In relation to: Board of Inquiry Transmission Gully Plan Change

Statements of evidence of Kevin Gywnn for Mana Cycle Group (submission 34) Relating to effects on mountain biking

1. My full name is Kevin Walter Gywnn.

2. My qualifications and related experience are: 2.1. I hold a Bachelor of Engineering from Auckland University 2.2. I have been an active mountain biker for 10 Years. In this time I have biked widely in the and have excellent knowledge of the regional track network, specifically the Mana region 2.3. I have biked regularly in the areas detailed in this report 2.4. I have knowledge of the range of mountain biking infrastructure that is currently available, as well as the ongoing work to develop standards for current and future development of the sport. 2.5. I am an active member of the Port Nicholson Poneke Cycling Club (PNP). I have been involved in the drafting of submissions and proposals around biking infrastructure, and cycling promotion, both onroad and offroad. 2.6. I am connected to a recently formed mountain bike umbrella group which is coordinating future mountain biking track development in the Wellington Region. 2.7. I am cognisant of the best practice guidelines in relation to track design and am able to access specialist knowledge in regard to this.

3. I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses (March 2011) as contained in the Environment Court Consolidated Practice Note (2006), and I agree to comply with it.

1

SCOPE OF EVIDENCE

4. I have been asked to cover the effect that the Transmission Gully Motorway (TGM) and its construction would be likely to have on current and future Mountain Biking recreational opportunities and experiences in the affected area. I have also been asked to propose possible mitigation works that would minimise those effects. 5. I was asked to look specifically at the following sections of the route as presented on the plans provided by the applicants:

 Cannons Creek, section 8 - access into Belmont Regional Park  Battle Hill, section 4 – access into Battle Hill Park

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 6. Background documents that were referred to me by the Mana Cycle Group and that I considered in preparing this evidence are:  TGM technical report – 23- part 1 and 2  Amended drawings (Appendix 1)  Belmont Regional Park Sustainable Land Use Plan (2011)  Battle Hill Farm Forest Park Management Plan (2009)

BACKGROUND ON MOUNTAIN BIKING

7. Mountain Biking is a rapidly growing sport in and the numbers of people actively engaged has increased substantially over the last decade. The New Zealand Cycleway Market Research Report (2009) estimated that there were 202,000 adult mountain bikers in 2008 (pg 15), rising to 220,000 with children included. 8. The development of mountain biking opportunities has increased exponentially over this period. Opportunities include increasing access to conservation areas and regional parks, as well as the construction of purpose built tracks. 9. Wellington has been a centre for track development. This has been driven in large part by grassroots mountain biking groups such as, Makara Peak Mountain Bike

2 Park (supporters group), Mountain Bike Park (supporters group) and Belmont Area Mountain Bike Association (BAMBA). 10. In the last decade it is estimated that 70 km of track have been developed in the Wellington Region by volunteer groups (Simon Kennett, Active Transport and Road Safety Coordinator, GRWC, pers comm, 2011) 11. Development of mountain biking infrastructure is showing no sign of slowing with new groups opening up sites across the region in conjunction with Regional and Local Councils. New areas include Polhill and Miramar Peninsula. 12. Future opportunities are largely restricted to council and crown land, as these areas are both large enough to accommodate track development as well as having management plans that support recreational development. 13. As a general rule, mountain biking facilities should be separated from those used by other users (walkers, horses), unless the tracks are wide or bike numbers low.

POTENTIAL FORMS OF IMPACT ON MOUNTAIN BIKING

14. TGM will affect mountain biking through: 14.1. restricting access to the affected regional parks 14.2. restricting future mountain bike track development opportunities within the catchments occupied by the new road 14.3. diminishing the mountain biking „experience‟ in the areas the road affects, during construction works and/or as a result of road operation

CANNONS CREEK, SECTION 8 - BELMONT REGIONAL PARK (BRP)

SEVERANCE IMPACTS: Current

15. here are currently four access tracks into BRP impacted by the Cannons Creek section of TGM. The motorway will sever all four routes. Two of the four tracks share a single entry point through the Cannons Creek ponds (Warspite Ave). These tracks are shown on pg 133 of technical report 23. A third track was omitted in the technical report drawings but has been acknowledged and partly

3 accounted for on subsequent drawings1 (Appendix 1). This farm track starts on Warspite Ave and effectively links the Bothamley Park shared cycle path, through to City, with BRP. The track winds up, and east, through the Park to join the Duck Creek Track where it junctions with the Cannons Head Track. This track is the route used in the Porirua Grand Traverse multi-sport event each year and is a common exit point for local riders. The fourth track is the Duck Creek Track starting from Takapu Rd. 16. All four tracks will be severed by TGM and ongoing access will require re-routing under Bridge 19 and 20. This will involve substantial detours for three of the four tracks from their current route. 17. I agree with the Belmont Regional Park Sustainable Land Management Plan statement as follows, “……Transmission Gully Motorway crosses Cannons Creek and then runs the length of Duck Creek. If built this would have profound impacts on the Duck Creek catchment and create significant severance between eastern Porirua and the park” (pg 26, italics added).

SEVERANCE IMPACTS: Future 18. As noted earlier, mountain biking track development is expanding rapidly with the support of Regional and Local Council. In Belmont Regional Park there has been extensive development in the east by the Belmont Area Mountain Bike

Association (BAMBA). It is likely that future development in the western area would link with this network. 19. Little track development has occurred on the western side, partly due to extensive track development elsewhere and partly due to a lack of coordination. The Mana Cycle Group formed in late 2009. The group is developing proposals for track development in the Mana area. It is my opinion, because of the people involved and the direction of the group, that there is a strong likelihood their plans will be successful. 20. Track development and recreational access is in line with the BRP Sustainable Land Management Plan (2011) which classifies the western area of the Park as „Peri-Urban Integration‟ zone. It recommends some retiring of grazing land, and

1 While the drawing says „request for a new track‟ this reference is to a request to re-establish an old track that has overgrown in gorse, and not to the track that is currently used local mountain bikers and by the Porirua Grand Traverse. They do share the same starting point however

4 sets out, for management purposes, a number of 'best uses' for this zone. These include the following: “Integrated easy access recreation, biodiversity and stock rearing / trading operation” (pg 29) 21. Experience shows that retiring grazing land is a key development in making an area more attractive and accessible for mountain bike track development. This area is in close proximity to a large community and has a feeder track (Bothamley Park) through to a major metropolitan area, Porirua City. My opinion, therefore, is that the area would be a prime location for future mountain bike track development. 22. My examination of the maps indicates that TGM would greatly restrict further integrated track development in this area of the park by limiting access through to the wider Park to three pinch points, namely bridges 18, 19 and 20. Any future development would have to detour back and under these bridges thereby compromising the integrity of the „line‟. Track development tends to work with the underlying landform feature (ridge, spur, gully) and this would be compromised in this area, as TGM effectively severs the continuity of these features. Hence development opportunities would be reduced

AMENITY IMPACTS 23. Central to the mountain biking experience is the sense of wilderness, being out in open spaces and away from noise, pollution and visually modified environments. Mountain biking fundamentally takes place in environments that are essentially natural, whose visual appeal is the lack of buildings and tarmac. 24. My view is that TGM will negatively impact on the mountain biking experience through its associated effects on amenity and landscape values. The impact will be substantial, and the various mitigation actions proposed, will have little effect on these negative outcomes. 25. The BRP Sustainable Land Management Plan recognises the landscape values inherent in this area of the park noting the area is an; “Important open space backdrop to Cannons Ck, Waitangirua” (pg 29). 26. In my view, these open space values will be compromised and the level of effect will increase the higher you climb into the Park.

5 27. The visual impact on Park users will be substantial. The motorway will be visually dominant in this area of the Park and irreparably alter user's experience. For example, Bridge 20, under which some of the current tracks will have to pass is a significantly large structure relative to the surrounding landscape. 28. Technical report 23 suggests that the visual amenity of road users be prioritised over Park users despite this being an area with recognised landscape and amenity values. The report states: “Ensure that views (motorists) to the wider landscape are maximised through the careful design and siting of landscape treatments and road furniture (e.g. safety barriers and screen planting)” (pg 135, italics added). 29. The report does not set out proposals, it appears, to minimise visual impacts of the motorway on the experience of other users of the area such as mountain bikers. Such mitigation should be developed and included in conditions. 30. Noise is another impact that will reduce the overall amenity value of the area. What is now a predominantly rural area would have a soundscape dominated by traffic noise, with this effect being especially obvious at higher altitudes. 31. The technical report states there will be “no issues” with regard to noise in this area (pg 135). I do not agree with that assessment, particularly given that the same report concludes, in relation to the Battle Hill Section, that “The new road will change the acoustic amenity in this Section from predominantly natural sounds to noticeable road-traffic” (pg 80). Traffic volumes will on average be higher in the Cannons Creek Section than further north, so the acoustic affect would be likely to be greater. 32. The current tracks in this area will need to be diverted under bridges 18, 19 and 20 which will extend the length of travel required and alter the nature and direction of their use. This is a further impact on user amenity

SECTION 8: MITIGATION 33. I have included in this section both mitigation proposed in the technical reports and additional mitigation, to provide an overall mitigation package.

34. Both my evidence and the technical reports provide only a basic outline of the mitigation activities. To minimises the impact of TGM on the complete mountain bike experience it is my opinion that plans should be developed in further detail.

6

35. The conditions should require that they be undertaken, with the intended mitigatory effect clearly set out in conditions, and the detailed design provided through plans that are signed off by suitably qualified mountain biking experts employed/contracted by the relevant councils.

35.1. Visual screening and the planting of species that favours park users and aims to reduce the visual and auditory intrusion of the motorway into the park. Planting should be undertaken along the immediate corridor of the motorway and taller growing species should be planted, in line with underlying landform and soil types (ie kahikatea and pukatea in wetter areas and titoki, totara, kohekohe etc on drier slopes). 35.2. The emergent species detailed above should be planted amongst faster growing seral species such as manuka and kanuka that will provide intial shade cover and ensure visual and noise buffering happens quickly. 35.3. The four access tracks detailed above need to be specified as shared walking/cycling tracks and developed accordingly. Alternatively, new tracks to allow separation of users could be developed. Currently the tracks have no specific designation. All track sections that require rerouting should be built to easy mountain bike standard (NZ Cycle Trail Standards2), and designed to be suitable for shared use, and specified on plans as such. 35.4. Where tracks pass under the bridges this should occur as close to the top abutment as possible and not be relegated to maintenance access tracks which will service the bottom of the support columns. Tracks should not go down to the stream unless for the purpose of crossing it. 35.5. As mitigation for severance a loop track should be built that allows movement through the 'severed' western end of the Park. This can be done by building a link section across the creek under bridge 20. Users will then be able to enter at the ponds and exit at Waihora Park or vice versa. 35.6. Track development to Mountain Bike easy standard should be provided along the SH58 to Cannons Creek section (partly shown on pg 110) to

2 http://www.nzcycletrail.com/news-media/cycle-trail-design-guide

7 provide access from Whitby, and surrounding residential areas, into Belmont Regional Park.

SECTION 4 – BATTLE HILL FARM FOREST PARK (BHFFP) 36. Mountain biking and its provision is consistent with the Park‟s management document which has a the following goal: “Providing recreational opportunities consistent with the primary recreational uses of experiencing a working productive farm, walking, tramping, picnicking, swimming, horse riding, mountain biking and camping” (BHFFP Management Plan, pg 6)

SEVERANCE IMPACTS: Current 37. BHFFP is used widely by the mountain biking community in Mana and Kapiti. The park had 95,000 visitors in 2004/2005 (BHFFP Management Plan pg 5) of which a portion were mountain bikers. As well as the obvious forestry roads that extend from the Park into the Akatarawa Forest there are numerous tracks and loops, that have been developed in recent times, throughout the forested slopes of the Park. There is currently one access over the stream and into the forested section of the park. This follows the farm road across the flats and over the stream. TGM severs this access way.

SEVERANCE IMPACTS: Future 38. Ongoing access into the forested section of the Park has been catered for with an underpass beneath bridge 7 (technical report pg, 83). My primary concern with this access is the provision made for forestry trucks in the design document. In my opinion this could effectively lead to a loss of access for much of the duration of the milling period (which could be up to 6 months), as concerns around transport conflicts and safety will lead to underpass closure. Unless specific provision is made for park users access could effectively be severed. 39. The access track/road between BHFFP and Paekakariki should be addressed. Communication between Mana Cycle Group and Peter Ward (NZTA) suggests that this 4wd road will be retained for maintenance purposes. This track has not been designated for dual use (Service vehicles and Recreational users). Left in this state, and in this condition, my experience would suggest that this track will

8 also be used by recreational users (mountain bikers/walkers). This could lead to potential user conflicts.

AMENITY IMPACTS: 40. As noted earlier the impacts on Noise amenity in the BHFFP section will be significant, aggravated by the echoing effect of the valley basin. This is acknowledged in the technical report (pg 80). Whilst the design objective of placing TGM on the western slope of the valley may help the visitors centre, it will result in sound travelling largely unfiltered to the main mountain biking area on the eastern slopes of this valley 41. The visual impact is equally significant. Not only does TGM significantly diminish the prior natural space values of this rural valley but the technical report, in my opinion, also provides for little mitigation of this impact. The technical report states that motorway design should: “Allow unrestricted views from the road to ensure that road users have the ability to connect with this unique location along the route”. (pg. 80). 42. The report does not set out proposals to minimise visual impacts of the motorway on the experience of other users of the area such as mountain bikers. Such mitigation should be developed and included in conditions.

SECTION 4: MITIGATION 43. Visual screening and the planting of appropriate species should favour park users and aim to reduce the visual and auditory intrusion of the motorway into the Park. Planting should be undertaken along the immediate corridor of the motorway and taller growing species should be planted, in line with underlying landform and soil types (ie kahikatea and pukatea in wetter areas and kanuka, totara, kohekohe etc on drier slopes). 44. The emergent species detailed above should be planted amongst faster growing seral species such as manuka and kanuka that will provide intial shade cover and ensure visual and noise buffering happens quickly. 45. All signage should be kept to a minimum in this section and be subject to visual screening for the benefit of park users

9 46. Bridge 7 should be allocated to Park Users (walkers, bikers and horse riders) and forestry operations should be directed south to bridge 8, thereby preventing any potential loss of access to the park. 47. Technical document 23 recognises that the TGM corridor can provide for future access opportunities by utilising the designated land for track development and effectively link up recreational areas that are currently poorly connected. 48. There is a significant opportunity along the TGM corridor as the gradient is gentle for much of this section and is suitable for shared track development. The Park has limited 'easy access' tracks and development along the corridor could remedy this and provide some mitigation for wider impacts. 49. In my opinion NZTA should build the two tracks highlighted on pg 40 of the technical document 23. These tracks are: 49.1. A proposed track linking Flightys Rd with BHFFP along the corridor. This track should be built as a shared walking/cycleway to mountain bike easy standard, as specified in the NZ Cycle Trail design manual3. Currently the responsibility been placed on Porirua City Council. ) This will provide some mitigation to access severance across BHFFP land and in other sections of the motorway; and help to mitigate other negative impacts the TGM will have on Park users. This track will enhance the recreational opportunities in the Park and wider region. 49.2. Access track/road between BHFFP and Paekakariki. In my opinion this track should be allocated to services and mountain bikers/walkers and be built accordingly (mountain biking easy standard). This could involve a mix of 4WD track and appropriate single track, where the access road becomes too steep. The road will provide for motorway maintenance and walking access, while the single track will provide for mountain bike access in areas where the road is too steep. It would provide excellent opportunities to link up both the Wainui Hill walkway but also cycling in QE2 Park and Whareroa Park (an area which is seeing increasing biking use.). 50. Both tracks could link with the national cycleway development and contribute to regional networks.

3 http://www.nzcycletrail.com/news-media/cycle-trail-design-guide

1 0 APPENDIX 1

1 1