to discuss the preparation of the CIA and development of a MoU between Genesis Energy and Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua. At the 22 June 2011 meeting, Genesis Energy arranged the Landscape and Visual specialist engaged for the CHWF project to again attend to present the key findings of this assessment.
Representatives of Kahungunu ki Tamaki Nui A Rua attended the first open day on 11 September 2010.
Te Hika O Papauma Marae
Genesis Energy initiated contact with Te Hika O Papauma Marae representatives on 4 August 2010 and had an introductory meeting on 6 September 2010 to introduce the CHWF project team. A visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken with representatives of Te Hika O Papauma Marae on 8 October 2010.
Te Kohanga Whakawhaitii Marae
Genesis Energy first initiated contact with Te Kohanga Whakawhaitii Marae representatives on 4 August 2010. An introductory meeting was held with Genesis Energy on 6 September 2010 to introduce the CHWF project team.
A visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken with representatives of Te Kohanga Whakawhaitii Marae on 8 October 2010.
Aohanga Incorporation
A meeting was held with Aohanga Incorporation representatives on 6 September 2010 to outline the CHWF project. Four further meetings were held (in conjunction with Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa representatives) on 13 December 2010, 21 April, 26 May and 7 July 2011 to provide Aohanga Incorporation with updates on the project.
Consultation Section 7 – page 331
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
A visit to the CHWF Site was undertaken with representatives of Aohanga Incorporation on 8 October 2010, and representatives of Aohanga Incorporation attended the second public open day on 1 April 2011.
7.2.6 Local Authorities Throughout the development of the CHWF project, Genesis Energy has worked closely with MWRC, GWRC, MDC and TDC to ensure that an open line of communication is maintained, and that all aspects of the project meet their expectations and requirements. This communication has assisted in ensuring that Council staff are fully informed about the project prior to the applications being lodged.
Specific consultation undertaken with the relevant Councils is detailed further below and has included:
Pre-lodgement meetings (and email / phone correspondence);
Provision of a project scoping report for review and feedback; and
Site visits.
In addition, copies of the three CHWF newsletters (discussed above) were provided to each Council representative in July 2010, November 2010 and May 2011 for displaying at service centres (e.g., libraries, community centres and Council offices). Open day invitations were provided to all four Councils, with representatives from some of the Council’s attending.
Pre-lodgement Meetings
Key Genesis Energy personnel first approached consenting staff from MDC and TDC in late 2008, in respect to placing wind monitoring masts on the CHWF Site. In October 2009 a meeting was held with MDC and TDC staff to outline the wind monitoring activities that Genesis Energy were carrying out in both Districts, and to provide a high level introduction to the CHWF project. An introduction meeting with MWRC and GWRC staff was held in June 2010, to introduce the CHWF project and the Genesis Energy CHWF project team. A meeting with TDC and MDC was also held in June 2010 to introduce the CHWF project and the Genesis Energy CHWF project team. Since these initial meetings, regular phone conversations and email correspondence have taken place with staff from all four Councils as the project has progressed.
Key project meetings have been held with the stated Councils on the following dates:
31 May – 10th June 2010 – a separate meeting was held with GWRC and MWRC and a joint meeting with TDC and MDC to introduce the CHWF project and project team, consents sought and proposed timelines, work undertaken to date and the proposed consultation programme. A joint council approach to managing the consenting process was suggested by the Councils and preliminary canvassed.
Consultation Section 7 – page 332
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
19 July 2010 – representatives from all four Councils met at the same time with Genesis Energy to discuss a joint council approach to managing the consent application process. A proposal was put forward that the four Councils use a single project facilitator to co-ordinate and oversee project deliverables. Other topics discussed included, responses to the scoping report provided by Genesis Energy, how the peer review process would be undertaken by Council (and/or their consultants) and the consultation process that Genesis Energy was undertaking.
6 and 9 December 2010 – a separate meeting was held with each Council to provide an update on the CHWF project, including consultation undertaken, progress of technical reports and proposed timeframes.
15 December 2010 – this meeting was held with the nominated CHWF project facilitator(s) for the four Councils (Philip Percy and Helen Marr, Perception Planning) who would be coordinating the Councils consenting process. Genesis Energy provided an introduction to the project and an overview of the work that had been undertaken to date.
29 June 2011 – Genesis Energy met with the regional councils (along with representatives from DoC, QEII and Forest and Bird) to discuss the options for the ecology mitigation measures. Feedback from the meeting has informed the preparation of the proposed ecology mitigation measures.
Meetings were held separately with the Regional and District Councils to discuss technical assessments undertaken for the project. The purpose of these meetings was to gain feedback on the assessment methods, level of detail required in the applications, and the proposed approach for managing and mitigating potential effects.
Regional Council pre-lodgement meetings included:
Construction works and management of effects, sediment and erosion control, and potential water resources (21 February 2011 and 24 March 2011); and
Ecological effects and mitigation (22 February 2011).
District Council pre-lodgement meetings included discussing assessment results and management of potential effects in respect to:
Noise (14 February 2011);
Traffic generation and required roadworks (24 February 2011); and
Landscape (14 March 2011).
The relevant technical specialists engaged by Genesis Energy to work on the CHWF project took part so that any questions relating to those areas could be directly answered or discussed. Summary reports on each topic area were prepared and circulated to all attendees prior to the meetings. Presentations were given by Genesis Energy to provide an update on the project development and by the CHWF project technical specialists in respect to their particular topic area.
Consultation Section 7 – page 333
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Following the pre-lodgement meetings, the various technical specialists for Genesis Energy considered all feedback in their respective assessments, and a follow-up letter outlining how these matters were being addressed was provided to the Councils and their technical specialists.
Following submission of the draft resource consent applications and AEE, a meeting was held on 11 July with the Genesis Energy project team and the Regional and District Councils to receive feedback on the draft AEE. The purpose of the meeting was to assess the completeness of the resource consent application prior to lodgement. Genesis Energy took into account feedback that was provided and responded with a follow up letter to council outlining how matters had been addressed.
Scoping Report
A scoping report outlining the CHWF project, along with results of the preliminary environmental assessments undertaken, was provided to all four Councils in July 2010.
The purpose of the scoping report was to:
Introduce the CHWF project to key stakeholders;
Provide details of the environmental assessments undertaken to date;
Outline the consents sought;
Provide details of proposed assessment methods for the AEE; and
Seek feedback and agreement on the proposed survey methods and consultation programme.
Comments on a number of topics in the scoping report were received and were passed to the relevant technical specialists engaged by Genesis Energy to work on the CHWF. The comments and issues raised by the Councils were considered by the technical specialists in their assessments.
Site Visits
A CHWF Site visit was held with staff members from all four Councils and the Genesis Energy project team on 18 August 2010. This provided an opportunity for Genesis Energy to address any queries the Councils had, while putting these into perspective at the Site. Key matters discussed during the site visit included, sediment and erosion control methods, potential mitigation options, requirements for roading upgrades, visual and noise effects, and the consultation process being undertaken.
A second site visit was held with all four Councils and their appointed technical specialists on 23 February 2011. The purpose of the site visit was to address any queries the Councils technical specialists had, and to give them a broad understanding of the Site and its physical context.
Consultation Section 7 – page 334
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
7.2.7 Other Interested or Potentially Affected Parties Other interested or potentially affected parties include a range of groups that may have a general or specific interest in the project but are not considered to be directly affected by it. Initial contact was made with these parties to outline key project details, and to identify any possible issues with respect to their interests. Further meetings (and in some instances site visits) were held with some parties to discuss specific issues.
In addition to the specific consultation undertaken with all potentially affected and other parties outlined below, Genesis Energy sent project newsletters and open day invitations to all parties listed below. Issues raised in the consultation process with these parties are outlined in Section 7.3.
The following parties are identified as being interested or potentially affected parties to the CHWF project:
NZTA.
Transpower New Zealand.
Port of Napier.
Operators of telecommunication services in the area.
GNS Science New Zealand (“GNS”).
DOC – Wellington Hawke’s Bay Conservancy and the Wairarapa Area Office.
New Zealand Fish and Game Council (“Fish and Game”) – Wellington Region.
QEII Trust.
Forest and Bird - Lower North Island.
Federated Farmers - Wairarapa Provincial Presidency and the National Board.
CAA.
Airways.
Grow Wellington.
Environmental Protection Authority (“EPA”).
MfE.
MED.
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (“EECA”).
Consultation Section 7 – page 335
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Environmental Defence Society (“EDS”).
Targa Rally New Zealand.
Rally Wairarapa.
New Zealand Transportation Authority
The NZTA (Palmerston North and Wellington Offices) were first contacted in August/September 2010 to introduce the CHWF project to them, and to outline the heavy haulage, construction traffic, road safety, road upgrades and other roading issues associated with the project.
A meeting was held with NZTA on 11 October 2010 to provide an outline of the CHWF project and to identify any specific concerns in respect to traffic and transport requirements. Particular issues discussed included operational issues (relevant permits and road/bridge upgrade requirements) and consenting issues (frequency of loads, traffic flows and peak travel times). Representatives from the NZTA attended both public open days.
Communications with the NZTA have continued, particularly in respect to the transport requirements (and restrictions) for OW/OD loads, peak travel times, and proposed external roadwork requirements and bridge upgrades.
Transpower
Genesis Energy has consulted with Transpower in respect to connecting the CHWF to Transpowers high voltage network (“Grid”), and the potential effect on existing equipment and operations.
An initial meeting was held with Transpower on 26 March 2010, to introduce the CHWF project, including the findings from the preliminary power system modelling undertaken by Genesis Energy, and to discuss the capacity available on the distribution network and at substations in the vicinity of the CHWF. Consultation has been ongoing with Transpower regarding the project, and will continue up to, and following the lodgement of the resource consent applications.
Representatives from Transpower attended the first open day in September 2010.
Port of Napier
The Port of Napier is the proposed option for the delivery of Turbines and other imported equipment. Preliminary consultation has been undertaken with the Port of Napier to ensure it is able to provide the berthing and unloading requirements for Turbine components, and temporary laydown areas to store Turbine components until they are ready to be transported to the CHWF Site.
A meeting was held with Port of Napier officials on 9 August 2010 to discuss port facilities and delivery capabilities for Turbine components. On the same day, Port of
Consultation Section 7 – page 336
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Napier officials conducted a site visit with Genesis Energy staff around the port facilities, transport routes to the Site and Off-site storage areas.
The Port of Napier has confirmed it can provide the required berthing and unloading facilities, and sufficient and secure laydown areas. Further consultation will be undertaken with the Port of Napier during the final design phase following resource consent acquisition process.
Operators of Telecommunication Services
Telecom New Zealand
Telecom operates eight fixed radio links in close proximity to the CHWF Site. As outlined in Section 5.12, Genesis Energy has consulted with Telecom in respect to potential disruption of services through reflection or diffraction from the Turbines. A copy of the independent assessment undertaken by Kordia in respect to the potential effects of the CHWF on radio services was provided to Telecom on 22 November 2010. Chorus reviewed the study (on behalf of Telecom) and provided a letter to Genesis Energy on 16 December 2010 stating they accepted Kordia’s findings, providing the final positioning and type of Turbine used does not encroach on radio paths in close proximity to, or within, the CHWF Site.
Genesis Energy will continue to consult with Telecom through the final design phase of the project to ensure any potential effects on radio paths are avoided.
Juken New Zealand Ltd
A meeting was held on 10 December 2010 with forestry owners JNL in respect to potential adverse effects on telecommunications (JNL operate the Castle Hill to Maungaraki radio link). Genesis Energy received a letter from Teletronics (on behalf of JNL) on 22 February 2011, accepting Kordia’s findings, and agreeing with the potential mitigation options. The potential use of forestry roads to access the CHWF Site and potential effects of locating Turbines close to forest plantations was also discussed.
Other Landowners
Genesis Energy has consulted with other landowners near the CHWF that operate small scale telecommunication equipment, and is working with these landowners to address any potential effects.
GNS Science New Zealand
Genesis Energy has consulted with GNS in respect to two GNS Continuous GPS and weak-motion seismic monitoring equipment located within the vicinity of the CHWF Site. Genesis Energy received an email from GNS on 6 May 2011 that stated GNS had no particular concerns with the potential effect of the CHWF on these monitoring sites, as long as the nearest Turbine is a sufficient distance from the monitoring sites and GNS retain right of access to the sites through all phases of the construction and
Consultation Section 7 – page 337
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects operation of the CHWF. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with and inform GNS during the final design of the project.
DOC – Wellington Hawke’s Bay Conservancy and the Wairarapa Area Office
An introductory meeting was held with DOC staff from the Wellington Conservancy and the Wairarapa Area Office on 27 May 2010 where Genesis Energy gave a presentation outlining the CHWF project, and the main activities associated with the project.
Genesis Energy provided the DOC with a copy of the CHWF scoping report (detailed in Section 7.2.3) for comment in July 2010. Comments were received in respect to hydrological, ecological and archaeological issues and were passed on to the relevant technical specialists engaged by Genesis Energy to work on the CHWF. The comments were taken into consideration by the specialists, and where appropriate, were addressed in their assessments.
A meeting and site visit was undertaken on 28 July 2010 and key issues discussed included farm plans within the CHWF Site, provisions to provide comment on the draft AEE and potential mitigation options. DOC staff expressed an interest in participating in the development of mitigation measures associated with the project. A follow-up meeting was held on 15 December 2010 in Wellington to provide the DOC with an update on project developments. A representative from the DOC attended both public open days.
Ecology specialists commissioned by Genesis Energy for the CHWF project met with the corresponding specialists from the DOC on 18 February 2011 to gain feedback on the ecological assessments undertaken.
Genesis Energy met with DoC on 29 June 2011 (along with representatives from the regional councils, QEII and Forest and Bird) to discuss the options for the ecology mitigation measures. Feedback from the meeting has informed the preparation of the proposed ecology mitigation measures.
Fish and Game – Wellington Region
An initial meeting was held with Fish and Game on 17 August 2010 where Genesis Energy gave an overview of the CHWF project. Fish and Game noted there was some hunting activity in the area but had no issues or any particular concerns with the project.
Representatives from Fish and Game were invited to attend the pre-lodgement ecology meeting on 18 February 2011 with the DOC and Forest and Bird, but did not attend.
Queen Elizabeth II Trust
Representatives from the QEII Trust attended the first open day in September 2010.
Genesis Energy and their ecology specialist from Wildland Consultants met key QEII Trust staff on 10 November 2010 to introduce the CHWF project, discuss potential effects on QEII covenanted areas within the CHWF Site, and to gain initial feedback
Consultation Section 7 – page 338
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects and comments. The QEII Trust was interested in the visual effects of the CHWF, and was supportive of proposals to undertake pest control as a form of mitigation. The QEII Trust also suggested the possibility of implementing a “cost-sharing” scheme for fencing and legal surveys of QEII covenants (if a survey was required in respect to CHWF infrastructure) as potential mitigation for the removal of vegetation associated with the project.
On the same day, Genesis Energy and their ecology specialist met with QEII representatives from Wairarapa and Tararua regions, to introduce the CHWF project, discuss potential effects on QEII covenanted areas within the CHWF Site, and to gain initial feedback and comments. The QEII representatives were supportive of Genesis Energy proposals to undertake proposed pest and weed control as a form of mitigation and of using covenants to protect further private land if required. Potential concerns about bats, birds and lizards were raised.
QEII representatives had initial concerns in respect to existing QEII covenants in the CHWF Site. Wildland Consultants were able to show, to QEII satisfaction, that these areas would not be affected by the project.
Wildland Consultants has maintained on-going discussions with QEII head office staff in respect to the clarification of legal QEII boundaries.31
Representatives from the QEII Trust took part in the pre-lodgement ecological meeting on 18 February 2011. They were generally satisfied with the assessment methods proposed.
Genesis Energy met with QEII on 29 June 2011 (along with representatives from the regional councils, DoC and Forest and Bird) to discuss the options for the ecology mitigation measures. Feedback from the meeting has informed the preparation of the proposed ecology mitigation measures.
Forest and Bird
A meeting was held with a Forest and Bird representative (Lower North Island Field Officer) on 10 November 2010 to introduce the CHWF project, and to identify and discuss any immediate concerns. A representative from Forest and Bird attended one of the public open days and the pre-lodgement ecological meeting on 18 February 2011.
Genesis Energy met with Forest and Bird on 29 June 2011 (along with representatives from the regional councils, DoC and QEII) to discuss the options for the ecology mitigation measures. Feedback from the meeting has informed the preparation of the proposed ecology mitigation measures.
Forest and Bird are supportive of proposed goat control across the CHWF Site, fencing and retiring areas, and focussed pest and weed control in areas of high ecological value. No particular issues of concern have been identified in discussions with Forest and Bird to date.
31 A survey anomaly has been identified at QEII covenant (5/07/635) on Castle Hill Road. This is currently being resolved between Genesis Energy, QEII and MDC.
Consultation Section 7 – page 339
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Federated Farmers - Wairarapa Provincial Presidency and the National Board
Genesis Energy contacted Federated Farmers in June 2011 to introduce the CHWF project. Federated Farmers were generally supportive of the project and outlined that no further contact was required.
Civil Aviation Authority
The CAA was initially contacted in December 2008 in respect to the erection of the wind monitoring masts. Under Rule 77.5 of CAA regulations, Turbines and monitoring masts greater than 60 m high are considered to constitute a hazard in navigable air space and the CAA must be notified 90 days before the commencement of construction.
The CAA was contacted about the CHWF project on 20 April 2011 where Genesis Energy provided project details and supporting information with respect to Part 77 of the CAA Act approval that is required. The CAA undertook an aeronautical study to determine (in accordance with Rule 77.21) whether the CHWF will constitute a hazard in navigable airspace. The CAA is expecting to notify Genesis Energy of the Determination and whether any conditions or limitations are imposed in early June 2011.
The CAA will continue to be kept informed during the final design of the project and will be notified as required under CAA regulations.
Airways Corporation
Genesis Energy contacted Airways on 17 February 2011 in respect to potential effects on their aeronautical Radar systems (used for aircraft tracking) operating at Rangitumau (9 km to the south-west of the CHWF Site) and Ballance (approximately 35 km north-west).
Genesis Energy received a letter from Airways Corporation on 1 March 2011 stating they had no concerns in respect to the effect of the CHWF on their nearby Radar systems. A second letter was received Aeronautical Design and Development section of Airways on 23 March 2011, concluding that the CHWF can be accommodated with minimal changes to the published Instrument Flight Rules operations at Hood Aerodrome in Masterton.
Grow Wellington
Genesis Energy met with a representative from “Grow Wellington” on 17 June 2011 to introduce the CHWF project. Grow Wellington is the regional economic development agency responsible for the economic aspects of the Wellington Regional Strategy. The Wellington Regional Strategy is a sustainable growth strategy that has been developed by greater Wellington's nine local authorities, in conjunction with central Government and the region's businesses, education, research and voluntary sector interests.
Consultation Section 7 – page 340
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Environmental Protection Authority
Genesis Energy sent the EPA information outlining the CHWF project and a meeting was held with EPA (and MfE) staff on 23 August 2010 to provide an overview of the CHWF project. A second meeting was held with the EPA on 9 March 2011 to provide an update of the CHWF project, outline the consultation process being undertaken with the Regional and District Councils, and to discuss the potential call-in of the CHWF. Genesis Energy described the collaborative relationship that had been established between Genesis Energy and the four Councils, and how the pre-lodgement process undertaken had laid the foundations for an efficient and open local resource consent hearing process. For that reason, Genesis Energy explained to the EPA that they would apply for resource consents for the CHWF through the local authority hearing process, and will not request that the Minister for the Environment call in the application. The EPA commended the consultation process undertaken by Genesis Energy with the relevant councils.
Genesis Energy will continue to keep the EPA informed during the development of the CHWF project.
Ministry for the Environment
Genesis Energy held a meeting with a representative from MfE (and EPA) on 23 August 2010 to provide an overview of the CHWF project.
Ministry of Economic Development
Genesis Energy held a meeting with a representative from MED on 23 August 2011 to provide an overview of the CHWF project.
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority
A meeting was held with an EECA representative on 23 August 2010 to provide an overview of the CHWF project. Representatives from EECA attended the first open day in September 2010. A subsequent meeting was held on 9 March 2011 to provide an update on the project.
Environmental Defence Society
Genesis Energy contacted a representative from the EDS in May 2011 to introduce the CHWF project and to advise EDS of potential lodgement dates for the application.
Targa Rally and Rally Wairarapa
Genesis Energy contacted the event organisers in June 2011. The organisers raised no issues about the CHWF project.
Consultation Section 7 – page 341
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
7.3 Issues Identified in Consultation
Throughout the consultation process Genesis Energy has received valuable input and feedback that has been incorporated into the project design of the CHWF.
Each of these matters, and all other potential effects from the construction, operation and maintenance of the CHWF, has been addressed in Section 5 of this document. Genesis Energy has taken all concerns raised into consideration throughout the development process of the CHWF project.
7.4 Summary
The consultation process undertaken for the CHWF has been important in keeping the public and key stakeholders informed, providing feedback, and enabling Genesis Energy to consider issues as they arose during the development process. Genesis Energy is committed to ongoing open and transparent consultation with all parties through the resource consent acquisition process.
Genesis Energy is appreciative of the time and effort taken by all parties participating and contributing to the consultation process and overall project development.
Consultation Section 7 – page 342
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
8. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK 8.1 Resource Management Act 1991
The RMA is the principal guiding statutory document governing the use of land, air and water. The purpose of the RMA, as set out in section 5, is to “promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources”. The method of applying section 5 involves an overall broad judgement, which allows for the comparison of conflicting considerations, the scale of them and their relative significance or proportion in the final outcome.
Section 88 of the RMA requires that an application for a resource consent be made in the prescribed form and manner, and include, in accordance with the Fourth Schedule, an assessment of environmental effects in such detail as corresponds with the scale and significance of effects that the activity may have on the environment.
This section of the AEE sets out the RMA framework for the resource consents that are sought from MWRC, GWRC, TDC and MDC.
The resource consent applications for the CHWF accompanying this AEE are in the prescribed form, as set out in Form 9 of Schedule 1 of the RMA. The requirements of the Fourth Schedule are set out below. By way of summary it is concluded that the AEE meets the requirements of the Fourth Schedule, and the requirements of section 88.
8.1.1 Fourth Schedule Requirements The Fourth Schedule to the RMA provides the key statutory guidance in terms of the content of an assessment of effects on the environment. The Fourth Schedule states:
1. Matters that should be included in an assessment of effects on the environment
Subject to the provisions of any policy statement or plan, an assessment of effects on the environment for the purposes of section 88 should include—
(a) A description of the proposal: (b) Where it is likely that an activity will result in any significant adverse effect on the environment, a description of any possible alternative locations or methods for undertaking the activity: (c) Repealed. (d) An assessment of the actual or potential effect on the environment of the proposed activity: (e) Where the activity includes the use of hazardous substances and installations, an assessment of any risks to the environment which are likely to arise from such use: (f) Where the activity includes the discharge of any contaminant, a description of— (i) The nature of the discharge and the sensitivity of the proposed receiving environment to adverse effects; and (ii) Any possible alternative methods of discharge, including discharge into any other receiving environment: (g) A description of the mitigation measures (safeguards and contingency plans where relevant) to be undertaken to help prevent or reduce the actual or potential effect: (h) identification of the persons affected by the proposal, the consultation undertaken, if any, and any response to the views of any person consulted: (i) Where the scale or significance of the activity's effect are such that monitoring is required, a description of how, once the proposal is approved, effects will be monitored and by whom.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 343
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
2. Matters that should be considered when preparing an assessment of effects on the environment
Subject to the provisions of any policy statement or plan, any person preparing an assessment of the effects on the environment should consider the following matters:
(a) Any effect on those in the neighbourhood and, where relevant, the wider community including any socio-economic and cultural effects: (b) Any physical effect on the locality, including any landscape and visual effects: (c) Any effect on ecosystems, including effects on plants or animals and any physical disturbance of habitats in the vicinity: (d) Any effect on natural and physical resources having aesthetic, recreational, scientific, historical, spiritual, or cultural, or other special value for present or future generations: (e) Any discharge of contaminants into the environment, including any unreasonable emission of noise and options for the treatment and disposal of contaminants: (f) Any risk to the neighbourhood, the wider community, or the environment through natural hazards or the use of hazardous substances or hazardous installations.
Set out below is a summary of how these requirements have been addressed in this document.
Clause 1(a) Description of the Proposal
A description of the proposal is provided in Section 4 of this AEE.
Clause 1(b) Possible Alternatives
Potential alternative sites and layouts for the development of a wind farm have been considered. Section 4.2.6 of this AEE outlines the alternatives considered, including alternative generation options, sites, Turbines and site layout, and access.
Clause 1(d) Actual or Potential Effects on the Environment
The actual and potential effects of the construction and operation of the CHWF are described in detail in Section 5 of this AEE.
Clause 1(e) Use of Hazardous Substances and Installations
As outlined further in Section 4, and the COMR attached as Appendix A of this document, a number of hazardous substances will be stored On-site. A hazardous chemicals area will be established and hazardous substances will be stored in accordance with relevant HSNO requirements. Areas used for storing substances during construction will be lined and bunded to avoid accidental discharges of contaminants, and a Spill Response Plan will be implemented to address any accidental spills of substances outside the secure storage areas.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 344
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Clause 1(f) Discharge of Contaminants
As detailed in Section 6.3.1 and the COMR (Appendix A, Volume 2), appropriate sediment and erosion control methods will be incorporated in the construction programme, and are detailed in the EMP and associated SEMPs which will be submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction activities commencing. Areas used for storing hazardous substances during construction will be lined and bunded to avoid accidental discharges of contaminants, and a Spill Response Plan will be implemented to address any accidental spills. The Concrete Batching Plant areas will have a washbay that drains to a multi stage settling pond. Cement silos will be fitted with a filter to minimise the risk of aeolian cement discharge.
Clause 1(g) Mitigation Measures
As outlined throughout this document, adverse effects of the CHWF will be avoided, remedied or mitigated through careful management of activities during construction and operation.
The mitigation measures proposed to further minimise the effects associated with the CHWF are outlined in Section 6 of this AEE. Proposed mitigation includes, for example, legal and physical protection by covenant and fencing, enrichment planting, revegetation planting (if required), natural regeneration, pest control, and monitoring and reporting. A Habitat Management Plan will be prepared for the CHWF that will guide the permanent protection and on-going improvement of an area of habitat up to 210 ha in size in a staged manner as the CHWF is constructed.
Clause 1(h) Interested or Affected Parties
Consultation with interested and/or affected parties has been taking place since mid- 2008. Genesis Energy has undertaken consultation with:
Wider community; CHWF Landowners; Neighbouring landowners and residents; Tangata whenua; Local authorities; NZTA; Transpower; Port of Napier; Operators of telecommunication services in the area; GNS DOC; Fish and Game; QEII Trust; Forest and Bird; Federated Farmers; CAA; Airways; Grow Wellington; EPA;
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 345
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
MfE; MED; EECA; EDS; Targa Rally New Zealand; and Rally Wairarapa.
The consultation undertaken with the above parties is described in detail in Section 7 of this document.
Clause 1(i) Proposed Monitoring
Proposed monitoring is outlined in Section 6.5 of this document. Monitoring will be undertaken as required by resource consent conditions throughout the construction phase and during the on-going operation of the CHWF. Specific monitoring relating to the construction and operation of the CHWF may include (but may not be limited to):
Baseline monitoring and water quality monitoring of discharges from representative construction areas.
Rainfall at each construction area.
Water level gauging at each water take site on the Tiraumea River and the Tiraumea, Te Hoe and Tinui Streams.
Downstream water quality monitoring from each water take site during abstraction.
Baseline avifauna monitoring involving five minute bird counts undertaken twice per year commencing at least two years prior to On-site construction commencing.
Searches for bird carcasses within the Turbine footprint.
Bat monitoring to assess whether bat roost sites are located within the Construction Footprint.
Lizard monitoring to identify likely lizard habitat prior to construction and to ensure any lizards found during construction are handled correctly. If necessary, lizard translocation to an area of appropriate adjacent habitat may be undertaken.
Vegetation monitoring through the establishment of permanent Reconnaissance (Reece) Plots.
Aquatic monitoring through a BAMP and a CAMP, and will include compliance standards and measures.
Noise monitoring during the construction and operational phases.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 346
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Clause 2(a) Wider Effects
Section 5 of this AEE provides an assessment of the potential effects generated by the proposal, including positive effects and wider effects. The CHWF will have positive effects to the northern Wairarapa area, and will make a material contribution to the electricity sector, at both the regional and national level, as detailed in Section 2.2 and Section 5.2. Other effects of the proposal on those in the neighbourhood and the wider community are discussed in detail Section 5 of this AEE.
Clause 2(b) Physical Effects
The primary physical effects associated with the CHWF are discussed in Section 5 of this document.
Clause 2(c) Effect on Ecosystems
The potential effects of the proposed development on the surrounding ecosystem are discussed in Section 5 of this document.
Clause 2(e) Discharge of Contaminants
Appropriate sediment and erosion control methods will be used during the construction phase of the CHWF to minimise the discharge of contaminants to the environment, as outlined in Section 6.3.1 and the COMR (Appendix A, Volume 2). Areas used for storing hazardous substances during construction and operation will be lined and bunded to avoid accidental discharges of contaminants, and a Spill Response Plan will be implemented to address any accidental spills. Substation sites and O&M facilities The discharge to air of dust and contaminants from the operation of the temporary concrete batching plants and mobile aggregate crushers will be limited to the immediate surrounds and have a minor effect on air quality. Cement silos will be fitted with a filter to minimise the risk of aeolian cement discharge.
Clause 2(f) Risks to Neighbourhood and Wider Community
The CHWF will not generate any risk to the neighbourhood and wider community. In terms of traffic generation, the transportation effects assessment (provided in Volume 3, Section 6, and summarised in Section 5.5 of this AEE), demonstrates that the existing roading network, subject to some upgrading and a comprehensive CTMP, is capable of withstanding the anticipated traffic generated by this proposal.
8.2 Resource Consent Requirements and Activity Status 8.2.1 Introduction Resource consents are required from the MWRC, GWRC, TDC and MDC. The relevant rules that determine the consent requirements for the CHWF are contained in the statutory documents set out in Table 8.1.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 347
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The resource consents required from the Regional and District Councils for the CHWF and an assessment of the activity status against the relevant Rules are set out in Sections 8.2.2 to 8.2.5. The relevant rules are provided in full in Appendix D (Volume 2) of this document.
The activity status for the various components of the CHWF project which require consent range from controlled through to discretionary. For those activities which overlap, it is appropriate to consider them as a combined discretionary activity. Where activities do not overlap, they can be considered according to their respective activity status.
Table 8.1: The relevant statutory planning documents for the CHWF.
Regional/ Territorial Relevant Plan Plan Status Authority Manawatu-Wanganui Operative Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Policy Operative Regional Council Statement (1998) (“MWRPS”) Regional Plan for Beds of Rivers and Lakes (2001) Operative (“RPBRL”) Land and Water Regional Plan (2003) (“LWRP”) Operative Manawatu Catchment Water Quality Regional Plan Operative (“MCWQRP”) Regional Air Plan for Manawatu-Wanganui (1998) Operative (“MW Air Plan”) Proposed One Plan as Amended by Decisions Proposed (2010) (“One Plan”) Tararua District Operative Tararua District Plan (1998) (“Operative Operative Council TDP”) Proposed Tararua District Plan as Amended by Proposed Decisions (2009) (“Proposed TDP”) Greater Wellington Regional Policy Statement for the Wellington Operative Regional Council Region (1995) (“Operative WRPS”) Proposed Regional Policy Statement for the Proposed Wellington Region (2010) (“Proposed WRPS”) Regional Freshwater Plan for the Wellington Operative Region (1999) (“Regional Freshwater Plan”) Regional Plan for Discharges to Land for the Operative Wellington Region (1999) (“Discharges to Land Plan”) Regional Soil Plan for the Wellington Region Operative (2000) (“Regional Soil Plan”) Regional Air Quality Management Plan for the Operative Wellington Region (2000) (“Air Quality Plan”) Masterton District Combined Wairarapa District Plan (2008) Operative Council (“Combined Plan”)
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 348
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
8.2.2 Manawatu – Wanganui Regional Council The resource consents required from the MWRC for the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF are summarised in Table 8.2 and discussed in more detail below.
Table 8.2: Summary of resource consents required from MWRC.
Activity Activity Status Plan Rule Land Use Consent – to authorise land disturbance, Restricted LWRP LM Rule 3 earthworks and vegetation clearance (including 0.027 ha discretionary One Plan Rule 12-4 identified as rare, threatened or at-risk habitat, and in a Hill Country Erosion Management Area), associated with the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement Discretionary One Plan Rule 12-6 and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the Castle Hill Wind Farm consent activities. Land Use Consent – to authorise the upgrade and Restricted LWRP LM Rule 3 maintenance of existing External Roads and construction discretionary One Plan Rule 12-4 of new roads (including associated land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance).
Land Use Consent – to authorise works in, and Discretionary RPBRL BRL Rule 12 associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, for the placement, construction, use and maintenance of structures, in, on, under or over the streambed. One Plan Rule 16-20
Water Permit – to authorise the damming and diversion Discretionary RPBRL BRL Rule 10 of surface water and groundwater during construction One Plan Rule 15-12 and operational activities.
Water Permit – to authorise the take and use of up to Discretionary LWRP SW Rule 5 531 cubic metres per day of surface water from Te Hoe Stream: One Plan Rule 15-8 a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N; when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) is less than the median flow but exceeds 2.04 cubic metres per second.
Water Permit – to authorise the take and use of surface Discretionary LWRP SW Rule 5 water for construction activities from: One Plan Rule 15-8 a) The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and b) The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N at a rate of up to 1037 cubic metres per day; and c) The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N at a rate of up to 2074 cubic metres per day;
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 349
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Activity Activity Status Plan Rule when the Tiraumea River flow at the Regional Council river flow gauge at Ngaturi (NZTM map reference 1847725E 5516240N) exceeds the median flow.
Discharge Permit – to authorise the discharge of Controlled LWRP DL Rule 15 stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and surface water via treatment ponds and interceptor systems, during the construction and operation of Discretionary MCWQRP MCWQ Rule infrastructure and facilities. 12 Restricted One Plan Rule 13-17 discretionary Discharge Permit – to authorise the discharge of Controlled LWRP DL Rule 15 stormwater that may contain contaminants to land from construction activities Discretionary MCWQRO MCWQ Rule 12 One Plan Rule 13-17
Discharge Permit – to authorise the discharge of Discretionary MCWQRO MCWQ Rule stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl washout 12 and concrete batching plant areas) to land One Plan Rule 13-27
Discharge Permit – to authorise the disposal of excess Discretionary LWRP DL Rule 12 fill to land. One Plan Rule 13-27 Discharge Permit – to authorise the discharge of Discretionary MW Air RAP Rule 17 contaminants to air associated with the operation of Plan temporary concrete batching plants and mobile One Plan Rule 14-13 aggregate processing plants.
Land Disturbance, Earthworks and Vegetation Clearance
LWRP
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the CHWF will not comply with the permitted activity standards in LM Rule 2, as construction activities will occur within 5 m of a water body, and vegetation clearance will exceed 2 ha per annum. Therefore, resource consent is required as a restricted discretionary activity under LM Rule 3 of the LWRP.
One Plan
Rules in respect to land disturbance are contained in Chapter 12 of the One Plan. Activity status is determined by whether the activity is carried out in a Hill Country Erosion Management Area, which is defined as:
...any area of land with a pre-existing slope of 28° or greater on which vegetation clearance, land disturbance, forestry or cultivation is being or is to be undertaken.
Some land disturbance and vegetation clearance for the construction of the CHWF will take place in Hill Country Erosion Management Areas, will exceed 1 ha per property, will occur within 5 m of the bed of a permanent flowing river, and involves new tracking.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 350
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Resource consent is therefore required as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 12-4.
As outlined in Section 5.7, vegetation clearance is required within habitat types classified as rare, threatened or at-risk habitats in Schedule E (Table E.1) of One Plan, and that meet the criteria specified in Schedule E (Table E.2) (0.02 ha of Podocarp forest or treeland and 0.007 ha of Podocarp/broadleafed fuchsia forest or treeland). Resource consent is therefore required as a discretionary activity under Rule 12-6.
Upgrade of External Roads
LWRP
Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with the upgrade of External Roads and construction of new roads for the CHWF will not comply with the permitted activity standards in LM Rule 2, as construction activities will occur within 5 m of a water body, and vegetation clearance will exceed 2 ha per annum. Therefore, resource consent is required as a restricted discretionary activity under LM Rule 3 of the LWRP.
One Plan
As outlined, some land disturbance and vegetation clearance associated with the upgrade of External Roads for the CWHF will take place in Hill Country Erosion Management Areas, will exceed 1 ha per property, will occur within 5 m of the bed of a permanent flowing river, and involves new tracking. Resource consent is therefore required as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 12-4.
There is no vegetation clearance required within habitats classified as rare, threatened or at-risk habitats in Schedule E (Table E.1) of One Plan, therefore resource consent is not required under Rule 12-6.
Disturbance of Stream Beds
Culverts and Bridges
As detailed in Section 4.3.4 and shown on Figure 4.23, Internal Roads require waterway crossings to access Turbines, substations and the Internal Transmission Line. The water crossings will require a combination of culverts and small bridges. Approximately 570 m of culvert is proposed for Turbine and substation access and 75 m of culvert is proposed for Internal Transmission Line access.
RPBRL
BRL Rule 11 of the RPBRL provides for the erection and placement of any new bridges, culverts, fords or other similar crossing structures in the river or lake bed with a catchment area not greater than 200 ha as a permitted activity. As outlined, it has been identified that some waterway crossings have a catchment area greater than 200 ha and therefore exceed the permitted activity BRL Rule 11. Genesis Energy is making a broader generic application for resource consent for disturbance of the stream bed for all Internal crossings in cases some of those crossings identified as
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 351
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects permitted require resource consent at the time of the final design. Resource consent is sought as a discretionary activity under BRL Rule 12 of the RPBRL.
One Plan
Rule 16-11 of One Plan provides for culverts in, on, under or over the bed of a river or lake as a permitted activity subject to a number of standards, including culverts up to 1.2 m in diameter which pass the 2-year return period flood without any flow impediment and providing for fish passage. The construction of culverts for some water crossings in the CHWF Site exceeds the permitted activity standards and therefore requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 16-20. It is noted that bridge and culverts will be designed to incorporate fish passage.
Rule 16-12 of One Plan provides for the erection, reconstruction, placement, alteration or extension of other structures, including bridges, in, on, under or over the bed of a river and any associated disturbance of the river bed, and the discharge of water or sediment as a permitted activity provided the structure does not occupy more than 20 m2 of the river bed, and the catchment above the structure is no greater than 200 ha.
As outlined, some water crossings required on Internal Roads to access Turbines, substations and Internal Transmission Line towers have a catchment area greater than 200 ha and therefore resource consent is sought as a discretionary activity under Rule 16-20 of One Plan.
Rule 16-7 provides for the removal or demolition of structures located in, on, under or over the bed of a river, including any discharge of water or sediment as a permitted activity, subject to compliance with the standard conditions in Section 16.2 of One Plan. The removal or demolition of any culverts and /or bridges will be undertaken using best management practices and will comply with the standard conditions in Section 16.2 of One Plan. MWRC will be notified in writing at least 10 working days prior to the commencement of such work.
Cables
Underground cables associated with the EBoP will are required to cross watercourses. As outlined in Section 4.3.3, this will be either by directional drilling (from each side of the stream), or through the use of a cable bridge.
One Plan
Rule 16-10 of the One Plan provides for the erection, placement or extension of a line, cable, pipeline or ropeway in, on, under or over the bed of a river as a permitted activity, providing the activity does not occupy more than 20 m2 of the bed, take place in a reach of river with a Schedule AB Value of Natural State or take place in any rare or threatened habitat. The CHWF Site is located primarily within the Mana 7a zone (Upper Tiraumea) under Schedule AA of the One Plan, with the eastern part being partially located within the Owha 1 zone (Owahanga). The Tiramea River within the Mana 7a zone is identified as having a Schedule AB Value of Natural State. Work is proposed in the upper reaches of the Tiraumea River and therefore resource consent for the placement of cables is required as a discretionary activity under Rule 16-20.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 352
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Water Abstraction Structures
As detailed in Section 4.3.8, three water take locations are proposed in the Manawatu- Wanganui Region during the construction period at the following locations:
The Te Hoe Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1846600E 5490500N; and
The Tiraumea Stream at or about NZTM map reference 1857510E 5498092N; and
The Tiraumea River at or about NZTM map reference 1842821E 5497910N.
RPBRL
The placement of intake structures near or in the bank of the stream to pump water to off-line storage areas requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under BRL Rule 12.
One Plan
Rule 16-12 of One Plan provides for the erection, reconstruction, placement, alteration or extension of other structures, in, on, under or over the bed of a river and any associated disturbance of the river bed, and the discharge of water or sediment as a permitted activity provided the structure does not occupy more than 20 m2 of the river bed, and the catchment above the structure is no greater than 200 ha.
The proposed intake structures do not comply with the permitted rule and therefore require resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 16-20.
Diversion of Surface and Groundwater
Stream diversions will be constructed around proposed works areas, such as water crossings throughout the CHWF Site, to allow the works to be completed in a dry streambed and reduce the potential for sediment generation during the construction period.
RPBRL
Stream diversions and the erection and placement of associated structures in, on, under or over the bed during the construction and operation of the CHWF require resource consent as a discretionary activity under BRL Rule 10.
Offline storage areas associated with the take abstraction points are not within permanently flowing water bodies and therefore are a permitted activity under BRL Rule 16-8.
One Plan
Rule 15-11 provides for the diversion of water where the diversion is wholly contained within the bed of the river. The diversion of surface water during the construction of the CHWF will not meet the permitted activity standards and requires resource consent as
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 353
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects a discretionary activity under Rule 15-12. The diversion of groundwater during earthworks, Internal Road construction and other activities associated with the CHWF is permitted under Rule 15-11 and does not require resource consent.
Surface Water Takes
As outlined in Section 4.3.8 of this document, the maximum quantity of water required for the construction of the CHWF is 360,000 m3 (average daily demand of approximately 300 m3 per Turbine Cluster per day). Water is required for aggregate processing, concrete production, wheel wash and truck cleaning, potable water for the construction work force and dust suppression.
Water is proposed to be taken primarily from Te Hoe Stream and Tiraumea Stream (at Haunui Road) in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region, with a back-up supply from the Tiraumea River downstream of the confluence with the Ihuraua River.
LRWP
Surface water takes from rivers protected by National Water Conservation Orders, as listed in SW Rule 1 of the LWRP, are prohibited, while takes of more than 15 m3 per day from rivers listed in SW Rule 2 are non-complying. The Te Hoe Stream and Tiraumea Stream are not listed in Rules SW1 and SW2.
Surface water takes during construction activities will exceed 15 m3 per day and therefore resource consent is required as a discretionary activity under SW Rule 5.
One Plan
Schedule B of the One Plan establishes minimum flows and core allocation limits for each Water Management Zone. The cumulative core allocation limit for the Mana 7a zone is 3,456 m3/day, however the actual core allocation available is 531 m3/day. In addition, restrictions are applied at the point of take based on prevailing stream flow conditions.
Resource consent for surface water takes from the Te Hoe and Tiraumea Streams during construction will be required as a discretionary activity under Rule 15-8. Limits proposed for water takes associated with the CHWF are detailed in the consent applications attached of this document.
Discharges to Land and Water
Substation and O&M Facilities
Stormwater runoff from the Main and Satellite Substations, and the O&M facilities will discharge to land and may enter water bodies.
LWRP
The collection and discharge of stormwater from impervious areas to land where the stormwater may enter water bodies outside the Manawatu catchment would not meet the standards in DL Rule 14 as there will be runoff from sites that store and use
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 354
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects hazardous substances (such as substations and O&M facilities). The discharge of stormwater to land requires resource consent under DL Rule 15 as a controlled activity.
MCWQRP
The discharge of stormwater to land from substations and O&M facilities requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under MCWQ Rule 12.
One Plan
The discharge of stormwater to surface water and land will not meet the standards of permitted Rule 13-15 of the One Plan and requires resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 13-17. Rule 13-17 provides for stormwater discharges not complying with Rule 13-15, provided there is no discharge to any rare, threatened or at-risk habitat, or any reach of a river or its bed with a Schedule AB Value of Natural State. Natural State is defined in Schedule AB as:
All sections of rivers^ and their beds^ that have sources in, and flow within, the Public Conservation Land (land held under the Conservation Act 1987 or administered by the DOC), with the exception of those where damming or diversion have significantly affected the natural state of the water^ (Table AB.2)
The Mana 7a zone is listed in Table AB.1 as having Natural State value, and is not listed in Table AB.2.
Concrete Batching Plants
A dry concrete batching process is proposed at the CHWF Site, therefore the washing down of wet concrete within the Concrete Batching Plant areas will be unlikely. However the concrete truck’s mixing bowl will be washed down in a a washbay in the Concrete Batching Plant areas. The washbay will isolate and capture runoff from active areas (such as the cement silo, concrete production, load-out, wash-pits, sludge drying and wash concrete), and drain to a multi-stage settling pond. Settled cement from the ponds will be removed periodically and either reused, or taken Off-site. Water from the settling ponds will be recycled for concrete manufacture and washing the inside of the truck bowls where possible. Stormwater from non-activity areas will be collected and treated prior to discharge.
LWRP
DL Rule 15 provides for the discharge of stormwater onto or into land from industrial or trade premises as a controlled activity subject to complying with standards relating to flooding, erosion, water quality and effects on aquatic ecosystems. The discharge of stormwater to land from non-activity areas of the Concrete Batching Plants and O&M facilities requires resource consent as a controlled activity under DL Rule 15.
MCWQRP
The discharge of wash water to land from truck bowl wash out in the Concrete Batching Plant areas requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under MCWQ Rule 12 of the MCWQRP.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 355
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
One Plan
The discharge of wash water to land from truck bowl wash out in the Concrete Batching Plant area requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 13-27 of the One Plan.
Effluent Discharges
The discharge to land of effluent from On-site sewage treatment systems will meet the permitted activity standards in the MCWQRP, LWRP and One Plan and therefore does not require resource consent.
Discharge to Air
Four potential Concrete Batching Plant locations have been proposed On-site for the CHWF project. The plants would be re-locatable with probably only one or two locations operating concurrently at any one time. A typical Concrete Batching Plant is likely to consist of a concrete mixer, cement silos, sand and aggregate stockpiles, water storage tanks and storage areas for equipment and tools. The cement silos will be equipped with a filter to minimise the risk of aeolian cement discharge.
MW Air Plan
The discharge of contaminants to air from mobile aggregate crushing plants is provided for as a permitted activity under RAP Rule 13 and does not require resource consent. However, the Concrete Batching Plants will require resource consent as a discretionary activity under RAP Rule 17 as they are not specifically provided for in the MW Air Plan.
One Plan
The discharge of contaminants to air associated with the Concrete Batching Plants and mobile crushing plants requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 14-13 of One Plan.
Disposal of Excess Fill to Land
Up to 9.5 million m3 of Excess Fill will be disposed to land of over an area of 460 ha via Excess Fill Areas at various locations within the CHWF Site.
LWRP
The discharge of Excess Fill to land by way of Excess Fill Areas requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under DL Rule 12.
One Plan
Rule 13-19 provides for the discharge of cleanfill material to land if less than 2,500 m3/year per property as a permitted activity. The disposal of Excess Fill to land at the CHWF exceeds 2,500 m3/year per property and therefore requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 13-27.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 356
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
8.2.3 Tararua District Council It is understood that appeals on the Proposed TDP will be resolved in the near future (and will no longer be subject to challenge), therefore the Proposed TDP can now be considered to have effect. The Proposed TDP is not operative, and while the provisions of the Operative TDP have been carried over to the Proposed TDP mostly unchanged, for completeness the provisions of the Operative TDP that are relevant to the construction and operation of the CHWF are included below.
Table 8.3 details the resource consent required from the TDC. As outlined in Section 8.2.1, a combined discretionary activity consent is sought from TDC under the Operative and Proposed TDP. For this reason, the rules relating to specific activities are not considered individually, except where particularly relevant to the assessment of effects.
Table 8.3: Summary of resource consents required from TDC.
Activity Activity Status Rule Land Use Consent – to authorise the Discretionary Rule 4.1.5.1(a) construction, operation, maintenance, (Operative TDP) replacement and refurbishment of the Castle Hill Wind Farm and associated structures, including: Rule 5.3.7.2(b) Not meeting noise standards in the Rural (Proposed TDP) Zone; Construction, operation and maintenance of substations and overhead lines for the internal conveyance of electricity within the CHWF Site; Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance (including in an area identified as “Significant groups of trees, vegetation and habitats”) The construction, realignment and upgrading of internal and external roads.
Wind Farm Construction
Proposed TDP
Rule 5.3.7.2(b) of the Proposed TDP provides for the construction, operation and maintenance of renewable electricity generation facilities, such as wind farms, as a discretionary activity in all management areas. Criteria for assessment of wind farm applications are set out in Section 5.3.7.4 of the Proposed TDP as follows:
(a) The contribution that the proposed renewable electricity generation facility will make to the achievement of energy policy objectives and/or renewable electricity generation targets of the New Zealand government; (b) The local, regional and national benefits to be derived from renewable electricity generation and use; (c) The extent to which the facility will adversely affect the amenity values of the locality, having particular regard to the impact of the development on existing residential dwellings, and including (but not limited to) the following effects:
(i) Electromagnetic interference to broadcast or other signals (ii) Glint resulting from the reflection of the sun off of Turbine blades
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 357
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
(iii) Shadow flicker resulting from shadows generated by moving Turbine blades.
(d) The visual and amenity effects of the facility with regard to the existing character of the area to which the proposal relates, the desired characteristics for the relevant Management Area as set out in Section 3.2 of this Plan, any significant landscapes or natural features identified in this Plan and/or any Regional Policy Statement and/or Regional Plan that applies to the area in which the site of the proposal is located; (e) The ecological effects of the facility, including any effect on significant natural areas including areas and habitats of indigenous flora and fauna, as identified in this Plan or any Regional Policy Statement or Plan that applies to the area in which the site of the proposal is located; (f) The effects of the facility on recognised archaeological and/or historic heritage features identified in this Plan or in other heritage registers; (g) The expected noise effects arising from the construction, maintenance and operation of the facility, with particular regard to the impact of noise on existing dwellings and the ability of the proposal to meet any relevant standards such as NZS6808:2010 Acoustics – Wind Farm Noise and the NZS6803:1999 Construction Noise or any subsequent versions of these standards. (h) The effects of the facility on aviation, navigation and existing network facilities. (i) The ability of the land to accommodate the earthworks, roads, building platforms or other infrastructure necessary to construct, maintain and operate the facility.
The above assessment criteria includes matters relating to the benefits from the development of renewable electricity generation facilities, as well as the potential for adverse effects relating to amenity values, electromagnetic interference, blade glint, shadow flicker, landscape, ecology, noise and earthworks. A comprehensive assessment of the potential effects (including positive effects) of the construction and operation of the CHWF have been provided in Section 5 of this document, and in more detail in the technical assessments attached in Volumes 3, 4 and 5.
In respect to assessment criteria set out in Section 5.3.7.4 of the Proposed TDP it is noted: a) The CHWF will make a material contribution to meeting central Government’s goal of generation of 90% of electricity needs from renewable sources. b) Local, regional and national benefits of the CHWF include include contributing towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand via renewable energy, diversification of generation supply options, assisting with the reduction in carbon emissions associated with electricity generation, providing a local supply of electricity to the Central Electricity Region, positive impact of the economies of the Masterton and Tararua Districts, and diversification of the industry base in both Districts. c) Adverse effects on amenity values have been assessed in detail in Section 5 of this AEE, noting:
(i) Potential effects of electromagnetic interference on telecommunication and radio communication services has been assessed and can be mitigated to the extent that the effects are no more than minor; (ii) There will be neglible blade glint effects from the use of a low reflectivity finish on the Turbines; and (iii) There will be no significant exposure to shadow flicker for any External Dwelling to the CHWF Site.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 358
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects d) The inland hill country landscape of the northern Wairarapa can accommodate the CHWF without adversely affecting or compromising its rural character or its associated rural activities. The CHWF does not impinge upon or compromise any outstanding natural features or landscapes within the northern Wairarapa area. e) Ecological values will not be adversely affected by the construction and operation of CHWF because threatened or at risk species found at the site occur at low or very low densities and the habitats of threatened species are, in the main, not those which will be removed or otherwise affected. f) The CHWF will have no adverse effects on any known archaeological sites during the construction phase, and is unlikely to have any significant effects on unidentified archaeological sites. g) Construction noise associated with the CHWF can comply with the provisions of NZS6803 at all External Dwellings as required by the TDC and MDC District Plans. Construction noise from upgrades to External Roads will, in some cases, exceed the noise limits in NZS6803 for brief periods at some External Dwellings. Noise levels at all External Dwellings comply with the noise limits of NZS6808. h) The Turbines will be appropriately lit and identified on aeronautical charts, in accordance with CAA requirements and will not cause an adverse effect in terms of navigable airspace. No potential effects on existing network utilities have been identified. i) Detailed design and constructability assessments have been undertaken and have concluded that the construction of a wind farm (and associated infrastructure and facilities) on the Site is technically feasible.
Relevant environmental standards for the CHWF are set out in Part 5 of the Proposed TDP and are outlined below.
Land Disturbance, Earthworks and Vegetation Clearance
Land disturbance and earthworks at the CHWF Site will exceed the maximum volume of 200 m3 permitted in the Rural Management Area in Standard 5.1.5.2(b).
Indigenous vegetation clearance for the CHWF exceeds criteria set out in Standard 5.5.4(a). As outlined in Section 5.7.3, clearance of 2.63 ha of indigenous vegetation is required in Patitapu Bush (RAP No. 8, ID No. 174, Planning Map 28). Patitapu Bush is a 363 ha area of secondary scrub and forest that is identified in Appendix 3.2 (Table 3.2) of the Proposed TDP as a “Significant groups of trees, vegetation and habitats”. Patitapu Bush is classified as ‘Category B’ which requires a moderate level of protection.
Modification, damage or destruction to any Category B item requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 5.5.3.2(b) of the Proposed TDP. Criteria for assessment is provided in 5.5.3.6 and includes the nature of the proposed activity, assessment of environmental effects, and proposed mitigation.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 359
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Construction of Roads
The proposed transport route for Turbines and other components for the CHWF is from the Port of Napier via State Highway 2, then via the local road network to the Wind Farm Access Points onto the CHWF Site. Minor upgrades proposed on External Roads from Alfredton to the CHWF Site includes repositioning signs, temporary or permanent kerb line shifts or localised widening of roads.
The construction of internal roads and the realignment and widening of existing roads from Alfredton to the CHWF Site does not meet the permitted activity criteria of Rule 5.3.1.4(a) and requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 5.3.1.4(e). As outlined in Section 4.4 of this document, if required a separate resource consent application for the section of road from the Port of Napier to Alfredton will be lodged at a later date.
Vehicle crossings associated with Internal Roads in the CHWF Site will comply with the permitted activity standards in Section 5.3.3.2 (e).
Operative TDP
The CHWF is located in the Rural Management Area of the Operative and Proposed TDP. There are no specific provisions for wind farms in the Rural Management Area in the Operative TDP, therefore the CHWF and associated activities requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 4.1.5.1(a).
Assessment Criteria 4.1.5.2(iii) requires that any application under Rule 4.1.5.1 for a discretionary activity to have regard to the Environmental Standards set out in Part 5 of the Operative and Proposed TDP. Relevant standards in Part 5 in respect to the development of the CHWF include land disturbance and excavation, infrastructure (roads, access and intersections), amenity and heritage, and natural features. Assessment against this criteria is provided as per above for the Proposed TDP.
8.2.4 Wellington Regional Council The resource consents, activity status and applicable rules in respect to CHWF activities in the Wellington Region are set out in Table 8.4.
Table 8.4: Summary of resource consents required from GWRC.
Activity Activity Plan Rule Status Land Use Consent – to authorise land disturbance, Restricted Regional Rule 2 earthworks and vegetation clearance associated with discretionary Soil Plan Rule 4 the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of all structures and activities associated with the CHWF consent activities.
Land Use Consent – to authorise the upgrade of Restricted Regional Rule 1 existing External Roads and construction of new discretionary Soil Plan Rule 2 Internal Roads (including associated land disturbance, Rule 4 earthworks and vegetation clearance).
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 360
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Activity Activity Plan Rule Status Land Use Consent – to authorise the work in, and Discretionary Regional Rule 49 associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds Freshwater for the placement, construction, use and maintenance Plan of structures in, on, under or over the streambed (including bridges, culverts and structures).
Land Use Consent – to authorise works in, and Discretionary Regional Rule 49 associated excavation and disturbance of streambeds, Freshwater for the placement, construction, use and maintenance Plan of structures in, on, under or over the streambed in a manner that constitutes a permanent reclamation or occupation of the bed.
Water Permit – to authorise the damming and Discretionary Regional Rule 16 diversion of water (including surface and groundwater) Freshwater during construction and operational activities Plan associated with the CHWF consent activities.
Water Permit – to authorise the take and use of up to Discretionary Regional Rule 16 890 cubic metres per day of surface water from the Freshwater Tinui River at Taipo, at or about NZTM map reference Plan 1866476E 5477290N for construction activities.
Discharge Permit – to authorise the discharge of Discretionary Discharges Rule 2 stormwater that may contain contaminants to land and to Land surface water, during the construction and operation of Plan infrastructure and facilities, associated with CHWF consent activities. Discretionary Regional Rule 5 Freshwater Plan Discharge Permit - to authorise the discharge of stormwater and wash water (from truck bowl wash out and the concrete batching plant areas) to land.
Discharge Permit – to authorise the discharge of Discretionary Discharges Rule 2 Excess Fill to land. to Land Plan
Discharge Permit - to authorise the discharge of Discretionary Air Quality Rule 23 contaminants to air associated with the temporary Plan concrete batching plants and the mobile aggregate crushing plants.
Land Disturbance, Earthworks and Vegetation Clearance
Regional Soil Plan
The CHWF is located in Area 1 in land defined as “erosion prone” (slope greater than 23°) in the Regional Soil Plan.
Soil disturbance associated with construction activities for the CHWF on erosion prone land requires resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 2 of the Regional Soil Plan.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 361
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Vegetation disturbance associated with construction activities on erosion prone land will not comply with the permitted activity conditions in Rule 3 and resource consent is required as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 4.
Upgrade of External Roads and Construction of New Roads
Regional Soil Plan
The upgrade of External Roads associated with the CHWF requires resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 2 (soil disturbance) and Rule 4 (vegetation disturbance) of the Regional Soil Plan.
The construction of new Internal Roads within the CHWF Site requires resource consent as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 1 of the Regional Soil Plan.
Disturbance of Stream Beds
Culverts and Bridges
As detailed in Section 4.3.4 and shown on Figure 4.23, Internal Roads require waterway crossings to access Turbines, substations and the Internal Transmission Line. The water crossings will require a combination of culverts and small bridges. Approximately 570 m of culvert is proposed for Turbine and substation access and 75 m of culvert is proposed for Internal Transmission Line access.
Regional Freshwater Plan
Rule 25 of the Regional Freshwater Plan provides for the placement and use of any river crossing that is fixed in, on, under, or over the bed of any intermittently flowing river or stream, including the disturbance of and deposition on any river bed, provided the catchment area above the crossing is not more than 200 ha. Rule 31 of the Regional Freshwater Plan provides for the erection and maintenance of bridges less than six metres in length over any river bed as a permitted activity.
As outlined in Section 4.3.4 of this document, an assessment of those watercourse crossings required to access Turbines, substations and Internal Transmission Line Towers has been undertaken for the CHWF. Seventeen crossings are required to access the Turbines and substations and the catchment area above most of the proposed crossings is small (<200 ha) so culvert crossings are likely to be adequate. However six water crossings have larger upstream catchments and bridge crossings may therefore be required. These crossings will not comply with Rule 25 and 31 of the Regional Freshwater Plan. Genesis Energy is making a broader generic application for resource consent for disturbance of the stream bed for all Internal crossings in cases some of those crossings identified as permitted require resource consent at the time of the final design. Resource consent is sought for all water crossings as a discretionary activity under Rule 49.
Where a culvert is longer than the width of the road, it is considered a piped watercourse as opposed to a culvert. As outlined in Section 4.3.4, culverts are required that is longer than the width of the road (see Table 4.5 and 4.6) therefore resource consent is required as a discretionary activity under Rule 49.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 362
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Rule 22 of the Regional Freshwater Plan provides for the upgrade, alteration and/or extension to existing culverts provided conditions are met which relate to the scale of any extensions. The culverts that require upgrading or extension are outlined in Table 4. 5 and 4.6 of this document.
Cables
Underground cables associated with the EBoP will be required to cross watercourses. As outlined in Section 4.3.3, this will be either by directional drilling (from each side of the stream), or through the use of a cable bridge.
Rule 28 provides for laying cables in, under, or over the bed of any intermittently flowing river or stream, which has an external diameter of 400 mm or less and does not alter the natural course or flow of the water body. Underground cables under the bed of a stream associated with the CHWF will comply with this rule.
Water Abstraction Structures
As detailed in Section 4.3.8, one water take location is proposed in the Wellington Region during the construction period at Tinui Stream (see Figure B13, Appendix B, Volume 2). This will require an intake structure near or in the bank of the stream to pump water to an off-line storage area.
The proposed intake structure requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 49 of the Regional Freshwater Plan.
Reclamation
The placement of culvert structures and reclamation of stream beds in addition to the structures identified above requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 49 of the Regional Freshwater Plan.
Water Take
Regional Freshwater Plan
The proposed water abstraction from the Tinui River at Taipo (WS5) may exceed 2.5 l/s and requires resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 16 (as amended by Plan Change 3).
Stream Diversion
Regional Freshwater Plan
Rule 9 provides for minor diversions of water from intermittently flowing streams if the diversion is less than 1.5 m3/s, including any associated disturbance and deposition on of and on the stream bed, provided the area above the diversion is not more than 200 ha.
The temporary diversion of water (including surface water and groundwater) through culverts during the construction and operation of water crossings for the CHWF will not
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 363
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects comply with permitted activity Rule 9 of the Regional Freshwater Plan and will require resource consent as a discretionary activity under Rule 16.
Discharges to Land and Water
Substation and O&M Facilities
Discharges to Land Plan
Stormwater runoff from the Main and Satellite Substations, and the O&M facilities will discharge to land. These discharges may contain contaminants and therefore resource consent is required as a discretionary activity under Rule 2 of the Discharges to Land Plan.
Earthworks
Regional Freshwater Plan
The discharge of stormwater to surface water is a permitted activity under Rule 2 of the Regional Freshwater Plan., provided the discharge complies with conditions, including not originating from an area of bulk earthworks greater than 0.3 ha. Stormwater will be discharged from areas of bulk earthworks exceeding 0.3 ha at the CHWF Site and may enter water, therefore resource consent is required as a discretionary activity under Rule 5 of the Regional Freshwater Plan.
Discharges to Land Plan
The discharge of stormwater to land from construction activities associated with the CHWF is a discretionary activity under Rule 2 of the Discharges to Land Plan, as contaminants may enter surface water.
Concrete Batching Plants
A dry concrete batching process is proposed at the CHWF Site, therefore the washing down of wet concrete within the Concrete Batching Plant areas will be unlikely. However the concrete truck’s mixing bowl will need to be washed down. The Concrete Batching Plant areas will have a washbay that will isolate and capture runoff from active areas (such as the cement silo, concrete production, load-out, wash-pits, sludge drying and wash concrete), and drain to a multi-stage settling pond. Settled cement from the ponds will be removed periodically and either reused, or taken Off-site. Water from the settling ponds will be recycled for concrete manufacture and washing the inside of the truck bowls where possible. Stormwater from non-activity areas will be collected and treated prior to discharge.
There are no specific rules in respect to the discharge of water to land that may contain contaminants, such as from the Concrete Batching Plant areas and substations. The discharge of water from these areas therefore requires resource consent as a discretionary activity.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 364
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Effluent Discharges
The discharge of sewage to land from On-site sewage treatment systems will meet the permitted activity requirements of Rule 7 of the Discharges to Land Plan and will not require resource consent.
Disposal of Excess Fill to Land
Discharges to Land Plan
As outlined in Section 4.4.4 of this document, up to 9.5 million m3 of Excess Fill will be deposited via Excess Fill Areas within the CHWF Site. Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be undertaken at each Excess Fill Site, however some Excess Fill may enter waterways. Resource consent is therefore required as a discretionary activity under Rule 2 of the Discharges to Land Plan.
Discharge to Air
Air Quality Plan
The discharge of contaminants to air associated with the pneumatic conveying of bulk materials is specifically excluded from permitted Rule 10 of the Air Quality Plan. Therefore, the discharge of contaminants to air associated with the aggregate crushing and concrete batching plants will require resource consent under Rule 23 as a discretionary activity.
8.2.5 Masterton District Council The main consents, activity status and applicable rules in respect to activities in the Masterton District under the Combined Plan are set out in Table 8.5.
Table 8.5: Summary of resource consents required from MDC.
Activity Activity Status Rule Land Use Consent – to authorise the Discretionary Rule 21.4(j) construction, operation, maintenance, Rule 21.4(a) replacement and refurbishment of the Castle Rule 21.3.12 Hill Wind Farm and associated structures, (restricted) including:
Construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of substations and overhead lines for the internal conveyance of electricity; Land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance activities, construction of including Turbine and overhead line foundations, substation sites, underground cables, fill placement areas, central laydown areas, internal roads and all ancillary activities The construction, realignment and upgrading of internal and external roads.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 365
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Wind Farm Construction, Operation and Maintenance
The CHWF is located in the Rural Zone of the Combined Plan, therefore the District Wide Land Use Rules in Section 21 and the Rural Zone Rules are applicable.
The development of wind energy facilities is provided for as a discretionary activity in accordance with Rule 21.4(j). Wind energy is defined as follows:
Wind Energy Facility – means the land, buildings, substations, Turbines, structures, underground cabling, earthworks, access tracks and roads associated with the generation of electricity by wind force and the operation of the wind energy facility. It does not include:
(i) Small scale Turbines of less than 5kW. (ii) Any cabling required to link the wind energy facility to the point of entry into the electricity network, whether transmission or distribution in nature.
The construction of activities associated with the CHWF, such as Internal Roads, substations and earthworks, are included in the definition of a wind energy facility and do not require separate resource consents.
Assessment Criteria for Wind Energy Facilities are set out in 22.1.20 as follows:
22.1.20 Wind Energy Facilities (i) The landscape and visual effects of the proposal, including: (1) The extent to which the proposal will adversely affect rural character, views from residences, key public places, including roads, and recreation areas. (2) The visibility of the proposal, including the number of Turbines and their height. (3) The extent to which the proposal will adversely affect the natural character of the coastal environment, waterbodies, and outstanding landscape or natural features. (4) The extent to which any aspects of the proposal can be sited underground. (ii) The ecological impact of the proposal, including the extent of disruption to vegetation and habitat, any impacts on waterways, and the likely effect on birds and other fauna. (iii) The effects on heritage, cultural, geological and archaeological values and sites. (iv) The effects of traffic and vehicle movements. (v) The actual or potential noise effects of the construction, development and operation of the wind energy facilities, including particular consideration of the special audible characteristics, and the proximity to and effect on settlements or dwellings, and the ability to meet NZS 6808:1998 “Acoustics – The Assessment and Measurement of Sound from Wind Turbine Generators; and other relevant standards such as NZS 6803:1999 “Construction Noise””. (vi) The extent to which the proposal will adversely affect amenity values of the surrounding environment, including the effects of electromagnetic interference to broadcast or other signals, blade glint and shadow flicker. (vii) The extent of any earthworks, including the construction of access tracks, roads and Turbine platforms. (viii) The cumulative effects of the proposal. (ix) The benefits to be derived from renewable energy. (x) Mitigation and rehabilitation works. (xi) Operational and technical considerations.
The above assessment criteria includes matters relating to the development of renewable electricity generation facilities, including the benefits as well as the potential for adverse effects relating to landscape and visual, ecology, heritage, cultural, geological and archaeology, traffic and vehicle movements, noise effects, amenity
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 366
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects values, extent of earthworks, cumulative effects, benefits of the renewable energy, mitigation and rehabilitation, and operational and technical considerations.
A comprehensive assessment of the potential effects (including positive effects) of the construction and operation of the CHWF have been provided in Section 5 of this document, and in more detail in the technical assessments attached in Volumes 3 and 4.
In respect to assessment criteria set out in Section 22.1.20 of the Combined Plan, by way of summary it is noted:
(i) The inland hill country landscape of the northern Wairarapa can accommodate the CHWF without adversely affecting or compromising its rural character or its associated rural activities. From public roads and rural settlements within 30 km of the CHWF, the visual effects will be minor. The CHWF does not impinge upon or compromise any outstanding natural features or landscapes within the northern Wairarapa area.
(ii) Ecological values will not be adversely affected by the construction and operation of CHWF because threatened or at risk species found at the site occur at low or very low densities and the habitats of threatened species are, in the main, not those which will be removed or otherwise affected.
(iii) The CHWF will have no adverse effects on any known archaeological sites during the construction phase, and is unlikely to have any significant effects on unidentified archaeological sites. No evidence has been found relating to any sites of cultural significance being located within the CHWF Site. One heritage item is located on the OW/OD Route but will not be affected by the proposal.
(iv) Traffic volumes will increase as a result of the CHWF project, with most increases occurring during the construction phase of the project. Given that a significant portion of these traffic movements will be HCV’s, a number of mitigation and management measures will be required to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the road network. With such measures, it is expected that the safe and efficient operation of the road network will continue with less than minor effects arising as a result of the CHWF.
(v) Construction noise associated with the CHWF can comply with the provisions of NZS6803 at all External Dwellings as required by the TDC and MDC District Plans. Construction noise from upgrades to External Roads will, in some cases, exceed the noise limits in NZS6803 for brief periods at some External Dwellings. Noise levels at all External Dwellings comply with the noise limits of NZS6808 during the operation of the CHWF.
(vi) Potential effects of electromagnetic interference on telecommunication and radio communication services has been assessed and can be mitigated to the extent that the effects are no more than minor. There will be neglible blade glint effects from the use of a low reflectivity finish on the Turbines. There will be no significant exposure to shadow flicker for any External Dwelling to the CHWF Site.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 367
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
(vii) Stormwater management controls will be implemented during the construction phase of the CHWF to manage potential erosion and sedimentation from exposed earthworks. ESCPs will be finalised prior to construction for each area of proposed works. While the construction of the CHWF will necessitate significant earthworks over an extensive area, the progressive rehabilitation of disturbed areas will reduce the extent of site disturbance at any one time.
(viii) As outlined in the Landscape and Visual Assessment undertaken for this application, cumulative visual effects can occur as a result of additional effects from other existing or consented wind farms in the same view catchment, or the wider area and region in general. The consented Turitea Wind Farm on the Tararua Ranges and the consented Waitahora Wind Farm on the western side of the Puketoi Range may potentially contribute to cumulative effects relative to the CHWF. Given the distance between the wind farms on the Tararua – Ruahine Ranges and the CHWF, cumulative visual effects have been assessed as been low. The Waitahora Wind Farm is within the CHWF distant middle ground area (10 to 20 km), however the Puketoi Range separates and screens the two wind farms from each other. From local roads and rural dwellings in the local and wider northern Wairarapa area, cumulative effects from the Tararua – Ruahine wind farms and the Waitahora Wind Farm will not generally be apparent due to the screening effects of intervening landforms and vegetation, as well as distance and orientation relative to most potential viewpoints.
(ix) The CHWF will make a material contribution to meeting central Government’s goal of generation of 90% of electricity needs from renewable sources. Local, regional and national benefits of the CHWF include include contributing towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand via renewable energy, diversification of generation supply options, assisting with the reduction in carbon emissions associated with electricity generation, providing a local supply of electricity to the Central Electricity Region, positive impact of the economies of the Masterton and Tararua Districts, and diversification of the industry base in both Districts.
(x) Mitigation and rehabilitation - a Revegetation Plan will be prepared for the CHWF, to ensure provision is made for rapid reinstatement of vegetation cover following earthworks. Proposed mitigation includes legal and physical protection by covenant and fencing, enrichment planting, revegetation planting (if required), natural regeneration, pest control, and monitoring and reporting. A Habitat Management Plan will be prepared for the CHWF that will guide the permanent protection and on-going improvement of an area of habitat up to 210 ha in size in a staged manner as the CHWF is constructed.
(xi) Detailed design and constructability assessments have been undertaken and have concluded that the construction of a wind farm (and associated infrastructure and facilities) on the Site is technically feasible.
Conveyance of Electricity
The CHWF will require the transfer of electricity via underground cables and overhead lines between clusters, and to the electricity network. Overhead lines for conveying
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 368
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects electricity are excluded from the definition of ‘wind energy facility’ in the Combined Plan, and are therefore assessed under Rule 21.1.20(a)(v). Rule 21.1.20(a)(v) classifies lines for conveying electricity with a voltage of up to and including 110kV as a permitted activity. Resource consent will therefore be required for the 220kV overhead lines connecting the two substations on the CHWF Site as a discretionary activity under Rule 21.4(a).
Vegetation Clearance
Approximately 66 ha of indigenous vegetation clearance will be required for the construction of the CHWF and associated structures, and will not comply with permitted activity Rule 21.1.6. Resource consent for indigenous vegetation clearance is therefore required as a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 21.3.12(b).
8.3 Statutory Planning Documents
Several statutory planning documents are relevant to the CHWF, including national policy statements and Regional and District Plans (as set out in Table 8.1). The relevant provisions of these documents are discussed in respect to the CHWF below, and provided in full in Appendix D.
8.3.1 National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation The National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation (“NPSREG”) took effect from 13 May 2011. The key objective of the NPSREG is to “recognise the national significance of renewable electricity generation by providing for the development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of new and existing renewable electricity generation activities”.
The NPSREG comprises one Objective and eight policy groups:
A. Recognising the benefits of renewable electricity generation activities;
B. Acknowledging the practical implications of achieving New Zealand’s target for electricity generation from renewable resources;
C. Acknowledging the practical constraints associated with the development, operation, maintenance and upgrading of new and existing renewable electricity generation activities;
D. Managing reverse sensitivity effects on renewable electricity generation activities;
E. Incorporating provisions for renewable electricity generation activities into regional policy statements and regional and district plans;
F. Incorporating provisions for small and community-scale renewable electricity generation activities into regional policy statements and regional and district plans;
G. Enabling identification of renewable electricity generation possibilities; and
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 369
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
H. Time within which implementation is required.
Of these, the policies in A, B and C are most relevant to new wind energy generation projects.
Policy A of the NPSREG lists a number of benefits associated with renewable energy generation, many of which are consistent with the anticipated benefits of the CHWF as described in Section 2.4 of this document. Giving effect to the CHWF will result in an increase of electricity generation capacity and an increase in the security of supply using a renewable resource. Accordingly, this will displace greenhouse gas emissions and avoid the need for using finite, and in some cases, imported fuels. Under Policy A, decision makers shall recognise and provide for such benefits.
The CHWF will make a significant contribution towards meeting the Government’s target for renewable energy generation, being 90% of all generation from renewable sources by 2025. Under Policy B decision makers shall have a particular regard to addressing the Government’s renewable energy targets.
There are a number of practical constraints associated with renewable energy generation, which Policy C1 seeks to recognise. A primary constraint is the need to develop renewable energy generation activities where the resource is located, which can lead to other technical constraints relating to matters such as access, construction and connection to the national grid. Genesis Energy undertook a comprehensive site selection process for the CHWF, as described in Section 2.3 of this document, recognising the practical constraints for a wind farm development. By applying these constraints to the site selection process, the CHWF Site was identified as a suitable location.
8.3.2 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2011 The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2011 (“NPSFM”) took effect from 1 July 2011. The NPSFM has two objectives relating to water quality, four relating to water quantity and two related to integrated management and the role and interests of tangata whenua.
The key water quality objective in relation to the CHWF is to safeguard the life- supporting capacity, ecosystem processes and indigenous species including their associated ecosystems of fresh water, in sustainably managing the use and development of land, and of discharges of contaminants (Objective A1). This is supported by Policy A1, A2 and A3 requiring Regional Councils to include water quality objectives and limits in Regional Plans, and specify targets and implement methods to assist the improvement of water quality in water bodies to meet those targets, within a defined timeframe and by: a) Imposing conditions on discharge permits to ensure the limits and targets specified can be met; and b) Where permissible, making rules requiring the adoption of the best practicable option to prevent or minimise any actual or likely adverse effect on the environment of any discharge of a contaminant into fresh water.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 370
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The relevant MWRC and GWRC Regional Plans include water quality targets and limits that have been taken into account in establishing the approach required for managing the earthworks activities for the CHWF.
It is also anticipated that conditions will be imposed in the discharge consents sought to ensure that water quality effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated. In addition, the proposed approach in relation to earthworks activities represents best practice for land disturbance and vegetation activities.
With respect to water quantity, NPSFM Objective B1 seeks to safeguard the life- supporting capacity, ecosystem processes and indigenous species including their associated ecosystems of fresh water, in sustainably managing the taking, using, damming, or diverting of fresh water, while Objective B2 seeks to avoid any further over-allocation of fresh water.
Supporting Policies B1, B2 and B5 require regional councils to: a) Make or change regional plans to the extent needed to ensure the plans establish freshwater objectives and set environmental flows and/or levels for all bodies of fresh water to give effect to the objectives of the NPSFM; and b) Ensure that no decision will likely result in future over-allocation, including the aggregate of all amounts of fresh water in a water body that are authorised to be taken, used, dammed or diverted, do not over-allocate the water in the water body.
The relevant MWRC and GWRC Regional Plans contain a range of water allocation provisions, including provisions seeking to prevent over-allocation of freshwater resources in the respective regions. These water allocation provisions have determined the proposed construction water take consents sought for the CHWF, which will not result in over-allocation of water resources in the respective regions. The the life-supporting capacity, ecosystem processes and indigenous species including their associated ecosystems of the water bodies from which water will be taken will be safeguarded by the water take proposals.
Objective C1 of the NPSFM seeks to “improve integrated management of fresh water and the use and development of land in whole catchments”, while Policy C1 requires regional councils to manage “fresh water and land use and development in catchments in an integrated and sustainable way, so as to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects, including cumulative effects”. The proposed construction approach for the CHWF provides an integrated approach to the proposed land use activities and their potential effect on surface water bodies.
8.3.3 Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council Policy Statement and Plans Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Policy Statement
The MWRPS is a high-level document which guides the management of natural and physical resources in the region. The MWRPS became operative on 18 August 1998.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 371
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Part Four and Part Five of the MWRPS contain the policy framework for resource management in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region. The relevant sections of the MWRPS are:
Part Four – Section 20: Matters of Resource Management Significance to Iwi.
Part Five – Section 21: Land; Section 22: Natural and Cultural Features; Section 23: Water; Section 24: Lakes, Rivers and Wetlands; Section 25: Air; and Section 29: Energy.
The relevant provisions from the MWRPS are contained in Appendix D and summarised below.
Section 20: Matters of Resource Management Significance to Iwi
Provisions in Section 20 seek to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Objective 1), protect resource management interests of iwi in the Manawatu- Region (Policy 1.1), and recognise iwi and hapu Kaitiakitanga. Objective 3 provides for the relationship of iwi with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga. Associated policies 3.1 to 3.3 seek to promote protection and enhancement of “mauri” of natural and physical resources, and waahi tapu from inappropriate uses.
To give effect to the provisions in Section 20, Genesis Energy has undertaken extensive consultation with tangata whenua as detailed in Section 7.2.5. Consultation has included site visits, meetings, and the opportunity to provide a CIA or CVA. Genesis Energy is not aware of any cultural issues associated with the CHWF that have not been considered in the project design. No evidence has been found in respect to sites of cultural significance located within the CHWF Site, and no known or recorded archaeological sites have been identified within or in the immediate vicinity of the CHWF Site during the archaeological survey undertaken for this application. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with tangata whenua to address any matters of concern.
In light of the above, it is considered the CHWF is not contrary to the above objectives and policies.
Section 21: Land
The CHWF Site is located on hill country land which is identified as being susceptible to accelerated erosion. Objective 5 and Policies 5.1 and 5.2 address the adverse effects of soil erosion and subsidence in the context of sustainable land management.
The earthworks associated with the CHWF will be undertaken using appropriate erosion and sediment control measures, as outlined in Section 6 and the COMR (Appendix A, Volume 2), to avoid accelerated erosion. All discharges to land will also use appropriate technology and will be located and designed such that they avoid, remedy or mitigate effects on the soil resource.
Section 22: Natural and Cultural Features
Section 22 contains the objectives and policies for managing landscapes, habitats and natural and cultural heritage values which contribute to the region’s character.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 372
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Objective 8 seeks to protect natural features and landscapes which are outstanding and regionally significant from inappropriate development. Policy 8.3 identifies those features that are outstanding or regionally significant. As outlined in Section 3 of this document, no outstanding landscapes or natural features identified in the MWRPS are located within, or in close vicinity to the CHWF Site. The nearest identified outstanding natural feature or landscape to the CHWF Site is the skyline of the Puketoi Range when viewed from the west.
Objective 9 promotes the protection of significant areas of indigenous vegetation and indigenous fauna habitats. Policy 9.1 contains a list of characteristics/criteria which should be given regard when identifying such areas, such as providing important breeding, feeding or roosting grounds for indigenous fauna. As detailed in Section 4.2, areas such as those identified in Policy 9.1 have been excluded from the CHWF layout, to the extent practicable. Overall, the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of Section 22.
Section 23: Water
Section 23 addresses the competing uses of water and the effects of land use on the region’s water resources. In promoting the maintenance and enhancement of surface water quality (Objective 11), the discharge of contaminants to land is preferred over surface water (Policy 11.3). Stormwater from the construction and operation of the CHWF will be primarily discharged to land and measures will be put in place to minimise contaminants entering water and effects on water quality.
Objective 12 seeks to maintain or enhance river and stream flows at a level that safeguards their life-supporting capacity. Associated Policy 12.1 and 12.2 enable the taking, diverting and use of water, provided that any adverse effects on flows, other users and identified values, are appropriately addressed. Policy 12.4 requires applicants to demonstrate that the abstraction or diversion is reasonably necessary, whether alternatives have been considered, and where appropriate, to install systems to measure water abstraction volumes.
Genesis Energy proposes to abstract water from three locations within the Tiraumea catchment of the MWRC during the construction of the CHWF. Water abstraction will only occur when river flows are below median flow, and in addition, a take regime is proposed which is designed to ensure residual flows are left in each waterbody below the point of take to sustain in-stream values. A comprehensive assessment of the proposed construction water takes on the hydrology of each affected water body has been undertaken by PDP (2011c) and the potential effects are detailed in Section 5.6.2. Monitoring for potential effects on ecology downstream of the take points will be undertaken during the construction period (see Section 6).
In light of the above, the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant provisions in Section 23 of the MWRPS.
Section 24: Lakes, Rivers and Wetlands
Activities in, on, over or under the beds of rivers and lakes are guided by the provisions in Section 24 of the MWRPS. Objective 16 seeks to avoid, remedy and mitigate the adverse effects of structures or activities in the beds of lakes and rivers. Associated Policy 16.2 contains the criteria for controlling the adverse effects of these activities on outstanding natural features of rivers, significant habitats of indigenous flora and fauna,
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 373
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Maori cultural or spiritual values, amenity or intrinsic values of rivers, and habitats of trout.
The construction of culverts and bridges within the CHWF Site will be undertaken in accordance with best management practices, and with appropriate erosion and sediment controls to ensure they will have no adverse effects on these features and values.
Section 25: Air
The provisions of Section 25 seek to maintain or enhance air quality in the region (Objective 19) and ensure that the adverse effects associated with discharges to air are avoided or mitigated.
Dust control measures will be in place during construction activities associated with the CHWF to ensure that any effects on air quality are avoided, remedied or mitigated. The cement silos at the Concrete Batching Plants will be equipped with a filter to minimise the risk of Aeolian cement discharge and to maintain air quality in the Region in accordance with Objective 19.
Section 28: Waste & Hazardous Substances
Section 28 provides a framework for managing the effects of storage, use and disposal of hazardous substances. Objective 27 and associated policies seek to minimise the adverse effects of the storage, use, transport and disposal of hazardous substances on human health and the environment, particularly on surface or groundwater, Class I or II land, significant areas of indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna, and areas of significance to Maori.
The storage of hazardous substances On-site during the construction and operation of the CHWF will be undertaken in accordance with HSNO requirements. Fuel storage and refuelling areas will be appropriately drained and bunded, and a Spill Response Plan will be prepared and implemented to address any accidental spills of substances outside the secure storage areas. With these management and mitigation measures in place, the effects of hazardous substances on the natural and physical environment will be, at most, no more than minor in accordance with the provisions of Section 28 of the MWRPS.
Section 29: Energy
Section 29 of the MWRPS recognises the significant role of energy and the potential for the wind resource in the region to be developed. Objective 28 promotes the sustainable management of energy resources. Policy 28.1 promotes the sustainable supply and use of energy resources to meet the needs of the regional community, while Policy 28.2 specifically provides for “the increased use and development of renewable energy sources where practicable”.
The CHWF is entirely consistent with this policy direction as it will develop a renewable source of electricity (approximately 1,500 GWh per annum and possibly up to 3,000 GWh per annum) while contributing towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand. The CHWF will provide a local supply of electricity to the Central Electricity Region that has on average over the last seven years, been a net importer of
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 374
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects electricity. Electricity generated from the CHWF will make the Central Electricity Region a net exporter of electricity (i.e. regional supply will outweigh regional demand).
MWRC Land and Water Regional Plan
The LWRP became operative on 30 September 2003 and provides a framework for land and water management in the region. The objectives and policies contained in Chapter Two (Discharges to Land), Chapter Four (Surface Water – Takes and Uses) and Chapter Six (Land Management) are relevant to the CHWF.
Chapter Two: Discharges to Land
Chapter Two of the LWRP addresses issues relating to the discharge of contaminants to land in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region, but outside of the Manawatu catchment. In particular, the relevant objectives seek to reduce contaminant run-off to groundwater (DL Objective 1 and 2), surface water (DL Objective 3) and to avoid long-term soil degradation (DL Objective 4). DL Policy 2 lists the matters Council should consider for resource consent applications, including effects of the discharge on surface water, soil and air, and the consideration of alternative discharge sites.
The erosion and sediment management methods, and stormwater management methods proposed for the CHWF have sought the best practicable approach, and appropriate design to avoid potential effects on the receiving environment. ESCPs will be prepared for each phase of development and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction. These methods will take into account the nature of the site and the surrounding environment.
The discharge of water to land associated with the concrete batching plants will be managed via a stormwater treatment system to reduce contaminants and ensure that adverse effects on the environment, including surface and groundwater are avoided or mitigated.
Overall the CHWF is consisted with the relevant provisions of Chapter 2 of the LWRP.
Chapter Four: Surface Water – Takes and Uses
Takes and uses of surface water in the region are guided by the provisions in Chapter Four. SW Objective 1 seeks to maintain flows in rivers at levels to maintain or safeguard existing life-supporting capacity, while SW Policy 2 outlines matters to be considered for resource consent applications, such as effects on natural flow regime, aquatic habitats and the efficient use of the proposed water take.
As outlined,water abstraction from three locations in MWRC during the construction of the CHWF will only occur when river flows are below median flow. In addition, the take regime is designed to ensure residual flows are left in each waterbody below the point of take to sustain in-stream values in accordance with SW Objective 1. Monitoring is proposed at each of the water take sites to ensure that water takes required for construction activities at the CHWF Site will not adversely affect flow regimes.
In light of the above, the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant provisions in Chapter 4 of the LWRP.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 375
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Chapter Six: Land Management
Chapter Six contains the framework for managing the effects of land use on soils in the region. LM Objective 1 is a general statement that seeks to avoid accelerated soil erosion on vulnerable land, and LM Policy 2 identifies the matters to be considered for resource consent applications, in particular effects on soil erosion, water quality, air quality (from dust) and surface water values.
The potential effects of soil erosion from earthworks associated with the construction of the CHWF are detailed in Section 5.6 of this document, and will be minimised with appropriate erosion and sediment control measures as set out in ESCPs prepared for each phase of development and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction. The ESCPs are described in more detail in Section 6 of this document, and within the COMR (Appendix A, Volume 2), and will set out measures to mitigate potential impacts of construction works on soils, waterways and air quality at the Site.
Regional Plan for Beds of Rivers and Lakes
The RPBRL became operative on 14 March 2001 and guides the management of activities in the beds of rivers and lakes, and associated activities such as damming and diverting of water.
Objective 3 seeks to enable the use and development of resources in, on or under beds of rivers and lakes while ensuring any adverse effects on natural character, ecology, intrinsic, amenity or cultural values are avoided, remedied or mitigated, and the existing life-supporting capacity is maintained or enhanced.
Objective 4 recognises and provides for physical resources in the beds of rivers, and their potential to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations. Policy 2 provides guidance on matters Council should have particular regard to when assessing resource consent applications for activities in the beds of rivers and lakes, including adverse effects on river bed stability, flooding and erosion, and effects of damming and diverting water. In particular, Policy 2(d) states that Council shall have particular regard to the degree to which the activity provides for, amongst others, the “development or maintenance of essential utilities and services that contribute to the wellbeing of people and communities”.
The construction of the culverts and other structures in the beds of streams in the CHWF Site will be undertaken, if practicable, when stream flows and rain expectancy is low. Culverts will be sized to a 20 year ARI rainfall event and the discharge point will be to stable natural channels to minimise potential erosion, in accordance with the provisions of the RPBRL.
During construction, temporary diversions will be installed, or water pumped around the construction area to ensure that no flowing or ponded water sits within the construction area. All in-stream structures will incorporate appropriate screening, and provisions for fish bypass to ensure fish passage is not affected.
Overall, the CHWF is not contrary to the provisions of the RPBRL.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 376
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Manawatu Catchment Water Quality Regional Plan
The MCWQRP was made operative on 6 October 1998 and specifically addresses the degradation of water quality within the Manawatu Catchment. While no direct discharges to surface water are proposed for CHWF activities, during construction activities there may be circumstances where contaminants enter water.
The overarching objective of the MCWQRP is to enhance surface water quality in the Manawatu Catchment to a level which meets the needs of people and communities, while safeguarding its life-supporting capacity. MCQW Policy 1(b) states that all surface waters in the catchment, excluding those in Palmerston North and Ashurst (and defined in Annex 6 of the MCWQRP), are to be managed for the purpose of contact recreation.
The discharge of stormwater and contaminants associated with construction activities for the CHWF will be to land and have minimal adverse effect on water quality in the Manawatu Catchment, while safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of the water, consistent with the Objective and Policy 3 of the MCWQRP.
Regional Air Plan for Manawatu-Wanganui
The MW Air Plan became operative on 30 January 1999 and contains provisions for air quality management within the region. The one objective is to maintain or enhance air quality in the region. Associated policies provide guidance for rules within the Air Plan in respect to matters to consider when assessing applications and the conditions that may be imposed, particularly in relation to adverse effects on the environment, amenity values, human health and wellbeing.
Dust control measures will be in place during construction activities associated with the CHWF to ensure that any effects on air quality are avoided, remedied or mitigated. The cement silos consistent with the provisions of the MW Air Plan.
Proposed One Plan for the Manawatu-Wanganui Region
One Plan was notified on 31 May 2007 and combines the MWRPS and six regional plans into one document to provide guidance for the management of natural and physical resources. Decisions on submissions and further submissions to One Plan were released on 24 August 2010 and the appeals have yet to be resolved.
The relevant objectives and policies within the One Plan (as amended by decisions) in respect to the CHWF are contained in:
Part I: Regional Policy Statement
Chapter 3: Infrastructure, Energy, Waste, Hazardous Substances and Contaminated Land.
Chapter 4: Te Ao Maori.
Chapter 5: Land.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 377
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Chapter 6: Water.
Chapter 7: Indigenous Biological Diversity, Landscape and Historic Heritage.
Chapter 8: Air.
Part II: Regional Plan
Chapter 12: Land Use Activities and Indigenous Biological Diversity.
Chapter 13: Discharges to Land and Water.
Chapter 14: Discharges to Air.
Chapter 15: Takes, Uses and Diversions of Water, and Bores.
Chapter 16: Activities in Artificial Watercourses, Beds of Rivers and Lakes, and Damming.
The relevant provisions to the CHWF are contained in Appendix A and summarised below.
Part I: Regional Policy Statement
Chapter 3: Infrastructure, Energy, Waste, Hazardous Substances and Contaminated Land
Chapter 3 contains the overarching framework for managing infrastructure, energy, waste, hazardous substances and contaminated land in the region. There is emphasis on the potential for renewable energy development and the importance of nationally and regionally significant infrastructure.
Objective 3-1 recognises the benefits of enabling the establishment, operation and maintenance of infrastructure and other physical resources of regional or national importance. Objective 3-1A seeks to improve energy efficiency and an increase in the use of renewable energy.
Once established, the CHWF will be recognised as infrastructure of regional or national importance under the One Plan, with it being a facility for the generation of more than 1MW of electricity (as listed in Policy 3-1(a)(i)). Policy 3-2 requires Council to ensure adverse effects on infrastructure of regional or national importance is avoided as far as reasonably practicable.
The management of adverse effects arising from infrastructure is guided by Policy 3-3. In particular, Policy 3-3(a) states that once the activity has been established, Council must allow for its operation, maintenance and upgrading.
Policy 3-4 promotes the use of renewable energy resources and requires Council to give preference to the development of renewable energy generation over the development of non-renewable energy resources in policy and plan development and decision-making.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 378
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The CHWF will contribute a potential nominal capacity of up to 860MW of renewable energy generation, making a significant contribution towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand. The proposal can proceed whilst avoiding, remedying or mitigating any potentially adverse effects, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 3.
Chapter 4: Te Ao Maori
Chapter 4 of One Plan identifies resource management issues of significance to hapu and iwi of the region and sets out how they are to be addressed.
The objectives and policies require regard to be had to the mauri of natural and physical resources and the relationship of hapu and iwi with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wahi tapu and other taonga.
As described in Section 7.2.4 of this document, Genesis Energy has undertaken extensive consultation with tangata whenua with respect to the CHWF project. This consultation has included site visits, meetings, and the opportunity to provide a CIA or CVA. Genesis Energy is not aware of any cultural issues associated with the CHWF and no evidence has been found in respect to sites of cultural significance located within the Site. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with tangata whenua to address any matters of concern.
In light of the above, it is considered the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of Chapter 4 of One Plan.
Chapter 5: Land
Land management issues, such as accelerated erosion arising from vegetation clearance, land disturbance, forestry and cultivation are addressed in Chapter 5 of One Plan.
Of particular relevance to the CHWF is Objective 5-2, which seeks to regulate the potential causes of accelerated erosion and sedimentation. Policy 5-2A(c) states that resource consent is required for land disturbance activities in Hill Country Erosion Management Areas.
A detailed ESCP will provide measures to ensure that earthworks and vegetation clearance in the Hill Country Erosion Management Areas of the CHWF Site will be appropriately managed to minimise the risk of accelerated erosion. Following construction, all disturbed areas will be rehabilitated as soon as practicable. The CHWF is not contrary to the Objective 5-2 or Policy 5-2A.
Chapter 6: Water
Chapter 6 addresses freshwater management issues in the region, including discharges and land use which affect water quality, water allocation and activities in the beds of lakes and rivers.
Objective 6-1 and Objective 6-2 seek to manage waterbodies and surface water quality to ensure that the relevant Schedule AB Values are maintained or enhanced. The Water Management Framework for the region is set out in Policy 6-1 and divides the Region into Water Management Zones and Sub-zones with individual values. The
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 379
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
CHWF Site is located within Mana 7a and Owha 1 Management Zones, and the following Schedule AB Values apply.
Mana 7a Zone:
Ecosystem Values – natural state.
Recreational and Cultural Values – contact recreation; Mauri; trout fishery III (other trout fishery); and aesthetics.
Water Use – industrial abstraction; irrigation; and stockwater.
Social/Economic Values – capacity to assimilate pollution; flood control and drainage; and existing infrastructure.
Owha 1 Zone:
Ecosystem values – aquatic sites of significance.
Recreational and Cultural Values – contact recreation; Mauri; and aesthetics.
Water Use – industrial abstraction; irrigation; and stockwater.
Social/Economic Values – capacity to assimilate pollution; and existing infrastructure.
Objective 6-3 seeks to manage water quantity to enable people, industry and agriculture to take and use water to meet their reasonable needs while restricting takes to essential needs in times of water shortage and setting minimum flows and allocation regimes for the purpose of maintaining or enhancing existing life-supporting capacity.
Water takes are to be managed in accordance with the minimum flows and cumulative core allocations set out in Schedule B (Policy 6-15 and 6-16).
Genesis Energy proposes to abstract water from three locations within the Tiraumea catchment of the MWRC during the construction of the CHWF. Water abstraction will only occur when river flows are below median flow, and in addition, a take regime is proposed which ensures residual flows are left in each waterbody below the point of take to sustain in-stream values. Monitoring for potential effects on ecology downstream of the take points will be undertaken during the construction period. Cumulative water takes from the Mana 7 Zone for construction activities, as outlined in Section 4.3.8 of this document, will not exceed the available core allocations set out in the One Plan.
Activities in beds of rivers and lakes are addressed in Policy 6-27, 6-28 and 6-30 and generally require activities to be managed to avoid, remedy or mitigate effects on (amongst others) habitat diversity, conveyance of flood flows, natural character, fish passage, and on values identified in One Plan for specific management zones.
The construction of culverts and bridges within the CHWF Site will be undertaken in accordance with best management practices, and with appropriate erosion and sediment controls to ensure they will have no adverse effects on the beds of the waterways located within the Site. During construction, temporary diversions will be
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 380
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects installed, or water pumped around the construction area to ensure that no flowing or ponded water sits within the construction area. All in-stream structures will incorporate appropriate screening and provisions for fish bypass to ensure fish passage is not affected.
In light of the above, it is considered that the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant provisions in Chapter 6 of the One Plan.
Chapter 7: Indigenous Biological Diversity, Landscape and Historic Heritage
Chapter 7 contains objectives and policies that address the maintenance of indigenous biological diversity (Objective 7-1), the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes (Objective 7-2), the protection of historic heritage (Objective 7-3), areas of significant indigenous vegetation, and regulation of activities affecting biological diversity (Policy 7-2A).
As detailed reserves, QEII Open Space Covenants and DOC land and legally protected habitats (including those identified as “rare”, “threatened” or “at risk” habitats under the One Plan) have been excluded from the CHWF development where practicable by the constraints mapping process outlined in Section 4.2.
There are no outstanding natural features or landscapes within or in close proximity to the CHWF Site. Similarly, and as stated in Section 5.9.3, no sites of historic heritage have been identified that will be affected by the CHWF.
In light of the above, the CHWF is not considered contrary to the relevant provisions in Chapter 7 of the One Plan.
Chapter 8: Air
The broad policy framework for managing air quality in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region is contained in Chapter 8 of the One Plan. Objective 8-1 seeks to maintain ambient air quality, which is not detrimental to amenity values, human health, property or the life-supporting capacity of air while also meeting the national ambient air quality standards. More specifically, Policy 8-2 contains the regional standards for ambient air quality, and states that dust discharges “must not cause any noxious, offensive or objectionable dust beyond the property boundary”. Policy 8-3 generally allows for the discharge of contaminants to air if the standards are met.
Discharges to air from the temporary concrete batching plants and the mobile aggregate crushing plants will be localised and will not cause offensive or objectionable dust beyond the Site boundary. Cement silos will be fitted with a filter to minimise the risk of aeolian cement discharge. Dust suppression activities will be undertaken throughout the Site to minimise dust discharges to air. The CHWF is consistent with the provisions of Chapter 8.
Part II: Regional Plan
Part II of the One Plan contains more specific objectives and policies to guide the decision-making process.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 381
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Chapter 12: Land Use Activities and Indigenous Biological Diversity
Objective 12-1 seeks to regulate vegetation clearance and land disturbance activities to ensure that the adverse effects of accelerated erosion are appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated. Policy 12-1 directs the decision-making process to be on a case-by-case basis, and lists a number of matters should be considered such as the appropriateness of establishing regionally or nationally important infrastructure. Objective 12-2 seeks the regulation of activities affecting protected areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna.
As detailed in Section 4.2, The CHWF has been developed through an iterative process, resulting in a layout that limits the amount of indigenous vegetation clearance and land disturbance to the minimum necessary. Sites of significant indigenous vegetation, such as reserves, QEII Open Space Covenants and DOC land, and those areas identified as “rare”, “threatened” or “at risk” habitats under the One Plan, have been excluded from development wherever practicable by the constraints mapping process. Such areas will be further enhanced by the various SEMPS to be prepared for the CHWF.
Where land disturbance is necessary, the ESCP will ensure that best practice measures are in place to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects of accelerated erosion consistent with the provisions of Chapter 12 of One Plan.
Chapter 13: Discharges to Land and Water
Chapter 13 of the One Plan regulates the discharge of contaminants to land and water. Objective 13-1 seeks to regulate discharges to land and water by having regard to the values and objectives in Schedule AB, and the objectives and policies of Chapter 6 of One Plan. Policy 13-2 outlines the matters that council must have regard to when assessing applications for discharges to land, including avoiding as far as reasonably practicable any adverse effects on any sensitive receiving environment, and avoiding discharges which contain any persistent contaminants that are likely to accumulate in the soil or groundwater. Compliance with relevant industry-based standards may also be adequate to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects associated with land and water discharges (Policy 13-2A).
During construction of the CHWF, appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be in place to ensure that the discharge of stormwater and contaminants to land will not adversely affect the values identified for the Mana 7a and Owha 1 Zones. It is anticipated that industry-based standards will be incorporated into the ESCP, which will set compliance levels for discharges to land and water.
Water from the stormwater treatment system where concrete production occurs will pass through a vegetated organic buffer strip, wetland, or rain garden to reduce residual pH levels and discharge to land via a dispersal trench.
In light of the above, any discharges to land or water from the construction of the CHWF will avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects on the environment, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 of One Plan.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 382
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Chapter 14: Discharges to Air
Objective 14-1 seeks to manage air quality in the region to meet regional ambient air standards. Policy 14-2 outlines the matters council must have regard to when assessing applications for air discharges, such as the degree of compliance with regional standards for ambient air quality, location of the discharge in relation to sensitive areas such as residential buildings, and effects on scenic, recreational and heritage values.
As previously outlined, discharges to air from construction activities associated with the CHWF will be localised, and will not have any adverse effects on air quality. Post construction, the CHWF will not include any activities that involve an on-going discharge to air that would need to be considered in terms of the One Plan.
Chapter 15: Takes, Uses and Diversions of Water, and Bores
Objective 15-1 seeks to manage takes, use and diversions of water by having regard to Schedule AB values and the objectives and policies within Chapter 6. The proposed diversions of clean water around construction areas and the treatment of water within those construction areas will ensure there are no adverse effects on water quality. Policy 15-1 contains the matters the council must consider when assessing surface water takes, including the avoidance of adverse effects on other lawfully established activities and water takes, while Policy 15-4A requires the consideration of alternative water sources.
As outlined in Section 4.3.8 of this document, the locations of the proposed water takes have been determined based on the MALF. As outlined in Section 5.6.2, the proposed water take regime for the CHWF can occur without adversely affecting the natural habitats and character of those water bodies, and without affecting other lawfully established water takes from the same catchments. Alternatives to surface water takes have been considered for the CHWF however none were deemed practical. The proposed water take locations were selected based on water availability, the MALF and their proximity to the proposed activities.
Chapter 16: Activities in Artificial Watercourses, Beds of Rivers and Lakes, and Damming
Objective 16-1 requires the regulation of structures and activities in the beds of rivers to have regard to Schedule AB values and the provisions in Chapter 6. Policy 16-2 contains matters the council must have regard to when considering activities in, on, under or over beds of rivers and lakes, such as the extent to which the activity is consistent with best management practices, the avoidance of any adverse effects on other lawfully established activities and the objectives and policies of Chapters 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 and 11A.
Culverts and bridges for the CHWF will be constructed in accordance with best management practices, and with appropriate sediment control measures. Culverts will include energy dissipating structures at the outlet, such as riprap, where scour and erosion may occur. The CHWF is considered consistent with the provisions of Chapter 16 of One Plan.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 383
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
8.3.4 Tararua District Council Plans As outlined, it is understood that appeals on the Proposed TDP will be resolved in the near future (and will no longer be subject to challenge), therefore the Proposed TDP can now be considered to have effect. Furthermore, the provisions of the Operative TDP that are relevant to the construction and operation of the CHWF have been carried over, mostly unchanged. Therefore, this assessment only considers the provisions of the Proposed TDP.
Proposed Tararua District Plan
The provisions of the Proposed TDP that are relevant to the CHWF are:
Section 2.3: Rural Land Use Management;
Section 2.6: Amenity and Environmental Quality;
Section 2.8: Infrastructure; and
Section 2.10: Treaty of Waitangi and Maori Resource Management Issues.
An assessment of the CHWF against the relevant objectives and policies of the Proposed TDP is outlined below and the relevant objectives and policies are provided in full in Appendix D (Volume 2) of this document.
Section 2.3: Rural Land Use Management
Section 2.3 of the Proposed TDP contains the policy framework for the Rural Management Area, including the management of rural land resources and the protection of environmental quality and amenity. Wind farms are identified as an emerging resource management issue in some rural areas of the Tararua District due to the abundance of a world class wind resource in the area.
The CHWF is located in the rural environment in a sparsely populated area with an excellent wind resource. Wind monitoring undertaken across the Site from six wind monitoring masts and LiDAR surveys shows that a large proportion of the CHWF Site has an average wind speed of more than 9 m/s, and some over 10 m/s. The wind resource across the Site arguably represents one of the best wind energy resources in the world for wind energy generation. Genesis Energy propose to use this resource efficiently, consistent with Section 2.3 of the Proposed TDP.
Objective 2.3.2.1 seeks to achieve sustainable rural land use and efficient use of resources while Objective 2.3.3.1 seeks to “maintain the vitality and character of the District’s rural areas”.
The CHWF is compatible with productive rural activities currently undertaken in the area as there will be minimal loss of productive potential of the land during the construction phase. The normal operation of productive and rural activities will continue, while the CHWF will diversify the industry base, and increase the efficient use of natural and physical resources. As detailed in Section 5.3, the inland hill country landscape of the northern Wairarapa can accommodate the CHWF without adversely
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 384
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects affecting or compromising its rural character or its associated rural activities. The CHWF is consistent with Objectives 2.3.2.1 and 2.3.3.1 of the Proposed TDP.
Objective 2.3.4.1 seeks to achieve “a high level of environmental quality and amenity throughout the rural areas of the District”. Associated Policy 2.3.4.2(a) seeks to ensure that adverse effects on environmental quality and amenity are avoided, remedied or mitigated; the character, features, level of amenity and environment quality are protected and enhanced (Policy 2.3.4.2(b)); and any potential conflicts between incompatible activities are reduced (Policy 2.3.4.2(c)).
The Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment undertaken for the CHWF (summarised in Section 5.3 and attached in Volume 3, Section 4) found that while the CHWF will introduce a new and significant industrial-like element into the rural landscape, the landscape will essentially retain its rural character, albeit somewhat different in appearance. Overall the assessment concluded that from public roads and rural settlements within 30 km of the CHWF, the visual effects will be minor.
An assessment on potential shadow flicker effects associated with the CHWF (see Section 5.10 and Volume 4, Section 6) concluded there will be no significant exposure to shadow flicker for any External Dwelling within 1,100 m of the CHWF.
The noise effects assessment undertaken by Marshall Day (2011) concluded that construction noise associated with the CHWF Site can comply with the provisions of NZS6803 at all External Dwellings as required by the Proposed TDP. During operation, at all external noise sensitive sites (excluding one), all Indicative Turbine Layouts will comply with the noise limit of NZS6808.
Overall, adverse effects of the CHWF on environmental quality and amenity throughout the rural areas will be no more than minor and therefore consistent with the Rural Land Use Management objectives and policies.
Section 2.6: Amenity and Environmental Quality
Section 2.6 of the Proposed TDP addresses the management of environmental quality and amenity, heritage resources, natural features, landscapes and habitats in the District. Objective 2.6.2.1 seeks “to maintain and/or enhance amenity values and environmental quality”, while associated Policy 2.6.2.2 seeks “to manage the effects of activities on amenity values” by environmental standards in the plan. As outlined above, the landscape, shadow flicker and noise assessments undertaken for the CHWF have concluded that amenity values will not be adversely affected by the development.
Objective 2.6.3.1 seeks to protect heritage resources in the District which are of “local, regional or national significance”. As outlined in Section 3.2.2, no known or recorded archaeological or heritage sites have been identified within, or in the immediate vicinity of, the CHWF Site. Overall, the CHWF is consistent with this objective.
The protection of important natural features (including areas of indigenous vegetation and habitats of indigenous fauna) and landscapes of local, regional or national significance (Objective 2.6.4.1) is guided by the significance criteria in Policies 2.6.4.2(a) and (b).
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 385
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Regionally significant natural features and landscapes in the Tararua District (as listed in the MWRPS) are contained in Appendix 3 (Section 3.3) of the Proposed TDP and identified in the District Planning Maps. There are no listed significant natural features and landscapes within the CHWF Site. The nearest identified outstanding natural feature or landscape to the CHWF Site is the skyline of the Puketoi Range when viewed from the west.
In addition to significant natural features and landscapes, the Proposed TDP identifies significant groups of trees, vegetation and habitats (Schedule 3, Table 3.2) that contribute to the amenity and environmental quality of the district, and heritage resources (such as historic buildings and places, historic churches, structures and monuments, archaeological sites and waahi tapu). The construction of the CHWF requires the clearance of 2.63 ha of indigenous vegetation from Patitapu Bush (RAP 8) (363 ha of secondary scrub and forest), identified as an significant group of trees, vegetation and habitat in Table 3.2 of Schedule 3. The removal of 2.63 ha of Patitapu Bush is a small proportion of the 363 ha site, and will not have an adverse effect on the ecology of the site.
Overall, with the proposed mitigation, the CHWF is not contrary to Objective 2.6.4.2(a) and (b).
Section 2.8 - Infrastructure
“Infrastructure” is defined in the Proposed TDP to include electricity generation facilities. Section 2.8 of the Proposed TDP outlines the framework for the management of infrastructure in the district, with specific regard to local, regional and national benefits to be derived from renewable energy generation, particularly wind farms. Objective 2.8.2.1 and Policy 2.8.2.2 support the maintenance and development of the District’s infrastructure (including renewable electricity generation) to meet the needs of the community in a safe, effective and efficient manner while avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse environmental effects. As outlined in Section 2.2.1, the CHWF is expected to generate approximately 1,500 GWh per annum and possibly up to 3,000 GWh per annum and provide a significant contribution to meeting the additional requirements for generation. As detailed in Section 5, the CHWF will be developed to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse environmental effects in accordance with Objective 2.8.2.1 and Policy 2.8.2.2.
Objective 2.8.3.1 and Policy 2.8.3.2 seek to ensure the safe, efficient and effective operation of the District’s transportation network, while associated Policy 2.8.3.2 specifies standards for site access, loading and manoeuvring to mitigate adverse effects on the safety and efficiency of the road network.
As detailed in Section 5.5, the CHWF will require the transportation of Turbine components, construction materials, plant, and heavy equipment to the Site via the OW/OD Route and other construction traffic routes. The transportation effects assessment undertaken for the CHWF is summarised in Section 5.5 of this document and provided in Volume 3. Numerous improvements and upgrades to External Roads between Alfredton and the Site will be required to safely accommodate the increase in traffic volumes and loads, and a CTMP will provide an appropriate set of managed controls and protocols specific to the CWHF to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the road network will continue with less than minor effects. The CHWF is consistent with Objective 2.8.3.1 and Policy 2.8.3.2.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 386
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Objective 2.8.4.1 recognises the potential for the development of renewable electricity generation, and wind farms in particular, in the Rural Management Area, while the local, regional and national benefits derived from such developments are recognised by Policy 2.8.4.2(a). Policy 2.8.4.2(b) seeks to remedy, mitigate or avoid potential adverse effects, particularly in respect to amenity values, landscape, ecology, noise and traffic, from wind farm developments.
The local, regional and national benefits associated with the CHWF are outlined in Section 2.2 and 5.2.1 of this document. At the national level, the CHWF will make a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth, and aligns with the Government’s goal of 90% of electricity generation from renewable sources and policy towards reducing climate changing greenhouse gas emissions. At the regional and local level, the CHWF will make the Central Electricity Region a net exporter of electricity, increase GDP and employment in the District, diversify the industry base and provide indirect economic benefits through an increase in population and flow-on effects in population based services. Potential adverse effects on amenity values, landscape, ecology, noise and traffic from the development of the CHWF have been discussed in Section 5, and it has been concluded that they will be appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated.
Overall, the CHWF is consistent with the provisions of Section 2.8 of the Proposed TDP.
Section 2.9: Waste Management and Hazardous Substances
Section 2.9 recognises that hazardous substances may cause significant adverse environmental effects if spilled or discharged to watercourses (either directly or via stormwater systems), or to land where contamination of the soil and groundwater systems may occur. Objective 2.9.4.1 and associated Policy 2.9.4.2 seek to ensure the use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous substances in the District does not result in adverse health or environmental effects.
All hazardous substances stored On-site during the construction and operation of the CHWF will be contained within lined and bunded areas, and a Spill Response Plan will be prepared and implemented, to ensure there are no adverse effects on the environment or health, in accordance with Objective 2.9.4.1 and Policy 2.9.4.2. The CHWF is consistent with these provisions.
Section 2.10 - Treaty of Waitangi and Maori Resource Management Issues
Maori resource management issues are addressed in Section 2.10 of the Proposed TDP. Objective 2.10.2.1 requires Treaty of Waitangi principles to be taken into account in the management of natural and physical resources. Policy 2.10.2.2(a) provides for the participation of tangata whenua in decision-making processes. Objective 2.10.3.1 seeks to recognise and provide for Maori values when managing natural and physical resources, and having particular regard to the concept of kaitiakitanga (Policy 2.10.3.1(a)).
To give effect to these provisions, extensive consultation has been undertaken with tangata whenua prior to the lodging of these consents (see Section 7.2.5). Consultation has included site visits, meetings, discussions regarding the specific provisions being proposed, and the opportunity to provide a CIA or CVA. Genesis Energy is not aware of any cultural issues associated with the CHWF that have not
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 387
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects been considered in the project design. In consultation with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne and as outlined in the four CIA’s and CVA’s either completed, or being complete, no evidence has been found relating to potential pa sites or any other sites of cultural significance located within the CHWF Site. No known or recorded archaeological sites have been identified within or in the immediate vicinity of the CHWF Site during the archaeological survey undertaken for this application. An Accidental Discovery Protocol is being developed with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne to ensure that if koiwi, taonga or sub-surface archaeological evidence is uncovered during the construction period, work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the remains so that appropriate action can then be taken.
In light of the above, it is considered the CHWF is not contrary to the above objectives and policies.
Section 2.11: Cross Boundary Issues
Objective 2.11.2.1 recognises the need for, and promotes integrated and consistent resource management across administrative boundaries. Associated Policies encourage the co-operation between District and Regional Councils to address resource management issues in an integrated manner.
Throughout the development of the CHWF, Genesis Energy has consulted with MWRC, GWRC, MDC and TDC in a co-ordinated and intergrated manner. As outlined in Seciton 7.2.6, this has included the appointment of single project facilitator to manage a joint council approach. Through this process, Genesis Energy has also sought a joint hearing between the four Councils to facilitate integrated resource management and efficient use of resources. The approach to the CHWF development is consistent with the provisions of Section 2.11 of the Proposed TDP.
Operative Tararua District Plan
The Operative TDP became operative in March 1998. The relevant objectives and policies from the Operative TDP have been carried over to the Proposed TDP largely unchanged, and are therefore not repeated here. As outlined, it is understood that appeals on the Proposed TDP have largely been resolved and are therefore considered to have effect.
8.3.5 Wellington Regional Council Policy Statement and Plans Operative Wellington Regional Policy Statement
The Operative WRPS sets out the broad policy framework for the management of the regions natural and physical resources. It was made operative in May 1995 and a new WRPS has since been drafted. However, the Operative WRPS remains relevant in terms of section 104(1)(b) as appeals for the Proposed WRPS have yet to be resolved. The relevant objectives and policies to the CHWF are contained in:
Chapter 4: The Iwi Environmental Management System;
Chapter 5: Freshwater;
Chapter 6: Soil and Minerals;
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 388
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Chapter 8: Air;
Chapter 9: Ecosystems;
Chapter 10: Landscape and Heritage; and
Chapter 12: Energy.
Chapter 4: The Iwi Environmental Management System
The overarching principles that guide Maori resource management are provided in Chapter 4 of the Operative WRPS. The objectives and policies are directed to local authorities and seek to ensure that the Treaty of Waitangi principles, the concept of kaitiakitanga and Maori customs are considered throughout resource management processes.
Genesis Energy has undertaken extensive consultation with tangata whenua, including site visits, meetings, and the opportunity to provide a CIA or CVA. Genesis Energy is not aware of any cultural issues associated with the CHWF and no evidence has been found in respect to sites of cultural significance located within the Site. Genesis Energy will continue to consult with tangata whenua to address any matters of concern.
In light of the above, it is considered the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of Chapter 4 of Operative WRPS.
Chapter 5: Freshwater
Chapter 5 guides the management of the freshwater resource and activities in the beds of water bodies in the Wellington Region. The objectives seek to provide for a range of uses while maintaining water quality and protecting freshwater resources of significance.
Generally the policies enable new use and development, provided that any adverse effects on water quality, water quantity and identified values are avoided, remedied or mitigated. Water bodies of regional significance are identified in Tables 4 to 7 of Policy 10, none of which are located within the CHWF Site.
Measures to ensure that water quantity and quality are not degraded by the CHWF proposal have been described in Section 5.6. These include limitations on the volume of water that can be taken during times of low flow, and measures to ensure that contaminants do not enter any watercourses during the construction period.
The CHWF is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies in Chapter 5 of the Operative WRPS.
Chapter 6: Soils and Minerals
Chapter 6 sets out to manage the Wellington Region’s soil resource, particularly with respect to soil erosion and natural hazards. Objective 4 seeks to reduce the adverse effects arising from the susceptibility of soils to flooding, land movement, subsidence, erosion, fire and wind. Objective 5 promotes the avoidance and mitigation of off-site impacts of soil degradation. The associated policies seek to manage the region’s soil
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 389
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects resource by avoiding off-site effects of erosion and soil degradation, encouraging site rehabilitation, and reducing the risks of natural hazards.
Appropriate management plans such as the ESCP and contingency measures will be in place during the construction of the CHWF to ensure that any adverse effects arising from erosion will be avoided, remedied or mitigated as appropriate, and in accordance with the relevant provisions of Chapter 6 of the Operative WRPS.
Chapter 8: Air
Chapter 8 contains the provisions for managing air quality in the Wellington Region. Objective 1 seeks to maintain and protect high quality air in the region while Objective 3 seeks to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse of the discharge of contaminants on human health and public amenity.
As detailed, discharges to air from the temporary concrete batching plants and mobile aggregate crushers, and from general earthworks during the construction of the CHWF will have minimal, if any, effect on air quality in the Region. Dust suppression will be undertaken during the construction period and cement silos will be fitted with a filter to minimise the risk of aeolian cement discharge.
The CHWF is consistent with the provisions of Chapter 8 of the Operative WRPS.
Chapter 9: Ecosystems
Chapter 9 contains the policy framework for safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of ecosystems, particularly indigenous ecosystems, in the Wellington Region. The objectives generally seek to increase the diversity, health and functioning of ecosystems in the region. Policy 4 seeks to ensure that the adverse effects on indigenous biodiversity, nutrient cycles and energy flows are avoided, remedied or mitigated.
As outlined, more than 90% of the CHWF Site comprises exotic grassland, exotic plantation forest or shelterbelts and gorse scrub that is considered low value habitat. Higher value habitat and areas, such as reserves, QEII Open Space Covenants, DOC land and legally protected or otherwise constrained habitats, have been excluded from the CHWF development where practicable by the constraints mapping process. The design process for the CHWF has safeguarded the life-supporting capacity of ecosystems in the area in accordance with the relevant provisions of Chapter 9 of the Operative RPS.
Chapter 10: Landscape and Heritage
Chapter 10 contains the provisions for the protection of landscape and heritage features in the Wellington Region. Objective 1 promotes the protection of regionally and nationally outstanding features from inappropriate development while Objective 2 seeks to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of human activities on regionally outstanding landscapes.
The relevant policies generally promote management of use and development in ways which minimise that any adverse effects on nationally and regionally significant landscapes and features, and protects nationally and regionally outstanding landscapes and features.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 390
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Reference is made to those nationally and regionally outstanding landforms and geological features listed in the ‘Inventory of Important Geological Sites and Landforms in the Manawatu and Wellington Regions’ (Kenny and Hayward, 1993) that are located in the Wellington Region and have an importance assessment of A to C and a vulnerability assessment of 1 and 2. Other regionally outstanding natural features are to be identified by the Council through the preparation of a regional plan. No outstanding features within the inventory are located within or in close proximity to the CHWF Site.
In light of the above, the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant provisions in Chapter 10 of the Operative WRPS.
Chapter 12: Energy
Chapter 12 of the Operative WRPS provides policy direction for the management, use and development of energy in the region, and recognises that energy is essential for the social and economic wellbeing of the region.
The provisions seek to increase the proportion of renewable energy production (Objective 2) while avoiding, remedying or mitigating the environmental effects associated with energy generation and relevant processes (Objective 3). The relevant policies seek to avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effects of energy generation and relevant processes on air quality, soil, water, ecosystems and human health.
The CHWF will contribute a potential nominal capacity of up to 860MW of renewable energy generation, making a significant contribution towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand. The proposal can proceed whilst avoiding, remedying or mitigating any potentially adverse effects, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12 of the Operative WRPS.
Proposed Wellington Regional Policy Statement
The Proposed WRPS (as amended by decisions) was released in May 2010 and GWRC has advised that there are a number of appeals yet to be resolved, with court- assisted mediation scheduled for August 2011. The Proposed WRPS provides policy guidance for regional and district plans, and the following sections are relevant for the CHWF:
Section 3.1: Air quality;
Section 3.3: Energy, infrastructure and waste;
Section 3.4: Freshwater (including public access);
Section 3.6: Indigenous ecosystems;
Section 3.7: Landscape;
Section 3.10: Resource management with tangata whenua; and
Section 3.11: Soils and minerals.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 391
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
In addition to the above, Chapter 4 of the Proposed WRPS contains the policies which give effect to the objectives identified in Chapter 3. These policies are outlined under the relevant topic headings below.
Section 3.1: Air Quality
Objective 1 seeks to ensure that “discharges of odour, smoke and dust to air do not adversely affect amenity values and people’s wellbeing”. Policies 1 and 2 direct district and regional plans to address reverse sensitivity effects associated with air discharges and to reduce adverse effects on amenity values and health.
As outlined, discharges to air from the temporary concrete batching plants, mobile aggregate crushers, and from general earthworks activities during the construction of the CHWF will have minimal, if any, effect on air quality in the Region. The CHWF will include appropriate dust control measures to ensure that air quality standards are met.
Section 3.3: Energy, Infrastructure and Waste
Section 3.3 recognises that significant renewable energy resources exist within the region, which should be appropriately utilised. In addition, energy generation is recognised as part of the region’s infrastructure, which has social, economic, cultural and environment benefits.
Objective 9 provides direction for meeting future energy needs in the Wellington Region, including reference to renewable energy development (Objective 9(b)), maximisation of the use of the region’s renewable energy resources (Objective 9(c)) and reduction of dependency on fossil fuels (Objective 9(d)). The benefits of regionally significant infrastructure, including electricity generation facilities, are recognised in Objective 10. The associated policies recognise the benefits from renewable energy and regionally significant infrastructure (Policy 6) and the need to protect such infrastructure (Policy 7).
The local, regional and national benefits associated with the CHWF are outlined in Section 2.2 and 5.2.1. At the national level, the CHWF will make a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth, and aligns with the Government’s goal of 90% of electricity generation from renewable sources and policy towards reducing climate changing greenhouse gas emissions. At the regional and local level, the CHWF will make the Central Electricity Region a net exporter of electricity, increase GDP and employment in the District, diversify the industry base and provide indirect economic benefits through an increase in population and flow-on effects in population based services.
The CHWF consistent with the provisions in Section 3.3 of the Proposed WRPS.
Section 3.4: Freshwater
The objectives contained in Section 3.4 seek to manage the region’s freshwater resources. Objective 12 generally seeks to ensure that the quality and quantity of freshwater meet the needs of various users, safeguards the life-supporting capacity of water bodies and meets the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations.
The freshwater policies generally provide direction for regional and district plans in relation to maintaining and enhancing aquatic ecosystem health, water allocation,
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 392
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects stormwater discharges and the effects of earthworks. Policy 17 seeks to protect significant values of rivers and lakes, while Policy 18 promotes the efficient use of water, including off-line storage.
The CHWF Site is not located near any of the rivers and lakes identified in Table 15 of Appendix 1 of the Proposed WRPS as having significant amenity or recreational values, or significant ecosystems. The Whareama River catchment is located in the south-eastern section of the CHWF Site, between Clusters E and F and has been identified in Table 16 of Appendix 1 as a “habitat for threatened indigenous fish species”. There is one water crossing in this area that has been designed to consider the physical and ecological characteristics of the waterway to minimise adverse effects during construction.
Each water abstraction point involves pumping water directly from the river to an off-line storage area to buffer the peak demand, consistent with Policy 18(b).
Section 3.6: Indigenous Ecosystems
The maintenance and restoration of indigenous ecosystems and habitats with significant biodiversity values is addressed in Objective 16, and implemented by Policies 22, 23 and 46. The policies promote the identification, protection and management of areas with significant biodiversity values.
As detailed in Section 4.2, an ecological constraints mapping exercise was undertaken during the design process of the CHWF, whereby areas of ecological value were identified and where possible excluded from the Turbine Corridor. This approach has resulted in any adverse effects on indigenous ecosystems and habitats being minimised, where practicable.
Section 3.7: Landscape
The region’s outstanding natural features and landscapes, and significant amenity landscapes are managed by the provisions in Section 3.7. The objectives generally seek to identify such features and maintain distinctive landscape character, sustainability and diversity in urban and rural environments.
Policy 24 through to Policy 27 provide for the protection of significant areas of indigenous ecosystems, outstanding natural features and landscapes as well as significant amenity landscapes through district and regional plans.
The CHWF Site is not located on, or near, any identified outstanding natural features and landscapes or significant amenity landscapes, nor will it adversely effect any such landscapes. In light of this, the CHWF is considered consistent with the provisions of Section 3.7 of the Proposed WRPS.
Section 3.10: Resource Management with Tangata Whenua
Section 3.10 contains objectives and policies that seek to recognise Treaty of Waitangi principles and matters of significance for tangata whenua and to avoid adverse effects on the cultural relationship of Maori with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and taonga.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 393
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Genesis Energy has undertaken consultation with tangata whenua, as detailed in Section 7.2.5 of this document, and CIA’s and a CVA have been prepared. In consultation with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne, and as outlined in the four cultural impact and values assessments completed, no evidence has been found in respect to sites of cultural significance located within the CHWF Site, and no known or recorded archaeological sites have been identified within or in the immediate vicinity of the CHWF Site during the archaeological survey undertaken for this application.
The CWHF is not contrary to the provisions of Section 3.10.
Section 3.11: Soils and Minerals
Section 3.11 addresses the issues associated with soils and minerals in the Wellington Region. In particular, Objective 28 promotes land management practices that do not accelerate soil erosion. Associated Policy 14 acknowledges the roles of district and regional plans in minimising the effects of earthworks and vegetation disturbance, and to safeguard the aquatic ecosystem.
Appropriate management plans such as the ESCP and contingency measures will be in place during the construction of the CHWF to ensure that any adverse effects arising from erosion will be avoided, remedied or mitigated as appropriate, and in accordance with the relevant provisions of Section 3.11 of the Proposed WRPS.
Regional Freshwater Plan
General Objectives and Policies
The Regional Freshwater Plan became operative in 1999 and contains the policy framework for activities relating to the freshwater resource in Wellington Region.
Objective 4.1.5 seeks to safeguard the life-supporting capacity of water and aquatic ecosystems from the adverse effects of subdivision, use and development. The potential effects on matters listed in Policy 4.2.9, including water quality, habitats, natural flow characteristics and ecosystems of rivers, have been assessed in Section 5.6 of this document.
Objectives 4.1.11 and 4.1.12 enable the use and development of freshwater resources, provided that the adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated. The design of river crossings associated with the CHWF project will ensure that the matters in Policy 4.2.11, which seek to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of the use and development of water bodies on aquatic habitats and freshwater ecosystems, are given due regard.
None of the waterways within the CHWF Site are identified in the RFP as Appendix 3, Appendix 4, Appendix 5, Appendix 6 or Appendix 7 of the RFP.
The southern part of the CHWF Site is located in the Tauweru Catchment, and the Tauweru River is identified as a water body with important trout habitat in Appendix 4 of the Regional Freshwater Plan. Policy 4.2.14 seeks to avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effects on important trout habitat. Sediment and erosion control measures on structures that will be located on tributaries of the Tauweru River will ensure there are no adverse effects on water quality in this catchment.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 394
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Water Quality and Discharges to Freshwater
Objective 5.1.1 seeks to ensure water quality meets a range of uses and values while safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of water and aquatic ecosystems.
The relevant policies seek to manage water quality (in the Tauweru River) for trout fishery and fish spawning purposes (Policy 5.2.3); and to manage the water quality of all water bodies in the region for aquatic ecosystem purposes (Policy 5.2.6).
The Regional Freshwater Plan encourages discharge to land over surface water (Policy 5.2.13) and to promote the reduction of contaminants entering water bodies from non-point source discharges (Policy 5.2.15).
As outlined in Section 6.3.1, discharges from construction areas in the CHWF will be treated in settlement ponds before being discharged to stable watercourses or land not susceptible to erosion.
Water Quantity and the Taking, Use, Damming or Diversion of Freshwater
Objective 6.1.1 enables the taking, use, damming and diversion of surface water while ensuring that flows and water levels are sufficient to maintain the natural and amenity values of water bodies.
Policies 6.2.2 and 6.2.13 guide the management of water flows and levels in water bodies by having regard to the adverse effects on natural, amenity and tangata whenua values. Policy 6.2.14 provides for minor or temporary diversions of water where they are associated with authorised works.
Water is proposed to be taken from the Tinui River at Taipo quarry at a maximum rate of 10.3 l/s (890 m3 per day) for construction activities associated with the CHWF project. When the river flow exceeds 110% of median river flow, and the rate of taking will not exceed 10% of the median river flow. When the river flow is between MALF and 110% of median flow, the rate of taking will not exceed 3.5 L/s. This proposed water take regime will not have an adverse effect on this water body.
Cleanwater diversions associated with the CHWF project will not have any significant adverse effects on the characteristics of water bodies as identified in Policy 6.2.15(2) as they will be temporary in nature and will ensure cleanwater is not contaminated by earthworks.
The CHWF is not considered to be contrary to the provisions of Objective 6.11 and associated policies.
Use of Beds of Rivers and Lakes and Development on the Floodplain
Objective 7.1.1 provides for “appropriate uses” of beds of rivers and lakes, while Objective 7.1.2 ensures the risk of flooding and erosion is not increased as a result of such activities.
Uses that are considered to be appropriate are listed in Policy 7.2.1, which includes structures for transportation and network utility purposes. Bridges and crossings associated with the CHWF will be constructed using best practicable methods and
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 395
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects appropriate sediment and erosion controls and are considered appropriate uses in accordance with Objective 7.1.1.
Regional Plan for Discharges to Land
Discharges to land in the Wellington Region are managed under the Discharges to Land Plan, which became operative on 17 December 1999.
In respect to the discharge of Excess Fill to land for the CHWF, the Discharges to Land Plan seeks to ensure that “any adverse effects from discharging solid contaminants to land are avoided, remedied or mitigated” (Objective 4.1.3). Policy 4.2.8(3) provides for the disposal of “inert solids” to land provided that any adverse effects can be avoided, remedied or mitigated.
Excess Fill will be deposited on land via Excess Fill Areas within the CHWF Site. Potential disposal areas that have been identified are “blanketing” type landscapes located near Internal Roads. Erosion and sediment control measures, compacting of material and site rehabilitation will be undertaken at each disposal site.
Policy 4.2.28 seeks to ensure that facilities where hazardous substances are used or stored have appropriate structures, procedures and contingency plans in place to reduce the potential for, or minimise the adverse effect of any unplanned discharge of hazardous substances.
As detailed, the storage of hazardous substances On-site during the construction and operation of the CHWF will be undertaken in accordance with HSNO requirements. A Spill Response Plan will be prepared and implemented to address any accidental spills of substances outside the secure storage areas, in accordance with the provisions of Policy 4.2.28.
In light of the above, the CHWF is considered not contrary to the relevant provisions of the Regional Plan for Discharges to Land.
Regional Soil Plan
The Regional Soil Plan was made operative on 9 October 2000 and contains the objectives and policies in respect to the management of soil resources in the Wellington Region.
The general objectives seek to encourage land use practices that reflect the susceptibility of some landforms to erosion (Objective 4.1.1); to maintain or enhance the potential for soils to provide for a range of uses (Objective 4.1.2); and to maintain the life-supporting capacity of soil (Objective 4.1.3). Policy 4.2.1 promotes land management practices which recognise the susceptibility of some landforms.
With respect to vegetation cover, Objective 4.1.8 seeks to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of accelerated erosion, while Objective 4.1.9 seeks to retain vegetation on erosion prone land if practicable. Policy 4.2.14 promotes the maintenance and enhancement of erosion prone areas. Objective 4.1.11 promotes land management practices which effectively control sediment runoff to water bodies.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 396
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Land disturbance activities on erosion prone land in the CHWF Site will be undertaken in accordance with the EMP to ensure that any adverse effects on soil are appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated. Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be in place during construction and sites will be reinstated immediately after commencement of earthworks (as outlined in Section 4.6 of this document), consistent with the above provisions.
Regional Air Quality Management Plan
The Air Quality Plan became operative on 8 May 2000 and contains objectives, policies and rules in respect to air quality in the region.
Objective 4.1.2 seeks to ensure that air discharges are managed in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while ensuring that adverse effects, are avoided, remedied or mitigated. Associated policies seek to avoid or minimise where practicable, the discharge of contaminants to air at their source (Policy 4.2.5) and to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects on amenity values.
As previously outlined, discharges to air from construction activities associated with the CHWF will be localised, and will not have any adverse effects on air quality. Dust suppression measures will be undertaken to ensure dust discharges are minimised at source and cement silos will be fitted with a filter to minimise the risk of aeolian cement discharge, consistent with the provisions of the Regional Air Quality Management Plan.
8.3.6 Masterton District Council Plan Combined Wairarapa District Plan
The Combined Plan was made operative on 25 May 2011 and addresses significant resource management issues identified in the South Wairarapa, Carterton and Masterton Districts.
Most of the CHWF Site in the Masterton District is located within the Rural (Primary Production) Zone of the Combined Plan, with the exception of the area along the Whareama River, which is zoned as Rural (Special) and identified as a Flood Hazard Area.
The Combined Plan contains zone specific objectives and policies in Part A and district wide objectives and policies in Part B. The relevant provisions are provided in Appendix D to this application, and assessed against the CHWF proposal below.
Section 4: Rural Zone
The objectives and policies of the Rural Zone set the general framework within which activities in the zone are to be managed, recognising the need to maintain and enhance amenity values as appropriate (Objective Rur1) and establishing more specific sub-zones (Rur1 Policies). While there is emphasis on rural production activities, other land uses are also recognised and provided for in Objective Rur1 and Rur2 Policies.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 397
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment Boffa Miskell (2011(a)) determined that while from some locations the CHWF will be seen as being visually prominent in the context of its rural landscape setting, it will also be seen to be an integral part of the working landscape. Natural elements and rural characteristics will continue to be dominant in the landscape. In the context of the wider inland hill country landscape, the CHWF does not have the potential for widespread adverse effects on the rural landscape character and rural amenity of the local or the wider northern Wairarapa landscape.
The CHWF Site and surrounding area is rural in nature, with the predominant land use being pastoral farming. During the construction and operation of the CHWF, normal primary production and rural activities will generally continue. Once operational, the CHWF will be an “other land use” as recognised in Objective Rur2, that functions efficiently and effectively in the Rural Zone.
The potential effects of the construction and operation of the CHWF on the other activities in the rural zone, such as recreation and tourism, has been assessed in detail in the Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment (Rob Greenway and Associates, 2011) provided in Volume 3 (Section 3) and summarised in Section 5.2.3 of this document. This assessment concluded that given the relatively low level of existing tourism and recreational activities in the general area, the net effect of the construction and operation of the CHWF on current recreation and tourism activities will be, at most, no more than minor.
Section 8: Tangata Whenua
Objective TW1 and associated policies seek to recognise and provide for cultural values, sites of cultural importance, protection of waahi tapu and the relationship of tangata whenua in managing the natural environment. Policy TW1(c) seeks to protect waahi tapu, sites of cultural importance and other taonga.
As discussed in Section 7.2.5, Genesis Energy has undertaken consultation with tangata whenua with respect to the CHWF project, including site visits, meetings, discussions regarding the specific provisions being proposed, and the opportunity to provide a CIA or CVA. In consultation with Ngati Kahungunu and Rangit ne, and as outlined in the four cultural impact and values assessments completed, no evidence has been found in respect to sites of cultural significance located within the CHWF Site, and no known or recorded archaeological sites have been identified within or in the immediate vicinity of the CHWF Site during the Archaeological Effects Assessment (Clough and Associates, 2011) undertaken for this application. The CHWF is consistent with this objective and policy.
Section 9: Landscape
The landscape features of the District are managed under the provisions in Section 9 of the Combined Plan. Objective 9.3.1 seeks to identify and protect outstanding landscapes and natural features of the Wairarapa area from adverse effects of inappropriate subdivision, use and development. Associated Policy 9.3.2 aims to identify and assess outstanding landscapes and natural features, manage potential adverse effects on such features, and protect particular attributes and values from inappropriate development.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 398
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Appendix 1 (Schedule of Natural and Historic Heritage Sites) of the Combined Plan identifies: Outstanding Landscapes, Outstanding Natural Features, Significant Natural Areas (SNA), RAPs, Notable Trees, Archaeological and Geological Sites, Areas of Significance to Tangata whenua, Heritage Items and Significant Water Bodies.
The CHWF Site and the immediate surrounds is not identified in the Combined Plan as being within, or part of, an outstanding natural feature or landscape. The nearest identified outstanding natural feature to the CHWF Site is Tinui Taipos located approximately 7.2 km from the Site. A visual simulation and an assessment of visibility and potential visual effects from Maunsell Trig, which is immediately to the north of the Tinui Taipos, was carried out by Boffa Miskell (2011(a)). From this location, the visual effect is low and the CHWF, which is partially visible in the distance, does not intrude upon the wider view or the significance of the site.
Two buildings identified as ‘Heritage Items’ in Appendix 1.7 of the Combined Plan are located on Annedale Road and Manawa Road, near the south-eastern part of the CHWF Site. These sites will not be affected by the proposal.
Overall, the CHWF is not contrary to the provisions that seek to identify and protect outstanding landscapes and natural features of the Wairarapa area.
Section 11: Indigenous Biodiversity
The indigenous biodiversity of the Masterton District is managed by provisions in Section 11 of the Combined Plan. Objective Bio1 seeks “to maintain and enhance the biological diversity of indigenous species and habitats within the Wairarapa”. Associated Policy Bio1 promotes the protection of areas of indigenous vegetation or habitat with significant biodiversity value and seeks to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects on indigenous ecosystems arising from the use, development and subdivision of a site.
Objective Bio2 seeks “to the protect areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna with the Wairarapa”. The relevant Bio2 Policy (c) seeks to avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects on the values of Significant Natural Areas.
As detailed in the Ecological Effects Assessment (Wildland Consultants, 2011) provided in Volume 4 (Section 3) and summarised in Section 5.7 of this document, the maximum amount of indigenous vegetation clearance required for the construction of the CHWF is 66 ha. Most (60 ha or 95%) of this indigenous vegetation clearance is manuka-kanuka scrub (41 ha) or shrubland (18.5 ha), being early successional and having only limited diversity. Shrubland types, in particular, are relatively young, with a simple open structure and very limited ecological value.
In light of the above, the CHWF is not contrary to the Indigenous Biodiversity provisions in Section 11 of the Combined Plan.
Section 12: Freshwater Environment
Section 12 of the Combined Plan guides the management of the freshwater environment in relation to the natural character and amenity values. Objective Fwe1 and Fwe1 Policies seek to maintain or enhance the environmental quality of
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 399
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Wairarapa’s rivers, lakes, wetlands and groundwater by managing the detrimental effects of development and activities.
The CHWF will not result in more than minor adverse effects on waterways in and downstream of the Site. ESCPs will be prepared for each phase of development and submitted to the relevant Council prior to construction to reduce the risk of increasing concentrated sediment discharges. In particular, erosion control will be more intensive in areas identified as being more susceptible to erosion (such as fine, sandy soils) to prevent or minimise potentially adverse effects. Proposed monitoring, as outlined in Section 6 of this document, of the receiving environment will ensure erosion and sediment control practices are operating effectively.
Appendix 1.9 of the Combined Plan provides a schedule of significant water bodies. Reaches of the Tauweru River (downstream of Tauweru Bridge) and Whareama River (seaward side of the Coastal Marine Area boundary) are listed, however both reaches are well downstream of the CHWF Site.
Drainage works such as channels, diversions, and stormwater treatment ponds, will be retained in the long-term in ares of high erosive potential, and on-going maintenance works will be undertaken. This will ensure that there should be no more than minor effects on surface water quality during the operation of the CHWF.
Minimum flow requirements (as specified in the Regional Freshwater Plan) at the main river or stream take sites will be maintained during the construction period to protect waterways. Monitoring for potential effects on ecology downstream of the take points will also be undertaken.
Reduced recharge to groundwater during construction is expected to cause reduction in stream baseflow that is within the natural variation currently occuring, and will have a no more than minor effect. No sediment-related effects on groundwater quality during construction are expected as rock mass joints in the CHWF area are unlikely to be sufficiently and persistently open.
In light of the above, the CHWF is consistent with Objective Fwe1 and Fwe1 Policies.
Section 15: Hazardous Substances
Objective Haz1 seeks “to protect the natural and physical environment, including community safety and health, from the adverse effects of hazardous substances”. Haz1 Policies guide the Combined Plan by promoting the establishment of thresholds and controls.
As outlined, all hazardous substances stored On-site during the construction and operation of the CHWF will be contained within appropriately lined and bunded areas in accordance with HSNO requirements. A Spill Response Plan will be prepared and implemented to address any accidental spills of substances outside the secure storage areas. With these mitigation measures in place, the effects of hazardous substances on the natural and physical environment will be, at most, no more than minor. The CHWF is not contrary to Objective Haz1 and Policy Haz1.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 400
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Section 16: Network Utilities and Energy
Section 16 of the Combined Plan recognises the potential for wind energy development in the Wairarapa. Objective NUE2 promotes energy efficiency and the generation of energy from renewable sources. Associated NUE2 Policies recognise the benefits to be derived from renewable energy generation, recognise and manage appropriate development of Wairarapa’s significant potential renewable energy resources, as well as the operational requirements of energy generation. In particular, NUE2(e) Policy seeks to provide for renewable energy generation, while as far as practicable, avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse effects.
As outlined in Section 2.2 of this document, the CHWF is a renewable electricity development that could produce approximately 1,500 GWh per annum (and possibly up to 3,000 GWh per annum), and will make a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth and to enabling the generation of electricity needs from renewable sources. Electricity related benefits include contributing towards meeting projected growth in electricity demand via renewable energy, the diversification of generation supply options, assisting with the reduction in carbon emissions associated with electricity generation, and providing a local supply of electricity to the Central Electricity Region.
The potential effects of the CHWF have been discussed in detail in Section 5, and in the technical reports provided in Volumes 3 and 4 attached of this document. Overall, as a result of careful project design, and proposed management, mitigation and monitoring methods, adverse effects will be appropriately avoided, remedied or mitigated.
The CHWF is consistent with the provisions of Section 16 of the Combined Plan.
Section 19: General Amenity Values
Objective GAV1 seeks to maintain and enhance general amenity values of the Wairarapa while associated GAV1 Policy (f) promotes the management of visual effects in accordance with the environmental zone in which the activity is located.
The Landscape and Visual Assessment (Boffa Miskell 2011(a)) undertaken for this application found that the inland hill country landscape of the northern Wairarapa can accommodate the CHWF without adversely affecting or compromising its rural character and rural amenity. Visual effects from public roads and rural settlements within 30 km of the CHWF will be minor. Overall, adverse effects of the CHWF on general amenity throughout the rural area will be no more than minor and therefore consistent with Objective GAV1 and GAV1 Policy (f).
8.4 Section 104 Assessment 8.4.1 Introduction This section of the AEE provides an analysis of the proposal in terms of the requirements of s104 of the RMA. Section 104(1) of the RMA lists the matters that the consent authority must have regard to when considering an application for resource consent. Section 104(1) states:
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 401
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
(1) When considering an application for a resource consent and any submissions received, the consent authority must, subject to Part 2, have regard to–
(a) any actual and potential effects on the environment of allowing the activity; and (b) any relevant provisions of— (i) a national environmental standard: (ii) other regulations: (iii) a national policy statement: (iv) a New Zealand coastal policy statement: (v) a regional policy statement or proposed regional policy statement: (vi) a plan or proposed plan; and (c) any other matter the consent authority considers relevant and reasonably necessary to determine the application.
Section 104(1) does not give any of the matters to which a consent authority is required to have regard primacy over any other matter. All the matters are to be given such weight as the consent authority sees fit in the circumstances and all provisions are subject to Part 2.
8.4.2 Actual and Potential Effects The requirements of section 104(1)(a), the actual and potential effects on the environment, are set out in detail in Section 5 of this document.
The project design and proposed approach for managing the effects of the project mean that potential adverse environmental effects will be avoided, remedied or mitigated, and in addition, the CHWF will have a range of positive effects. Examples of positive effects of the CHWF, and how potential adverse effects will be avoided, remedied or mitigated include:
The electricity generated by the CHWF will make a material contribution to the New Zealand electricity sector, at both the national and regional level.
The CHWF will provide significant renewable electricity generation, giving effect to the NPSREG and assisting with reaching the Government target of 90% generation from renewable resources by 2025.
The CHWF will have positive direct and indirect effects on the economies of the Masterton and Tararua Districts and will add to the GDP and employment in the area.
The effect of the CHWF on current recreation and tourism activities will be no more than minor.
The CHWF will not adversely affect any outstanding natural features or landscapes within the northern Wairarapa area.
From a landscape and visual perspective, the northern Wairarapa hill country landscape is an appropriate location for the CHWF, and adverse effects can be avoided, remedied or mitigated.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 402
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Improvements and upgrades to the External Roads between Alfredton and the Site will be undertaken to enable vehicle movements associated with the construction of the CHWF without adversely affecting other road users.
A comprehensive EMP and associated SEMPs will be prepared, detailing the specific measures to be used to control the CHWF construction activities.
A CTMP will be prepared with management controls and protocols specific to the CHWF to enable traffic effects to be appropriately managed.
With traffic management, road improvements and mitigation measures, the safe and efficient operation of the road network will continue with less than minor effects arising as a result of the CHWF.
Noise generated during the construction of the CHWF will comply with the provisions of construction noise standard NZS6803, as required by the TDC and MDC District Plans.
The CHWF will be designed and constructed so that noise effects from Turbines will comply at all External Dwellings with NZS6808:2010 Acoustics – Wind Farm Noise.
A Construction Noise Management Plan and an Operational Noise Management Plan will be prepared to ensure that the construction and operation of the CHWF complies with all relevant noise standards.
Best-practice erosion control measures will be used during construction, and post-construction revegetation will be undertaken at disturbed sites.
Temporary water takes to supply construction needs will all comply with the allocation framework set out in the relevant planning documents, and with minimum and residual flows to ensure flow regimes are maintained at a sufficient level to sustain in-stream ecological values.
All in-stream structures will incorporate appropriate screening, or provision for fish bypass to ensure fish passage is not affected.
There will be a negligible effect on recharge to groundwater during construction.
The predicted maximum exposure to shadow flicker will comply with international guidelines for acceptable levels of shadow flicker.
The proposal is unlikely to have adverse effects on any sites of cultural significance or affect any historic buildings, heritage items or known archaeological features in the area.
Overall, any potential effects of the CHWF on radio-communication and telecommunication services can be mitigated to the extent that they are no more than minor.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 403
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
The CHWF will not cause an adverse effect in terms of navigable airspace, RADAR communications or airways management.
All electromagnetic fields from the CHWF will comply by a considerable margin with the relevant limits for general public and occupational exposure, set in the 2010 ICNIRP Guidelines (as endorsed by the New Zealand Ministry of Health), meaning that there will be no risk to public health and safety from electromagnetic fields.
8.4.3 Relevant Provisions of Statutory Planning Documents In terms of section 104(1)(b) of the RMA, these consent applications have been assessed in accordance with the relevant provisions of RPS, Water Management Plan, Discharges to Land Plan, Regional LRMP and the Proposed LWMP and the District Plan. An assessment of this application against the policies, objectives and rules of these plans is set out below.
National Environmental Standards
The National Environmental Standard for Air Quality sets an acceptable daily level for 3 PM10 of 50 g/m and requires continuous monitoring throughout the year in areas where PM10 is likely to be an issue. There are 44 monitored airsheds in New Zealand, and the CHWF Site is not located within an identified airshed. Construction activity associated with the CHWF is unlikely to make the area susceptible to PM10 and on this basis the National Environmental Standard for Air Quality is not considered relevant to this application.
There are no other National Environmental Standards relevant to these applications.
Other Regulations
There are no other regulations relevant to these applications.
National Policy Statements
NPSREG
The NPSREG is relevant to these applications, in particular Policies A and C1.
Policy A states: 1. Decision-makers shall recognise and provide for the national significance of renewable electricity generation activities, including the national, regional and local benefits relevant to renewable electricity generation activities. These benefits include, but are not limited to:
a) maintaining or increasing electricity generation capacity while avoiding, reducing or displacing greenhouse gas emissions; b) maintaining or increasing security of electricity supply at local, regional and national levels by diversifying the type and/or location of electricity generation; c) using renewable natural resources rather than finite resources;
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 404
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
d) the reversibility of the adverse effects on the environment of some renewable electricity generation technologies; e) avoiding reliance on imported fuels for the purposes of generating electricity.
Granting consent to the CHWF will recognise and provide for a nationally significant renewable electricity generation project, and will increase the diversity of electricity supply. Many of the effects of developing the CHWF are reversible, while the project uses a renewable natural resource (wind) for electricity generation. The project also has the potential to displace greenhouse gas emissions. Policy C1 states:
Decision-makers shall have particular regard to the following matters:
a) the need to locate the renewable electricity generation activity where the renewable energy resource is available; b) logistical or technical practicalities associated with developing, upgrading, operating or maintaining the renewable electricity generation activity; c) the location of existing structures and infrastructure including, but not limited to, roads, navigation and telecommunication structures and facilities, the distribution network and the national grid in relation to the renewable electricity generation activity, and the need to connect renewable electricity generation activity to the national grid; d) designing measures which allow operational requirements to complement and provide for mitigation opportunities; and e) adaptive management measures.
As noted in this AEE, there is a significant wind resource where the CHWF will be built; hence it will be built where the renewable energy resource is available. An integral part of construction of the CHWF involves the use existing infrastructure in the area such as roads, ports and transmission lines. As noted in Section 2, the presence of these facilities forms an important part of identifying an appropriate site for development. Measures enabling a range of mitigation opportunities are proposed for the CHWF, and an adaptive management approach has been adopted in relation to managing the effects of the construction activities.
In summary, the CHWF gives effect to the relevant parts of the NPSREG.
NPSFM
The NPSFM includes a range of objectives and policies relating to water quality, water quantity and integrated management of land and water resources. The CHWF project has taken into account the MWRC and GWRC Regional Plans that incorporate provisions relating to safeguard the life-supporting capacity, ecosystem processes and indigenous species including their associated ecosystems of fresh water, the management of water quality and the management of water allocation. The CHWF construction proposals have taken into account the potential effects of land disturbance, earthworks and vegetation clearance activities on fresh water.
To the extent that the existing Regional Plan provisions give effect to the NPSFM, the CHWF also gives effect to the relevant parts of the NPSFM.
New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement
The New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement is not relevant to this proposal.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 405
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Regional Policy Statement or Proposed Regional Policy Statement
Manawatu-Wanganui Region
As discussed in Section 8.3.2, the CHWF project is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of the MWRPS and the One Plan (Regional Policy Statement section).
The policy framework in the MWRPS balances the use and development of resources in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region with the protection of water resources, soils and vegetation, and resource management matters of significance to iwi. The CHWF is generally consistent with the relevant provisions, and contributes to the overall sustainable management of natural and physical resources in the region.
Wellington Region
As discussed in Section 8.3.4, the CHWF project is consistent with the relevant objectives and policies of the Operative WRPS and the Proposed WRPS.
The Operative WRPS contains a high-level policy framework for the management of natural and physical resources in the Wellington Region and seeks to balance the effects of resource use, development and environmental protection. In particular, the policies within Chapter 12 promote the use of renewable energy. The CHWF is consistent with the broad policy framework of the Operative WRPS.
The intent of the Proposed WRPS is to maintain and protect regionally significant landscapes and ecosystems through the auspices of regional and district plans. It also broadly promotes the use of renewable energy.
Regional and District Plans or Proposed Plans
Manawatu-Wanganui Region
As discussed in Section 8.3.2, the CHWF project is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of the operative and proposed Regional Plans applicable to the Manawatu-Wanganui Region.
The CHWF proposals are consistent with the objectives and policies of the LWRP, the RPBRL, the MW Air Plan, the MCWQRP and with the One Plan (Regional Plan section), as indicated in Sections 8.2.1 and 8.3.2.
Tararua District
As discussed in Section 8.3.2, the CHWF is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of the Operative and Proposed TDP.
The CHWF is located within the Rural Management Area of the Operative and Proposed TDP where emphasis is on efficient use of rural land in this zone. The construction and operation of the CHWF will allow the normal operation of productive and rural activities in the area, such as pastoral farming, while increasing the efficient use of natural and physical resources and diversifying the productivity of the land. The
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 406
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects overall visibility of the CHWF will be largely confined and contained within the inland hill country landscape area, and the area does not comprise any outstanding natural features or landscapes. Overall the CHWF is not contrary to the objectives and policies of the Operative TDP.
The Proposed TDP carries over many of the provisions of the Operative Pan, but in addition recognises the regional and national benefits of renewable energy generation, particularly wind farms. The CHWF Site is located in the Rural Management Area of the Tararua District as anticipated by the Proposed TDP and is not contrary to the relevant Rural Management Area provisions.
Wellington Region
As discussed in Section 8.3.5, the CHWF project is not contrary to the relevant objectives and policies of the operative and proposed Regional Plans applicable to the Wellington Region.
The CHWF project has had regard to, and gives effect to, the relevant provisions of the Regional Freshwater Plan, the Discharges to Land Plan, the Regional Soil Plan and the Air Quality Plan, as discussed in Sections 8.2.4 and 8.3.4.
Masterton District
The CHWF is located primarily in the Rural (primary production) Zone of the Masterton District. The construction and operation of the CHWF will allow the continuation of productive and rural activities in the area, ensuring efficient use of renewable energy resources. There are no sites identified as Outstanding Landscapes or Outstanding Natural Features. Overall, the visibility of the CHWF will be largely confined and contained within the inland hill country landscape area. As indicated in Section 8.3.6, the CHWF is not contrary to the provisions of the Combined Plan.
8.4.4 Other Relevant Matters There are no other matters relevant to consideration of the CHWF applications.
8.4.5 RMA Part 2 Part 2 Matters to be considered
Part 2 of the RMA sets out the purpose and principles of the RMA. The purpose of the RMA is to “promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources”, and defines sustainable management as follows:
“…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
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 407
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
(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.
Part 2 also defines several matters of national importance that all persons must recognise and provide for in achieving the purpose of the RMA. These include the preservation of the natural character of wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins, and the protection of them from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development, the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development, the protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna and the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.
In addition to the matters of national importance, Part 2 also identifies other matters that all persons are to have particular regard to or take into account in exercising RMA functions and powers. These include kaitiakitanga, the efficient use and development of natural and physical resources, the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values, the effects of climate change and the benefits to be derived from the use and development of renewable energy, and the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
The matters addressed in Part 2 of the RMA as they relate to the CHWF are discussed below.
Overall Broad Judgement
The CHWF will promote the sustainable use of natural resources by enabling the use and development of a natural resource to generate electricity that will enable people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being and for their health and safety. The use of the natural resource (wind energy) by the CHWF will not affect the potential for that same resource to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations and the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems on the CHWF site will be safeguarded. Any adverse effects of the CHWF activities on the environment will be avoided, remedied, or mitigated.
The matters of national importance relevant to the CHWF have been recognised and provided for in development of the project details and through the mitigation proposals developed for the project. The CHWF is not contrary to any of the matters of national importance set out in s6 of the RMA.
The other relevant matters which must be given particular to or taken account of (in terms of s7 and s8 of the RMA) are discussed in this AEE as relevant to the CHWF, particularly in terms of such matters as kaitiakitanga, consultation with iwi and the benefits to be derived from the use and development of renewable energy.
Overall, granting resource consents for the CHWF will promote the purpose and principles of the RMA.
Statutory Framework Section 8 – page 408
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
9. CONCLUDING STATEMENT
Genesis Energy is proposing to establish and operate the CHWF on privately owned rural land located in the northern Wairarapa. The CHWF Site covers some 30,000 ha of predominantly pasture land, and is located in a remote, sparsely populated area. The On-site Construction Footprint will be approximately 861 ha, while the On-site Operational Footprint of the CHWF will be approximately 226 ha.
The wind resource across the CHWF Site is highly suited to a wind farm development and could support up to 286 Turbines with a potential nominal capacity of up to 860 MW of renewable electricity generation. The electricity produced will be equivalent to that consumed each year by up to 370,000 average New Zealand households.
Resource consents are sought from MWRC, GWRC, TDC and MDC, for the construction, operation, maintenance, replacement and refurbishment of the CHWF and associated infrastructure.
Detailed analysis of the potential socio-economic, landscape and visual, noise, traffic, hydrological, ecological, cultural, archaeological, shadow flicker, radio-communication and telecommunications, aviation and electric and magnetic field effects have been presented in Section 5 of this AEE. These assessments demonstrate that the effects of the CHWF are either minor in nature, or can be appropriately avoided, remedied, or mitigated.
Development of the CHWF is consistent with the objectives and policies of the relevant statutory documents, in particular the National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy, and will enable the effective and efficient use of a renewable energy resource.
Genesis Energy has consulted widely with both interested and potentially affected parties about the CHWF. Consultation will continue throughout the construction and operation of the CHWF.
The CHWF will make a material contribution to meeting projected demand growth in electricity, and is consistent with the Government’s overall policy framework to secure energy supply with the development of renewable electricity generation projects.
Concluding Statement Section 9 – page 409
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
10. REFERENCES
Allibone, R., David, B., Hitchmough, R., Jellyman, D., Ling, N., Ravenscroft, P. & J. Waters, 2010. Conservation status of New Zealand freshwater fish, 2009. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research (First published on: 27 September 2010 (iFirst)).
Arkins A.M., Winnington A.P., Anderson S. & Clout M.N., 1999. Diet and nectarivorous foraging behaviour of the short-tailed bat (Mystacina tuberculata). Journal of Zoology 247. 183-187.
Aurecon, 2011, Construction Effects and Management Report – Castle Hill Wind Farm. Report prepared for Genesis Energy, June 2011.
Beadel S.M, Biddy C.J., Perfect A.J., Rebergen A.A. & Sawyer J., 2004. Eastern Wairarapa Ecological District survey report for the Protected Natural Areas Programme. DOC, Wellington.
BERL Economics, 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm: Economic Impact Assessment, Final Report. July 2011.
Boffa Miskell Ltd, 2010. Wairarapa Landscape Study 2010 – Landscape Character Description. Prepared for Greater Wellington Regional Council, and Masterton, Carterton and South Wairarapa District Councils.
Boffa Miskell Ltd, 2011a. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment. July 2011.
Boffa Miskell Ltd, 2011b. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Shadow Flicker Effects Assessment. July 2011.
Borkin K. & Parsons S., 2009. Long-tailed bats’ use of a Pinus radiata stand in Kinleith Forest: Recommendations for monitoring. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 53 (4): 38-43.
Borkin, K. & Parsons, S., 2010. The importance of exotic plantation forest for the New Zealand long-tailed bat (Chalinolobus tuberculatus). New Zealand Journal of Zoology 37 (1): 35-51.
Browne, G.N, 2007. The development of an invertebrate database for the lower North Island. DOC Research and Development Series No. 269, 2007. DOC, Wellington.
Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand, 2006. Lighting and Marking of Wind Farm Turbines, 8 May 2006.
Clough & Associates Ltd, 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Archaeological Effects Assessment. July 2011.
Concept Consulting Group Ltd, 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm: Electricity-Related Effects Assessment. July 2011.
References Section 10 – page 410
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Daniels, M.J., 1982. First record of long-tailed bats in a Pinus radiata forest. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 26 (1): 108-111.
Dawson, D.G. & Bull, P.C., 1975. Counting birds in New Zealand forests. Notornis, 22(2), 101-109.
Deloitte, 2011. Economics of Wind Farm Development in New Zealand – Prepared for the New Zealand Wind Energy Association.
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority, 2007. New Zealand Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy – Making it Happen.
Enviromedix Limited, 2011. Assessment of Health Effects Arising from Electromagnetic Fields at the Castle Hill Wind Farm. Enviromedix Limited, June 2011.
Findlay, J.F., 1992. Pahiatua Ecological Region Protected Natural Area Survey: A survey to identify important natural features using an abbreviated survey technique. DOC, Napier.
Greater Wellington Regional Council, 2009. Greater Wellington – Regional Pest Management Strategy. Greater Wellington Regional Council, Wellington.
Hitchmough, R., Bull, L. & Cromarty, P., 2007. New Zealand threat classification system lists 2005. Science and Technical Publishing – DOC, Wellington, New Zealand.
Hitchmough, R.A., Hoare, J.M., Jamieson, H., Newman, D., Tocher, M.D, Anderson, P.J, Lettink, M. & Whitaker, A.H., 2010. Conservation status of New Zealand reptiles. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 37: 3, 203-224.
Horizons Regional Council, 2010. The Environmental Code of Practice for River Works.
Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, 2002. Geology of the Wairarapa Area. 1:250,000 Geological Map 11.
Johnston, M.R., 1975. Sheet N159 and pt. N158 Tinui-Awatoitoi (1st ed.) Geological Map of New Zealand, 1:63,360. DSIR, Wellington, New Zealand.
Kingsley, A. & Whittam, B., 2005. Wind Turbines and birds: A background review for environmental assessment. Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Quebec. 81 pp.
Kordia, 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Radio Services Effects Assessment. July 2011.
Kunz, T.H., Arnett, E.B., Erickson, W.P., Hoar, A.R., Johnson, G.D., Larkin, R.P., Strickland, M.D., Thresher, R.W. & Tuttle, M.D., 2007. Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats: questions research needs and hypotheses. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 5: 315-324.
Langston, R.H.W. & Pullan, J.D., 2003. Wind farms and birds: an analysis of the effects of wind farms on birds, and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selection issues. Unpublished report by BirdLife International, 58 p.
References Section 10 – page 411
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Lloyd, B., 2005. Lesser short-tailed bat. In The handbook of New Zealand mammals. King, C.M., (Ed.) South Melbourne, Australia, Oxford University Press. 110- 127.
McFadgen, B. 2003. Archaeology of the Wellington Conservancy: Wairarapa. DOC.
Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council, 2007. Regional Pest Plant Management Strategy. Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council, Palmerston North.
Marshall Day Acoustics, 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Noise Effects Assessment. July 2011.
Ministry for the Environment, 2000. Stream periphyton monitoring manual. Ministry for the Environment, Wellington.
Ministry for the Environment, 2011. National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011.
Ministry of Economic Development, 2007. New Zealand Energy Strategy to 2050 – Powering Our Future.
Ministry of Economic Development, 2011. New Zealand Energy Data File 2011.
Miskelly, C.M., Dowding, J.E., Elliott, G.P., Hitchmough, R.A., Powlesland, R.G., Robertson, H.A., Sagar, P.M., Scofield, R.P. & Taylor, G.A., 2008. Conservation status of birds (2008). Notornis 55(3):117-135.
Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm - Cultural Impact Assessment. July 2011.
Neef, G., 1974. Sheet N153. Eketahuna (1st ed.). Geological Map of New Zealand, 1:63,360. DSIR, Wellington, New Zealand.
Newman, D.G., Bell, B.D., Bishop, P.J., Burns, R., Haigh, A., Hitchmough, R.A. & Tocher, M. 2010: Conservation status of New Zealand frogs, 2009. New Zealand Journal of Zoology: iFirst 2010, 1-10.
O'Donnell, C.F.J., 2001. Advances in New Zealand mammalogy 1990-2000: Long- tailed bat. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 31: 43-57.
O'Donnell, C.F.J., 2005. New Zealand long-tailed bat. In: King C.M. (ed) The Handbook of New Zealand mammals. pp. 98-109. 2nd edition, Oxford University Press, Melbourne.
O’Donnell, C.F.J., Christie, J.E., Hitchmough, R.A., Lloyd, B. and Parsons, S., 2010. The conservation status of New Zealand bats, 2009. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 37(4).
Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, 2011a. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Groundwater Effects Assessment.July 2011.
Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, 2011b. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Hydrology Effects Assessment. July 2011.
References Section 10 – page 412
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd, 2011c. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Water Supply Assessment. Report prepared for Genesis Energy, June 2011.
Percival, S.M., 2001. Assessment of the effects of offshore wind farms on birds. Unpublished report for the UK Department of Trade and Industry, 93 p.
Powlesland, R., 2009a. Bird species of concern at wind farms in New Zealand. DOC Research & Development Series No. 317. DOC, Wellington. 55 pp.
Powlesland, R., 2009b. Impacts of wind farms on birds: a review. Science for Conservation No. 289. DOC, Wellington. 53 pp.
Rangit ne o Wairarapa Inc. 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm - Cultural Impact Assessment. July 2011.
Rob Greenway & Associates, 2011. Genesis Energy Castle Hill Wind Farm Proposal – Recreation and Tourism Effects Assessment. July 2011.
Robertson, C.J.R., Hyvonen, P., Fraser, M.J. & Pickard, C.R., 2007. Atlas of Bird Distribution in New Zealand 1999 – 2004. Wellington, Ornithological Society of New Zealand.
Ryder Consulting Limited, 2011. Genesis Energy Castle Hill Wind Farm Development – Aquatic Ecology Assessment. Report prepared for Genesis Energy, June 2011.
Sawyer, J.W.D., 2004. Plant Conservation Strategy Wellington Conservancy (excluding Chatham Islands) 2004-2010. DOC, Wellington.
Stark, J.D., 1985. A Macroinvertebrates Community Index of Water Quality for Stony Streams. Water & Soil miscellaneous publication 87. National Water and Soil Conservation Authority, Wellington.
Stark, J.D., 1993. Performance of the Macroinvertebrate Community Index: effects of sampling method, sample replication, water depth, current velocity, and substratum on index values. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 27:463-478.
Stark, J.D., 1998. SQMCI: a biotic index for freshwater macroinvertebrate coded abundance data. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research. 32: 55-66.
Stark, J.D. & Maxted, J.R., 2004. Macroinvertebrate community indices for Auckland’s soft-bottomed streams and applications to SOE reporting. Prepared for the Auckland Regional Council by the Cawthron Institute, Cawthron Report No. 970.
Statistics New Zealand, 2006. Census Data 2006.
Traffic Design Group, 2011. Castle Hill Wind Farm – Transportation Effects Assessment. July 2011.
References Section 10 – page 413
Genesis Energy – Castle Hill Wind Farm Assessment of Environmental Effects
Townsend A.J., de Lange P.J., Norton D.A., Molloy J, Miskelly C, Duffy C, 2008. The New Zealadn Threatened Classification System Mannual. Wellington, DOC.
Wildland Consultants, 1998. Bat survey, Tararua Forest Park 1997/98. Wildland Consultants Ltd Contract Report No. 210. 61 pp.
Wildland Consultants, 2011. Assessment of Ecological Effects for the Proposed Castle Hill Wind Farm, Northern Wairarapa. Draft report prepared for Genesis Energy, June 2011.
Williams, P.A., Wiser, S., Clarkson, B. & Stanley, M.C., 2007. New Zealand’s historically rare terrestrial ecosystems set in a physical and physiognomic framework. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 31: 119-128.
World Health Organization, 2009. Night Noise Guidelines for Europe. World Health Organization, Copenhagen.
References Section 10 – page 414