TRANSMISSION GULLY PROJECT – NZTA, PCC AND TRANSPOWER LIMITED APPLICATIONS

Summary of Submissions

November 2011

Ref Submitter Position Application Summary of Submission To be Decision Requested of Interest heard? 0001 John Pfahlert Support All Unqualified support for the project to assist in providing improved arterial roading into and out of the Wellington No Not stated. Region. 0002 Ivan Rowe Support in All Support, with the following exception, to better link TG into Porirua: No Not stated. part - The Kenepuru interchange should also link the southbound existing SH1 motorway to the northbound TG; and the southbound TG to the northbound existing SH1. 0003 Dave Not stated Not stated If funded from National roading funds then no objection. Not Not stated. Johnston Depends on If funded from a combination of national roading funds, regional petrol taxes and rates increase and tolls then stated funding opposed. Suggests a more economical project around upgrading existing road (refer to submission for details). TG is as fault prone as Centennial Highway. 0004 Wayne Erb Oppose in All TG motor way doesn‟t represent prudent management of the country‟s resources. No Reject the applications. full. Motorway is unnecessary in medium term - Oil and petrol prices volatile and on an upward trend, this will flatten demand for motor vehicles / driving kilometres. Electric vehicle (substitute) will be slow and expensive. Unnecessary burden on state finances Oil prices threaten to dampen economic growth which would disrupt government revenue 0005 Grant Support in full All Wish to see TG proceed immediately. Yes Approve immediately. Corleison

0006 Ballinger Support in full All Economic and social benefits are large. No Speed up the process and construction timetable. Industries Limited 0007 Malcolm Support in All The main alignment as proposed is faulty in that the southern termination should be at Takapu Road and not Yes BOI direct that the main alignment terminate at Faulls part; oppose Linden. Takapu Road and that the Kenepuru and Waitangirua in part Link Roads be deleted. 0008 Philip Support in full All The construction of the TG motorway is already long overdue. No Ensure their conclusions do not delay the proposed Harland construction of the TG motorway. 0009 Paul and Oppose in full All TG proposal is economically and environmentally destructive. No Termination of TG. Deborah Waste of taxpayers‟ money, time and effort. Consider alternative proposal – develop the regional Rosin Proposal will destroy business/properties in surrounding towns due to less vehicles passing through these towns. public transport network, focus on redistributing road Money needs to be invested into railways not roads. freight onto the railway network, and tramway systems/light rail for Greater Wellington. 0010 Philip Support in full All Country‟s economic growth and ability to make progress along with the rest of the world is being obstructed by Yes Proceed with TG as rapidly as possible. Hayward inadequate road infrastructure and irrational, quasi-religious opposition to improvement to it. 0011 The Hutt Support in full All The Chamber has taken a key position in promoting transport and accessibility issues for business. Consistently Yes Approve the applications. Valley lobbied and presented submissions on the need for roading infrastructure improvements. Has established a special Impress on the applications: Chamber of Infrastructure Committee. - A need for the connector SH58 (between Commerce Is fully supportive of the RoNS initiative for the Wellington Region. TG/SH58 interchange and SH2) capacity and and Industry There is a need for ensuring that connector roads are also provided to ensure full benefit and efficiency is achieved safety to be concurrently addressed to ensure that Incorporated from the RoNS initiative and in this regard strongly supports TG and the TG/SH58 interchange component. SH58 the accessibility benefits that the TGP provides for between the TG/SH58 interchange and SH2 also needs to be upgraded. the Hutt Valley are not compromised. The diversion of heavy freight carrying vehicles via SH58 will has positive effects in reducing heavy traffic volumes - The need to ensure that other indirect but which would otherwise traverse the “Ngauranga Triangle Strategy Area”. consequential road transport infrastructure is Benefits & efficiency for freight movement to and from the Hutt Valley delivered such as the other SH2 interchanges at Better commuter and public transport connections between the Hutt Valley and Porirua/Kapiti districts. the Kennedy-Good and Melling Intersections and Addresses concerns with regard to the Regions significant vulnerability in the event of natural disaster or major the Cross Valley Link Road between SH2 and the accident affecting the existing primary highway access routes. Seaview/Gracefield Industrial Area. The Granada to Petone and Cross Valley Link between SH2 and the Seaview/Gracefield Heavy Industrial Area are relevant complementary highway connectors – which are indirectly affected and are beneficial roading

Page 1 of 32 infrastructural improvements. Cross Valley Link‟s importance must be elevated to avoid the impact of heavy vehicles using Hutt City‟s residential roads. The inevitable additional traffic on SH2 south of SH58 will place greater pressure on the need for interchanges at the Kennedy-Good and Melling intersections. 0012 Richard Neutral on all NZTA Suggests that: Not The assurance that all effort will be made to increase Witheford- aspects - Provisions be made for the Ribbonwood terrace work site entrance in Ranui Heights to the Kenepuru Drive stated. native tree planting and a serious look into the Smith [NoR3 & 5] link road become an entrance into the Belmont Regional Park when the project is complete; possibility of the Ribbonwood work entry site - Native trees are planted in as many places as possible to complement the increased native birdlife that Ranui becoming a walking/mountain biking entry to the is experiencing at present; Belmont Regional park with routes under the - That pine trees are discouraged due to the amount of pollen produced; and motorway and into the hills. - As a part of being a good owner that the pine trees currently surrounding houses in Ranui be removed and replaced with natives. 0013 CentrePort Support in full All CentrePort‟s effectiveness as a key port for interisland ferry traffic and the international market is dependent on Yes Approve the applications. Limited quality road connectors. Impress on the applicants: The Wellington region needs an holistic and integrated roading plan. 1) The need for the connector SH58 (between Strong support for all facets of the Governments RoNS. TG/SH58 interchange and SH2). For the transport network to be fully functional all aspects of the RoNS programme need to be delivered supported 2) Capacity and safety to be concurrently addressed by addressing key highway connector routes and modal interfaces. to ensure that the accessibility benefits that the Primarily concerned with ensuring that the efficiencies that it has introduced within its port operation activity and TG project provides for the Hutt Valley and the expansion objectives are not hindered by inadequate or at risk road networks. consequential movement of port freight are not The economic wellbeing of the region is highly dependent on the efficiency of all transport modes. There is a compromised. significant level of dependency between modes particularly in the movement of freight. 3) Ensuring other indirect but consequential road TG can be built with minimal interruption to traffic flows along the existing highways transport infrastructure is delivered such as the TG provides a shorted more direct route for trucks carrying freight other SH2 interchanges at the Kennedy-Good Diversion of heavy freight carrying vehicles via SH58 positive effects on reducing heavy traffic volumes. and Melling Intersections and the Cross Valley The effects of freight trucks passing through populated centres are reduced (particularly those carrying hazardous Link Road between SH2 and the products) Seaview/Gracefield Industrial Area. TG provides significant improvement in security of access in the event of a natural disaster or significant accident/incident event. TG increases overall capacity and aligns with the projections for increased freight transport demand. TG provides via SH58 a more direct route to the Hutt Valley transport logistic centre at Seaview/Gracefield. The inclusion of the TG/SH58 interchange component is seen as beneficial to the movement of National/Regional freight to and from the Seaview/Gracefield heavy industrial area which has an “Inland Port” role in the movement of freight. Approximately 2.5m tonne of the 11M tonne of freight that passes through CentrePort Wellington annually passes through the Seaview/Gracefield area. Therefore important that SH58 between the TG/SH58 interchange and SH2 is also upgraded. The Granada to Petone and Cross Valley Link between SH2 and the Seaview/Gracefield Heavy Industrial Area are relevant complementary highway connectors – are indirectly affected and beneficial roading infrastructural improvements. Cross Valley Link‟s importance must be elevated to avoid the impact of heavy vehicles using Hutt City‟s residential roads. The inevitable additional traffic on SH2 south of SH58 will place greater pressure on the need for interchanges at the Kennedy-Good and Melling intersections. 0014 Christopher Support in PCC Owner of Lot 25 DP341339 (53A Cleat Street). Submission relates solely to the components of the overall proposal Yes Approval of all parts of the proposal as it affects Lot 25 Alan Green part as they affect and occupy Lot 25 DP341339. DP341339 subject to ensuring: [NoR 8, Part of the proposed Waitangirua Link Road alignment will extend into the southern end of the submitters property - Land taken for the purpose of the proposal is RC17, 18, 19] requiring physical works that will disturb the land within the property and a new road alignment that will undertaken in a manner that ensures provision permanently occupy the land. Land will need to be formally taken for roading purposes. can be made for suitable width and gradient two- Purpose of submission to ensure adequate compensation is provided to Mr Green and access between Lots 25 DP way vehicle access between Mr Green‟s property

Page 2 of 32 341339 and the Waitangirua Link Road is available on completion of the construction works. at Lot 25 DP 341339 and the new road formation; Support is conditional. and The applicant has worked with NZTA and PCC over the last three years (regarding this application). The applicant - Adequate compensation is made to Mr Green for has provided a plan showing a possible earthworks design solution that would ensure physical access can be the land taken; and achieved between the new road carriageway and the submitters property. - Suitable mitigation measures are imposed in There is a small difference between the area the submitter allowed for a designation notation on their original plan. consent conditions and designation requirements A plan attached to the submission showing the current proposal against their original suggestion as it affects the to protect Mr Green‟s property from any adverse southern part of Lot 25 DP 341339. environmental effects resulting from the proposed Submits that either the current proposal or their original version of the designation outline would be acceptable. construction programme (e.g. dust, noise, stormwater, soil erosion and stability problems, unnecessary damage to or loss of native vegetation-noting that vegetation on Mr Green‟s property is located within one of the Porirua City Council inventoried Ecosites) and completed works (vehicle noise, run-off, safety and protection measures in relation to vehicle movements passing the site boundary). 0015 Cannons Not stated Not stated Sound and noise of extra traffic (estimated 7000 extra vehicles per week) coming through the Waitangirua area Not Not stated. Creek and into Cannons Creek. stated. Residents Exhaust fumes will increase and affect families and children as some schools and churches are at the edge of the and main route of Warspite Avenue. Ratepayers Added risk to pedestrian traffic along the whole length of Warspite Avenue as it passes a new children‟s park at Association Waitangirua Mall and reaches Cannons Creek school, church and shopping areas. Chemical run off from the new link road tar seal affecting pets and plant life. 0016 Kapiti Coast Supports in Not stated TG will bring Wellington and the Hutt Valley closer to the Kapiti Coast and have positive economic and social Yes. Not stated. Airport full effects. Limited TG will reduce the variability of travel times which is important for the development of the Airport. 0017 Patricia Support in All Wants TG built as soon as possible. No. Approval of the NORs. Norton part Relying on a single major route in and out of Wellington is not prudent. Building an alternative route is imperative. Approval of the RCs subject to effective environmental Are neutral in Has attached submission from 2005 comparing TG with coast road option. mitigation requirements. part. We need a second road: civil defence; blockage of the road; economic/ strategic reasons; will give reliability that is currently not available; will allow the coast road to become an effective local road; enabling Hutt traffic to access the northern section of the gully road from SH58 will take pressure of Ngauranga Gorge Environmental factors: providing alternative east/west connections will greatly reduce the impact on Pauatahanui Inlet; global warming will have no effect. Social factors: current (2005) international best practise is to ensure major highways have minimum impact on existing communities. The gully route will meet that requirement. It will bypass every township from Paekakariki to Paremata. Heritage: The gully route will have little or no impact. For decades the government and the roading authorities have undertaken to build the new highway through TG and not to further disrupt or destroy the coastal communities with on-going road works. Engineering: We should be able to build the road over the faults. Disruption: Is a green-field development – can be built with little disruption to local communities and with no on- going delays to traffic. Health: presents no health issues for local residents. Time scale: the whole road can be opened within 15 years. More straightforward than coast road (2005 submission). Grays Road: will give Hutt Valley traffic access to the highway at Pauatahanui so traffic will have no need to use Grays road and the proposed upgrade will become unnecessary. Concerned that the resource consents include effective requirements for stringent measures to mitigate adverse environmental effects, particularly in regards to erosion / sediment control, and waterways and their natural

Page 3 of 32 populations (fish, insects etc.). 0018 Cecil Stanley Oppose in NZTA Only on parts of the applications for NoR and RC that relate to the TG Main Alignment from the proposed tie-in with Not Require the applicants to consult with the submitter as Westley part existing SH1 at Linden to the NE boundary of the Wellington District together with the Kenepuru Link Road. stated. owners of a property within close proximity to the Edmonds [NoR 4, 5, 6, Owns 23 Tremewan Street, Linden. designated route, on options that are available in light and Susan RC1, 2, 3, 8, Technical reports on lighting, traffic, air quality, vibration and noise consistently note the highest impact on of belief that the impact on amenity values is unable to Elizabeth 11, 14, 15]. residential properties will be in the Linden area and/or in Tremewan St. be mitigated. Edmonds Property will be subject to severe effects on amenity values in the construction phase (traffic, dust, noise and vibration – cosmetic cracking is possible). After construction the amenity values of the property will continue to be severely affected (visual, lighting, noise). Removal of the houses on the designated land in Tremewan Street and earth work construction in its place will have a severe visual effect on the amenity values of the property. Provides a photo of current view to SH1 (which is minimal). To date the submitter has not been consulted. 0019 Eberhard Oppose in All Proposed alignment cuts the submitters property in half. Yes For the motorway (i.e. the designation) to be shifted on Deuss part [NoR3, Submitter proposes moving the designation on the northern part of the submitters property 100m east, with the the northern end of submitter‟s property by NSP same exit on the southern end (as proposed). approximately 100m east. 11/2.030] Proposed alignment would greatly reduce the visual and noise impact on the lower part of the submitters property Neutral in where the submitter intends to build a dwelling. part. It is not necessary to move the alignment higher by shifting the alignment further up, because the highest peak of the submitters‟ property is where the proposed motorway exists to the south and this point won‟t change. In the first proposal, where the motorway was supposed to go 500m further east, the maximum cuts were 45m high. By shifting alignment as proposed the cuts would be nowhere near 45m. The increase in cut would be only minor. The Horokiri Bridge would only need to be turned by a few degrees, but would remain at the same location A minor realignment of the current proposed motorway to accommodate this shift would allow the present power lines to remain in situ. Staff from Transit stated during the last visit on 4 October, there would be no major drivers which would prevent the motorway to be shifted as long as the Horokiri Stream is preserved. Submitter‟s current proposal would in no way change this. Geologically it has been thoroughly investigated. The effects on the Horokiri Stream to the north would be the same under both proposals. 0020 David Oppose in NZTA Bought section in 2003, built residence to enjoy peace and tranquillity. At the time the planned designation was well Yes Recommend moving the current designation east of its Christensen part to the east of the property and on the far side of several significant hills going north up the valley. Were satisfied present location further from the boundary of [Oppose with assurances given that any impact on their living standard would be insignificant. submitter‟s land. NoR3] Latest designated route brings the road significantly closer to the property. Believe this will have substantial impact on standard of living. Recommend that NZTA include submitter in formal URS noise survey found significant change in the acoustic amenity at the house. URS described the change in negotiations regarding compensation resulting from noise levels as equivalent form moving from a quiet library into a busy shopping mall with the constant drumming of the effect of the new road on property value and the air-conditioning and general traffic in the mall. This will make a significant impact on quality of living. lifestyle. Construction noise: Even more alarming level of noise pollution - has been advised this will last for longer than 20 weeks. Whilst not objecting to the construction of the road per se, objects to the current designation. Because property is not directly affected by the route, have had minimal contact with NZTA and its contractors and have not been able to engage in any conversation regarding compensation for the significant impact on submitters‟ lifestyle that the current designation will have. Fully support the proposal of many neighbours on Paekakariki Hill Road to move the designation eastwards in order to reduce the potential impact of noise pollution on their homes. Road does not need to be so close to their homes. Peaceful rural lifestyle needs protecting. 0021 Rita Hunt Support in full Not stated Cannot see any provisions enabling pedestrians to cross the new motorway. If there are none please provide some No Facilities for pedestrians/cyclists to cross this wherever possible. motorway in several places. The crossings must be

Page 4 of 32 At the moment this motorway will go through largely unpopulated areas but in 20-30 years it is likely to be a designed with personal safety in mind i.e. avoid different picture. Then it will be expensive and difficult to provide pedestrian access. tunnels/subways. Pathways/bridges with open railings Please avoid subways/tunnels like the ones linking Porirua Centre and Porirua East over SH1. They are invitations preferred. the crime. Pedestrian ways should be as open as possible, with open railings which allow observation of the path from all over the area (similar to the bridges near the Paremata roundabout). 0022 Roger, Support in full All The Coastal Community of which Paremata/Mana is part has for many years been split in two, adversely affecting No Not stated. Jennifer and the movement of people between the two sections. It is safer and faster to drive to Porirua to shop rather than drive Karen Philips to the Mana shopping centre, even though the distance to Porirua is greater. These adverse effects have steadily got worse over the years and if TG is not built then shopping in Mana will be done only in an emergency. The resulting reduction in traffic, particularly trucks, will enable public recreation in the harbour areas and the sporting events on Ngatitoa Domain to be expanded to the benefit of the Wellington Region. These comments equally apply to the villages of Plimmerton, Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki. Suggest a Rest Area at the top of the Wainui Saddle (on both sides of the expressway) to give people the opportunity to view the high point of the Expressway and the use of Porta-loos. Signs could be displayed showing the positioning of the interchanges and provide directions to Hutt Valley, Porirua, Tawa and Paremata and the Wellington Airport. In the other direction, signs could show the direction to Paekakariki and the Kapiti Coast. Pleased to see Truck braking facilities shown on the plans. In Northern Escarpment, Idaho, US truck runoffs – much longer restraining upward slope than the downward sloping run and gravel provided to make stopping a certainty. Prominent sign at the top of US state roads shows the gradient which in this case is 8% and the presence of truck run offs. Suggests providing a similar sign at the top of the saddle advising the gradient and that truck run offs are available on both downward slopes. Trusts that Pauatahanui Inlet will be safeguarded and any realignment of either SH58 or Grays Road will not encroach on the inlet. 0023 Kapiti Coast Supports in All Relates to all parts of the NoR that fall within or have effects on the Kapiti Coast District. Yes Condition of consent: an on-going independent peer District part. Council notes minimal consultation in the development of the TG project particularly in contrast to other RoNS review by a fresh water ecologist of the proposed Council projects. Involvement has been limited to completive the statutory „fit for purpose‟ check against its District Plan mitigation of adverse effects on the Te Puka Stream to Support in requirements; preparing a key issues report (149G(3) RMA); attendance at various high level meetings at early assess the adequacy of the proposed mitigation. This conditional on stages (until mid-2009); occasional technical meetings since 2009. review should also examine the extent to which the the NoR Council has had little opportunity to participate in the development of the project and has had to review an proposed offsetting for damage to the stream will being overwhelming amount of documentation in an extraordinarily tight timeframe. achieve the best ecological outcomes, particularly in approved with Notes no new funding for RoNS meaning they will be funded out of existing baselines. Council would be very respect of the offsetting that is located beyond the conditions concerned if this placed any constraints on the level and nature of mitigation needed to address adverse effects of district boundary. that deal with the TG project. the issues Ecological effects KCDC and Greater Wellington are party to the discussed in Very high impact on Te Puka Stream. Affected sections have high and moderate ecological values. Significant outcomes of this review and a joint monitoring the adverse effects are unavoidable and require mitigation. committee is established to oversee this work. submission. Impacts on two high values ecological sites (K106 and K139), on eight proposed ecological sites (K223-230) and on areas of unprotected native forest and scrub. Loss of varying amounts of native vegetation is expected for which Formal reporting to the community of the outcomes of [Support mitigation is proposed. monitoring work on a biennial basis. NoR1; RC1, Insufficient mitigation of adverse effects on the Te Puka Stream and other ecological values. If there is to be a “new 2, 3, 4, 5; science” then assurance is needed on how the proposed mitigation will be monitored, as well as the process for Mitigation of ecological impacts: NSP updating Council and the community as that science develops. - Information on the nature of the effects on the 11/2.029] Council requires evidence to demonstrate that proposed offsetting of effects on the Te Puka Stream within the K106 wetland at Mackay‟s Crossing and assurance Kapiti District is located beyond the district boundary will achieve the best ecological outcomes for the catchment that these effects will be adequately mitigated. affected by the works. - The EMMP needs to include a long-term plan to In the absence of adequate mitigation the impacts on the Te Puka Stream are so high as to provide strong control possums, rats, mustelids, deer and goats to justification for declining consent. low levels and maintain those levels permanently. Impact on the high value K106 wetland is assessed as moderate but there is no mention of mitigation for adverse - performance criteria including long-term monitoring effects. and reporting requirements should be specified for There is no plan to control pest animals, an essential part of any attempt to protect, restore or create areas of consent holders and contractors responsible ecological value implementing mitigation and management

Page 5 of 32 Success of proposed mitigation depends on high levels of commitment, expertise and performance by the consent measures to address adverse ecological effects. holder and contractors and rigorous monitoring and reporting, sustained over many years - The EMMP should specify the consent holder‟s The Ecological Management and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) does not refer to territorial local authorities in regard to responsibilities towards KCDC and other affected monitoring, reporting, compliance or consultation, though they have statutory responsibilities and a vital interest in TLA‟s. These should include reporting and environmental outcomes of the project. consultation requirements (there is reference to Greater Wellington and DoC but no reference to Stormwater and runoff territorial local authorities in regard to monitoring). No attenuation of the run off in the Te Puka / Wainui and Whareroa Catchments is provided in the NoR. There will - Long term monitoring of ecological effects to be be an increase in peak flow. NZTA should comply with the Council policy of hydraulic neutrality. undertaken by an independent party. The use of vague, generalised terminology (as far as reasonably practicable / as far as practicable) completely - An independent review of the effectiveness of all waters down the intent of any conditions. mitigation of ecological effects. The standards being applied for Stormwater Treatment and Erosion and Sediment Control are not clear. NZTA - KCDC wishes to have a role in selecting an Treatment and Draft Erosion Control standards and the relevant Greater Wellington documents and standards are appropriate independent provider and making sure mentioned. Greater Wellington will be the lead agency – unclear what standards will be applied. that the monitoring is carried out appropriately. It Important that the design and construction is done to the appropriate standard so that contractors and consultants does not expect that this would be second hand are clear what standard they should be working to achieve. through Greater Wellington. - Store part of the stormwater run-off so that the Road design and local resilience peak flow leaving the proposed designation is not There will be no local alternative route between Paekakariki and Mackay‟s crossing. This is unacceptable and must increased. be resolved during the BoI process. - Qualifiers such as “as far as reasonably A major rationale for the RoNS network is the provision of an alternative route if there is a significant event on the practicable” and “as far as practicable” are SH – the absence of a 2km section of the location road network from Sang Sue corner to MacKay‟s Crossing removed from the proposed consent conditions interrupts the alternative route along the local road network that could one day stretch from Porirua to Levin. Lack which need to be much more clearly worded with of local alternative route seriously undermines the resilience of the proposed TG route in the event of a significant specific performance measured. event. - Management plans state clearly the standards and It will also be necessary to provide an alternative local route if the TG is tolled. Submitter suggests two possibilities processes that are being used for stormwater, for providing a local road network, in each option it is essential that a single carriageway local road be constructed erosion and sediment control. that allows for the safe passage of pedestrians, cyclists and drivers not wishing to use the motorway. - Seeks evidence that the treatment of the bypassed It is unclear whether the effects of the proposal on the old SH1 are treated as part of the TG project. To date there sections of SH1 has been properly investigated has been no process to discuss this with NZTA (unlike for Mackay‟s to Peka Peka and Peka Peka to Otaki RoNS). and the result be provided to Council for scrutiny. When SH1 reverts to local road some treatment will be required. Nature of the treatment not provided. No analysis - Requires confirmation that the modelled impacts of is provided of the impact on safety if SH1 is left untreated. As volumes fall, speeds will rise and untreated the downgrading of the SH1 to local road is funded intersections and stretches of the old SH1 road may experience higher crash severity as a result. as part of the TG project. No analysis of the effect of tolling is included in the NoR. Tolling could have very significant impact on the local - Appropriate safety measures on the old SH1, road network/SH1. including at the Paekakariki intersection, will be Reasons for the difference between the NoR and NZTA Wellington Region figures for further growth are not funded as part of the project. explained. If traffic figures are incorrect, the resultant mitigation based on these figures may be inappropriate. - NZTA supply the TGM SATURN model to Council The sensitivity testing of fuel prices in the NoR does not adequately simulate the potential effects of very major for scrutiny. sudden fuel cost increases. - An independent review of the assessment of expected daily traffic growth on SH1 through Landscape and visual effects Paekakariki. Subject to the review findings, further The proposal impacts on Landscape Character Areas 01 and 02 in the Kapiti District. Impacts on Area 02 are test of the assumptions may be required, together significant and include permanent effects on landform, landscape character and biophysical impacts with the with further testing of the underlying analysis. realignment of the Te Puka Stream. - Evidence that the sensitivity testing to fuel prices Very limited certainty around both the process and outcomes of mitigation, including poorly specified (or missing) has been properly investigated and that the results performance criteria, management plans and long-term maintenance measures. Concern that detailed site of any analysis be provided for scrutiny. environmental plans will be determined during the construction phase. This is unacceptable to Council. Detail - Clearly specified performance measures to needs to be developed in the management plans and signed off as part of the BoI process. mitigate the acknowledged landscape and visual Limited supporting visual evidence is provided to validate the conclusions about landscaping. effects of the proposal. For example, performance No reference is made to potential recreation uses e.g. recreational use of the track alongside Te Puka Stream and based criteria must be provided for re-vegetation access under the new bridge. (e.g. % coverage within timeframe including re-

Page 6 of 32 No reference to providing a lookout point at a suitable high point on the western ridge. vegetation of terraced batters). Visual effects of realignment of existing essential transmission lines and towers. Some towers will be located on - Final earthworks should have a naturalised look, visually prominent spurts with lines crossing the tributary gullies of the Te Puka stream as well as causing a break particularly the realignment of Te Puka stream, in the skyline from some viewpoints. This contravenes many of the guiding principles for locating transmission lines shaping of riparian batter etc. I.e. there should be in a landscape and results in negative visual impacts. no area of uniform slope over 20m in length. Landscape and visual impacts from the proposed expressway development and associated realignment of the - The extent of terraced batters should be minimised transmission lines are significant. These effects are likely to be mid-long term and permanent. Mitigation is unlikely and, where possible cut laid back without terracing to make good or hide all of the negative impacts. whilst maintaining roughened surface for providing NoR does not provide sufficient clarity or certainty around the methods of proposed mitigation or enough habitat for pockets of re-vegetation. information on performance measures. There is a high risk of failure of process or achievement of adequate - In character area 1 ensure batters should be mitigation outcomes. shaped to blend well with existing slopes - Structures in the landscape should be minimised, Effects on Council’s water supply for Paekakariki particularly in areas of high natural landscape, Council plans to procure a new Paekakariki Water Supply Bore upstream of NZTA proposed Wainui Stream including lighting, signage, barriers, fencing except Culvert. The test site was agreed with NZTA and then tested successfully in 2011 (NZTA funded testing). where they are necessary to maintain natural It is likely that the proposed new culvert for the Wainui Stream will cause additional flooding upstream which habitats and populations. presents risks to Council‟s above ground water supply infrastructure e.g. electrical cabinets at the proposed new - Low visual impact materials and colours should be groundwater bore pump site. The risk of flooding presents a significant risk to its local water supply system, used. particularly its proposed new water supply bore for Paekakariki. - On-going monitoring and management of re- NZTA will need to vest an agreed portion of land to the Council to site the new production bore and provide access vegetation beyond the 3 years of the project to new and existing water infrastructure. Council needs to have access to this land to protect the water supply construction is needed to ensure that performance assets and provide future access to existing and new water infrastructure. criteria are achieved, including monitoring of weed and pest control. Historic heritage - Walking, cycling and off road access to public open Construction will affected the adjacent brick fuel tank listed in the heritage register. Condition 9 saying that a space needs to be maintained or where possible management plan will be developed is too vague and specific details about how these impacts will be mitigated are improved. needed. - Provision should be made for a lookout at the Council supports making the tank accessible, but wishes to see this included explicitly in the conditions. It is also highest suitable point of the western ridge. likely that some restoration works will need to be undertaken prior to construction to ensure that the structure is not - Sufficient detail be developed and signed off as affected by vibration. part of the BoI process. The brick fuel tank is also part of a whole precinct of military history around Paekakariki, the continuity of which will - Information on access roads should be included as change as a result of the proposed route. part of the Outline Plan or during the consent phase for approval during the BoI phase. - Consideration needs to be given to relocation of Towers 9A, 10A and 11A post construction of the road - Consideration should be given to relocating Tower 2A to the eastern site of the proposed road given that it sits at the entrance to the district and the current site will be prominent focal point for those travelling on the route as they enter the district. - Meeting the additional costs to design the new bore to mitigate flood risk should be part of the conditions of the proposed project. - Condition 9 needs to provide specific detail on how effects will be mitigated. Recommendations of the heritage architect are listed in the condition. - Potential mitigation could include interpretive signage at the tank or other places where visitors can experience the site as a whole.

Page 7 of 32 0024 Colin Support in NZTA To sound a note of caution before committing an unspecified sum of over $1 billion to a project, the costs of which No Not to have to borrow from overseas in order to fund. MacGibbon part PCC will probably exceed the benefits, at a time of dire financial uncertainty, both nationally and internationally, which Niven [Support in may last for years and possibly decades. It should not be started if finance has to be borrowed overseas. To get Split project into two separate sections. Complete first part NOR1; most benefit from expenditure suggests: section (a) before starting sections (b). RC11, RC12, Project be split into two i.e. a) Linden to SH58 and b) SH58 to SH1. RC13 Section a) be split into three sub-sections between interchanges. Support – Start be made at Linden with completion of Kenepara Link Road. NoR4, NoR5, Each sub-section be brought into use before serious work starts on next sub-section. NoR6, RC1, To open up use some parts would initially be built as two lanes with provision for subsequent supplication when RC14, NoR7, use justified. This applies to both sections a) and b). NoR8, RC17; Section b) should only be seriously started when section a) is in full use and funds are available. Neutral – RC2, RC3, RC4, RC5, RC15, RC16] 0025 Waitangirua Support in PCC Safety concerns regarding existing pedestrian crossing on Warspite Avenue – located between Maraeroa Marae No Existing pedestrian crossing on Warspite Avenue Community part [NoR 8] and Waitangirua Community Park. located between Maraeroa Marae and Waitangirua Park Design Due to the estimated increase in volume of traffic flow in this particular area the community are asking that Community Park. Team measures be undertaken that will encourage safety awareness. Suggest the pedestrian barriers are erected on said crossing to minimise potential accidents / injuries to all users – Planting of trees shown on photomontage plan LA15 foot traffic and motorists. and LA74. Tree planting as shown on photo montage plans LA15 and LA74. The community has discussed the concern of planting vegetation (trees) surrounding park and have asked that this not be undertaken. Reasons: broken branches may be used as weapons or missiles on park users or motorises. Concealment of persons whose intention is to cause injury or cause a nuisance to all who reside or use the community park. 0026 Jacob Oppose in All Concerned about the effect of construction on the hydrology within the affected regions. No Not grant any consent that potentially affects the Shapleski part [oppose Horrified that the recent changes to the RFWP has effectively exempted the TGP from adhering to the guidelines environment and in particular the hydrology of the RC2 – RC16, set out in the Plan. Understand the intent was to mitigate the adverse effects which are (apparently) impossible to Wellington Region where the application has not RC18-RC20] avoid. publically specifies a) valid reasons for why the Considering the discharge permits and land use consents sought by NZTA and PCC it is impossible to see exactly ‟avoidance‟ required by the Regional Freshwater Plan what these parties are going to „mitigate‟ the adverse effects of this project on the regions hydrology. is not possible and b) what steps are being taken to Strongly oppose on the grounds that there is too much prior subversion of policy, and, more to the point, not „mitigate‟ the adverse effects on the environment or enough transparency on these issues. hydrology in the affected areas. 0027 New Zealand Support in NZTA KiwiRail Network is one of the New Zealand Railway Corporation‟s business units. KiwiRail Network maintains and Yes NoR 3 and 5 be granted provided that the specific Railways part; oppose improves the rail network and controls the operations of trains on the network, including the North Island Main issues raised by KiwiRail in this submission are Corporation in part [NoR3, Trunk line through Porirua City. appropriately addressed so as to: (“KiwiRail”) NoR5, KiwiRail‟s interest as “landowner” is affected - Part of the area below the proposed Kenepuru Link Road is owned a) provide for on-going railway operations; (Pamela by the Crown for railway purposes and administered by KiwiRail. b) avoid any conditions attached to the Butler, KiwiRail‟s interest as “requiring authority” are affected - That land is held for a rail corridor and is presently subject Transmission Gully NOR that might adversely Senior RMA to designations for “railway purposes”. KiwiRail sees no reason why it could not give its approval on resolution of impact on railway operations on the railway Advisor) the various interface issues. corridor; and KiwiRail‟s interest as railway operator is affected – in regards to preserving the operation of the North Island Main c) otherwise better achieve sustainable Trunk. management, including of the existing railway Supports the project provided it is designed and implemented so as to maintain KiwiRail‟s railway operations. resource and infrastructure. The final details about the extent of the impact of the Kenepuru Link Road on the railway (and the existing Kenepuru substation) are still to be finalised with NZTA and KiwiRail‟s main interest is to ensure that its operations are maintained. 0028 Kapiti Grey Support in All The 5000+ members have a wide variety of views about NZTA‟s proposal for roading, especially the Kapiti section No TG be granted with conditions that will: Power part and concerns about effect on the environment. - Provide an alternative local route from SH1 to

Page 8 of 32 Association [Support all There won‟t be an alternative local route off the Expressway at Paekakariki to MacKay‟s crossing for vehicles to be Paekakariki to MacKay‟s crossing. Inc (Betty except diverted from the TG route in event of an earthquake, accident delays or flood. The absence of a 2km section of - Protect the KCDC proposed new water supply van Gaalen) support in the local road network between Sang Sue corner on SH1 at Paekakariki and MacKay‟s Crossing interrupts the bore to Paekakariki and give access to the land part NoR1] alternative route along the local road network and could be dangerous for cyclists, pedestrians and older drivers. It where bore and water supply assets are located. is essential to provide an alternative route between the existing SH1 at Paekakariki and Mackay‟s Crossing in case Additional costs to Council of designing bore so as of a significant event on SH1 to mitigate flooding risk should be part of the Effects on the KCDC water supply to Paekakariki, flooding risk to the new water supply bore. The new culverts for conditions of the proposed TG project. the Wainui Stream could cause additional flooding upstream which could be a risk to the „above ground‟ water - Designation be adjusted to exclude land to be supply infrastructure such as electrical cabinets at the proposed new groundwater bore pump site. vested in KCDC for the proposed production water Council access to land on which its‟ water supply is located. NZTA will need to vest an agreed portion of land to the supply bore and filter sites and an easement as Council on which to site the new production water bore and provide access to the new and existing water appropriate to be vested to Council for the infrastructure. Council needs secure access to this land to protect water supply assets and to provide future access protection of buried pipe assets and to allow future to existing and new water infrastructure. maintenance access. Connectivity between Kapiti District and Wellington City where so many go to keep hospital and other - Mitigate the effect of the discharge of chemicals appointments. and other contaminants into stormwater and Want older people and all regional residents to be able to travel safely around the regional communities on road streams. that will create safer and more expedient driving conditions for the local and cities areas. TG preferred option to SH1 in 1989 Greater Wellington Land Use and Transport Study. Were told that TG would be built in 15 years. TG top of the WRC Transport Implementation Programme for some years. Needs to be completed so the proposed RoNS from Mackay‟s Crossing to Levin can be lined up easing the traffic bottleneck that would occur if TG is not completed before the proposed expressway through Kapiti. TG will provide an alternative route in and out of Wellington City by an alternative SH1 route. SH1 provides access in the North Island, and is the gateway to the Capital City, to the airport, to the harbour and sea port for produce and goods to travel to the South Island and further afield. Will provide an alternative route in case of natural disasters. Congestion will be reduced, travel times improved, safer environment for motorists provided. 0029 Wellington Support in All WRC is making this submission in its capacity as a consenting authority and also in its capacity as a land/asset Yes That the NoR and resource consents be granted, Regional part. owner and/or manager in the affected area. subject to appropriate conditions. Council As consenting authority: ensure that in relation to the Regional Council consents there is a full set of information before the Board that will allow full consideration and understanding of the potential effects and proposed mitigation (see in particular the information gaps identified it the key issues report dated 6 September 2011, Parts 5 and 9). As consenting authority: particular interest in the proposed mitigation and/or offsetting conditions of consent across the project site as it will be the body responsible for monitoring ongoing effects and ensuring compliance with conditions, if the Board grants the Regional Council consents. WRC sees this role as one of providing assistance to the Board, rather than an advocacy role. As land/asset owner and/or manager: has concerns with some of the mitigation/offsetting that is proposed in its regional parks and/or adjacent areas and impacts on its utilities. Hydrology Water quality Ecology (marine, terrestrial and freshwater) Consistency with the relevant statutory regional planning documents and non-statutory documents Impact on its regional parks Impact on utilities (in particular, forestry access and bulk water supply to the cities of Porirua and Wellington) flood protection 0030 Kiapproth & Oppose in full All The protection of the environment must have higher priority than the privilege of private transport which pollutes the No No TG road building with Taxpayers‟ money. Jaretzki Environment already more than can be justified. (John and Andrea) 0031 CJ Sheridan Oppose in NZTA Properties subject to this submission are located to the southeast and above where the new motorway is proposed Yes Without limiting the scope of submission, request that / AD part [NoR3, 4, to divert away from existing SH1. Approx. 120-200+m from the existing SH1. the following be imposed as conditional requirements

Page 9 of 32 Osborne 5, 6, RC1, 3] Construction and long term effects of the proposed section of state highway between Collins Avenue on any decision that is granted, or that the outcomes (Bridge 26) from the existing section of SH1 in the south to the Kenepuru Interchange (Bridge 23 & 24) in sought below be guaranteed by other means. If these the north. measures cannot be implemented then we seek that Noise: the proposal be declined. - Adverse noise and vibration effects during the construction phase - Removal of tree cover for construction will increase the perception of noise levels during construction. The following matters be included in any construction - Kenepuru Interchange will be approx. 50 m closer and up to 11.5 m higher than the existing ground level at and/or operational management plan, as appropriate. 27000 mark (drain P06) which will increase noise levels. The landscape planting proposal must be required as - The use of the mobile rock crusher and associated heavy earthmoving works at Kenepuru Interchange will a condition of consent and should include the size and adversely increase noise in a Rural area. species of tree to be planted to achieve the requested - Noise will be amplified by the valley south of P06. level of mitigation. - Dust: - All construction will create air quality issues for properties in the path of the predominant north/north west Traffic and Traffic Management winds. - No parking is allowed in Rangatira Road, or the - An existing tree screen will be lost, which will allow more dust to travel on the predominant north/north west cul de sac end of the road, by construction winds which are funnelled by the valley running south from P06. vehicles or other vehicles associated with the Long Term Effects Transmission Gully project. - Noise: - A speed restriction be imposed in Rangatira Road - Existing 15 years plus tree screening SH1 will be removed which will increase the perception of traffic noise. limiting traffic to 30km/hour. - Kenepuru Interchange will be approx. 50 m closer and up to 11.5 m higher than the existing ground level at - No heavy vehicle use of Rangatira Road. 27000 mark (drain P06), which will result in increased noise levels. - A visibility mirror be installed at intersection of cul - Projected traffic levels will be higher in proximity to the residential dwellings; therefore noise levels will be de sac and rights of way to improve visibility. higher. - Improvement of sight lines at junction of Rangatira - Concern that projected noise barriers over Bridge 25 will create bounce back of noise up the P06 valley to Road and Collins Avenue, or other road upgrade Rangatira Road houses. works to achieve a safe outcome. - Noise will be amplified by the valley south of P06. - Improved access from Collins Avenue, by - Visual Effects: professional pruning of Pohutukawa trees, and/or - The Technical Report acknowledges that the visual effects to Rangatira Road properties will be high. soften the kerb to give easier turning into - Rural outlook will be removed by the Kenepuru Interchange which will be approx. 50 m closer and up to 11.5 m Rangatira Road. higher than existing ground level at 27000 mark (drain P06) and will be central to north-facing views from 19, 21 and 23 Rangatira Road. Network Utilities - Existing tree screen will be lost. - Requirement that the Rangatira Road residents - Planting is suggested, but there will be a time lag to its effectiveness. be notified of any resource consent application to - Network Utilities relocate the cell phone tower. - A new location for the cell phone tower adjacent to the proposed site compound has not been designated in the project. Noise and Vibration (Short Term) - Possibility of disruption to stormwater and sewer services (Wellington City Council drains) from no's 4, 17,19, - Inclusion in the "specific neighbour" consultation 21, 23 and 25 Rangatira Road by the formation of the Site Compound, realignment of SH1 and heavy traffic as per CIause 5.4.2 Technical Report 12 when along the access. strip limits are finalised. Rangatira Road property - Water Quality and Ecology (Stream at 27000m to Culvert P06) owners to retain an ability to object before and - Possible loss of regenerating stream and wetlands by build-up of construction sediments and no provision for during the construction phase. future fish passage. - Consultation with residents over hours and extent - Loss of amenity resulting from the height of the new road over the stream and the length of the new drain of night time works. required. - A guarantee that noise and dust issues will be - Concern over long-term ecology of the stream and wetland when the entrance to the valley has been monitored, and that there will be a quick response changed. to any complaint. Matters around the location and use of the proposed 'Site Compound' at 11 Rangatira Street. - Installation of construction barriers to limit noise - The change of use of the site from rural residential to industrial may temporarily and possibly permanently - and dust travelling on the predominant northerly change the current rural environment. Residents are concerned about the future effect on the rural winds up the valley where sound and wind are environment if the site is not to be returned to Rural. funnelled and amplified. - The nuisances of associated dust, noise and visual impairment from the projected uses will affect all the

Page 10 of 32 residents of Rangatira Road. Dust - The projected day and night use will affect all the residents of Rangatira Road - Minimal removal for construction of pines in - The extent of additional traffic on Rangatira Road creates security and safety concerns. plantation on boundary between Wellington and - The presence of an increased range and number of people accessing Rangatira Road at all times of day and Porirua City Council districts during the night may undermine the security of residents. construction of Kenepuru Interchange. We accept - Temporary Effects that in time the trees will be milled, but there will . The use of Rangatira Road and Collins Avenue by heavy vehicles be noise and dust effects during construction. We . There will be additional traffic, both during the day and at night. would want certainty that such effects are . Rangatira Road is a cul de sac, and the only access for the residents. adequately mitigated. . There will be Safety and Access risks for anyone on foot on this rural road, which has no footpath or - Planting for long-term growth of trees not just lighting. The road is currently used by pedestrians, school children, horse traffic, and joggers/sports shrubs to limit noise effects and limit views of the teams for training. highway from the Rangatira Road houses at a . There will be compromised safety at the Collins Avenue intersection, and at the cui de sac. higher level. . All intersections have bad sightlines. Increased traffic will increase the risk of accidents. - Request that planting is done prior to - The only entrance to and from Rangatira Road is via Collins Avenue therefore heavy traffic in Collins Avenue commencement of the works. will either pass sections of road that are heavily used by school children from Linden School or Greenacres - Investigation and implementation of methods of School. limiting noise and dust up valley from P06. - The proposal has not addressed any of the potential effects, nor does it propose specific mitigation. Noise Mitigation (Long Term) - Construction of permanent noise barrier on eastern side of southern approach to Kenepuru Interchange to stop amplification of noise by amphitheatre effect up valley. - Inclusion in the "specific neighbour" consultation as per cl 5.4.2 Technical Report 12 when limits are finalised, and an assurance that a process is in place that allows Rangatira Road residents an ability to object before and 'during construction. - Application and implementation of an engine- braking restriction on the lanes on the southern side of the Kenepuru Interchange.

Visual Effects - Specific landscaping plan prepared to address submitters concerns. - Minimal tree felling done before construction, especially to pine plantation on PCC/WCC boundary. - Request that planting is done as soon as practical and prior to earthworks commencing. - Fence the eastern side of approach to Kenepuru Interchange. - Bank on east side of northern approach to Bridge 26 be planted immediately upon completion of Stage 1 construction, with tree planting not just shrubs. - All eastern banks to Bridge 25 and its approaches to be planted immediately upon Stage 1 completion with tree planting not just shrubs.

Stream (27000 m to Culvert P06)

Page 11 of 32 - Extend planting beyond fill bank over P06, and zone to protect the planting in order to create a visual barrier on the east side to preserve the rural outlook down the valley from the Rangatira Road properties. .

Use of 11 Rangatira Road: The following matters, and methods to achieve the requested outcomes, be included in a construction management plan or similar document, and that this document be prepared in consultation with Rangatira Road property owners: - No. 11 (Site Compound) be committed to reversion back to Rural use upon project completion. - Any earthworks and vegetation removal be kept to the minimum required to achieve the necessary outcome. - Implementation of rigorous dust control measures. - Use of regular damping techniques for dust control. - A prescribed limitation on the amount of night time and 7 day works. - A requirement for consultation and approval by Rangatira Road residents over extent of night time and 7 day works - Provision of regular house washing. - Security camera at cul de sac. - Ensure night works lighting is focussed directionally on works. - Guaranteed monitoring and quick response to noise and dust issues. - Eastern row of pines to no. 11 Site Compound access to remain as the basis of mitigation planting. - The bank behind existing arena at house on no. 11 Site Compound to be kept along with its associated semi-mature trees. 0032 John Wells Support in All Sole concern – developments in the catchment must have a negligible adverse effect on the ecological health of Yes That the BoI approve the applications subject to the on behalf of part the inlet. inclusion of conditions that require the applicants to the Two major sources of pollutants from human activities within the catchment threaten its ecological health and its undertake additional mitigating and/or offsetting Guardians of value as a recreational resource: measures sufficient to ensure that any increases in the 1) uncontrolled input of sediment from rural erosion and urban development sediment or contaminants entering the Pauatahanui Pauatahanui 2) Input of toxic chemicals, much of which derives from vehicles using roads in the catchment, especially SH1, Inlet as a result of the proposal are completely offset Inlet Inc. SH58 and Grays Road, which ring the shores of the Inlet. by equivalent reductions elsewhere in the Inlet (GOPI) Understood when TG began to be considered seriously about a decade ago that strict controls (Transit NZ called catchment. them “advanced ecological mitigation”) on sediment outflow during construction and on chemical contaminants in stormwater afterwards would effectively reduce the direct impact of these pollutants on the Inlet to zero. A condition of consent should be to require NZTA to The AEE and Technical Reports clearly show that even the very best current onsite and near-site methods of contribute to plans contained in the Porirua Harbour controlling sediment and contaminants will not be able to prevent them having an adverse cumulative effect on the Strategy aimed at reducing sediment entering the Inlet over and above the current situation. harbour from sources other than the TG project and

Page 12 of 32 The AEE predicts that despite taking excellent precautionary measures the project will still deliver sediment and restoring the tidal prism or increasing the flushing result in an increase in contaminant loads in the Pauatahanui Inlet. ability of the harbour. AEE details predictions of effects of sediment on the harbour during construction during rainfall events and the longer term cumulative sediment effects of the works. Submitter is very concerned that NZTA seems to regard A condition of consent should be that NZTA be these results as reasonable and unavoidable. required in mitigation to continuously update TGM Mitigating and/or offsetting measures sufficient to ensure that there is no overall adverse impact on the harbour in stormwater treatment methods and install treatment the long term should be taken. The measures that will be taken to mitigate sediment and contaminant problems will devices on stormwater run-off outlets from other roads only be partially effective during construction and do not address the longer term situation. in the Inlet catchment to offset the adverse effects from TGM. 0033 New Zealand Supports in Not stated The area traversed by the proposed road contains a significant collection of heritage places, including those Yes Seeks that the landscape planting plan is reviewed to Historic part with associated with early Maori and European settlement, and the NZ land wars. These need to be recognised and ensure that the mitigation will screen the proposed Places Trust amendments provided for as a matter of national importance under section 6(f) of the RMA. road from important views from the Battle Hill skirmish Pouhere [in relating to NZHPT assessment has identified potential adverse impacts on historic heritage. site. Taonga historical Battle Hill heritage] - Concurs with NZTA‟s; Archaeological Assessment re: skirmish site; Cultural Impact Report re: wahi tapu or Seeks that consideration is given to a single site neutral in part Maori traditional relationship with the site; Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment. specific management plan being development [to parts of - The outlook from the site is historically important, and is a key aspect of why the site would have been covering all the potential effects and mitigation the project chosen as a defendable position – its ability to survey the wider landscape for approaching enemies measures for St Joseph‟s Church and condition of not relating to - Supports landscape planting along the proposed realignment to screen the road from Battle Hill to better consent NZTA.9 “any management plan should be historic retain the feel of the historic vista and approaches to the hill. The pine plantation offers only temporary consistent with the conservation plan for St Joseph‟s heritage]. mitigation of the effects of the road until the pine trees are harvested. Seeks a more permanent and on-going Church” should be included as a condition of consent form of planting mitigation. and prepared prior to the construction of the road. - It is not clear whether the planting plant will achieve the mitigation sought in relation to views form the Battle Hill Skirmish site. A Conservation Plan should be written for the Fuel St Joseph’s Church Storage Tank to inform any future work and provide an - Supports NZTA‟s intention to implement a construction management plan to management temporary up to date condition survey as a baseline for negative effects arising from construction. monitoring. This should be included as a condition of - The location of the concrete batching plant in the construction yard nearby has the potential to create excess consent and prepared prior to the construction of the dust and vibration that would damage the Church‟s stained glass windows. Upmost care needs to be taken to road. Condition of consent NZTA.9 “Consideration is preserve these windows. given to a single site specific management plan being - While NZHPT is happy to support the approach recommended by Ian Bowman (technical report 19) NZHPT developed covering all the potential effects on the Fuel seeks that a robust monitoring regime is implemented to ensure the integrity of the windows and other fabric Storage Tank. Consideration is given to appropriate of the church. If during monitoring it is found that damage is occurring a plan for swift action needs to be mitigation planting, to assist in obscuring the road implemented. structure and lessening the roads impact on the - NZHPT questions the relevance of developing an Archaeological Management Plan for the site, when the setting of the Fuel Storage Tank. main concerns are around built heritage. NZHPT acknowledges that the main effects on St Joseph‟s Church, of vibration, dust and construction noise will be included in the Construction Management Plan to be NZHPT supports consent condition NZTA.10 which developed in consultation with NZHPT and iwi in the event consents are granted. requires the preparation of an accidental discovery - A Site Specific Environmental Management Plan would be more appropriately suited to management of the protocol, training procedures for contractors regarding site during construction. This would cover all the potential effects on St Joseph‟s. It could incorporate or the discovery of archaeological material and seeks its replicate measures presented in other plans including the Construction Management Plan, a Conservation inclusion in consent in the event consent is granted. Plan and monitoring of the church structure and windows. One „go to‟ plan would avoid confusion and provide surety as to the management of the site during construction and beyond. - Mr Bowman recommends a comprehensive up to date condition survey is completed of the church to measure any deterioration in the building due to construction effects. NZHPT recommends that this should be in the form of a Conservation Plan and that any subsequent management plan should be consistent with the Conservation Plan. A Conservation Plan provides a baseline for minoring and any works that may be necessary as a result of the roading project. - NZHPT supportive of Mr Bowman‟s recommendation that the edges of the project be planted with appropriate vegetation so that it is largely obscured from the church. - NZHPT would not support planting on the church site to block views of the new road as the most likely

Page 13 of 32 position for planting would be part of the graveyard on the south facing hill site below the church, or surrounding the site. NZHPT would not support disturbance or shading of this site by vegetation – shading could lead to excessive growth of lichen and moss on the head stones, which can damage the stones. The hill top position would have been an important consideration in its original siting, onsite landscape planting would potentially enclose the site and obscure wider views to Pauatahanui Village and inlet from the site. NZHPT would like to see views to and from the site maintained. - Technical report 5 states that Mr Bowman‟s report proposed planting along the boundary of the church property. This is not NZHPT‟s reading of Mr Bowman‟s report and no planting is shown on the landscape plans. - NZHPT is satisfied that the proposed landscaping of the road verge and improvements to the accessway and approach to the access offered by NZTA will help balance out any negative impacts of the separation. The ability to view the church from the village and vice versa is an important aspect to counteract this physical separation. WW2 Fuel Storage Tank - Relatively rare in NZ and is one of the best preserved examples left. - The integrity of the structure may be affected by construction of the road and needs to be carefully monitored – will be particular susceptible to vibration as it is an unreinforced masonry structure. Given that the Fuel Storage Tank will potentially also be accessible to the public, NZTA should consider earthquake strengthening the structure to ensure public safety. - The Conservation Plan (recommended by Mr Bowman) should be completed prior to the construction of the road to assess the structure‟s current state, providing a baseline for monitoring and any works that may be necessary to or around the immediate setting of the structure. The Conservation Plan should also inform any management plan devised for the purpose of managing negative effects of road construction on the Fuel Storage Tank. - Effects on the setting cannot be entirely mitigated. NZHPT concurs with recommendation that immediate environment of the structure be retained as existing as far as possible and suggest that appropriate planting of the 6m high embankment may help lessen the overall impact of the road on the Tank setting. - Again NZHPT questions the relevance of developing an Archaeological Management Plan for the site, when the main concerns are around built heritage. NZHPT acknowledges that the main effects of vibration will be included in the Construction Management Plan to be developed in consultation with NZHPT and iwi in the event consents are granted. Other Heritage Sites and Archaeology - NZHPT archaeologists have reviewed Ms O‟Keeffee‟s report and recommendations and concur with her findings. - NZHPT intends to continue to work with NZTA within the archaeological authority process to ensure that any archaeological discoveries made during the construction will be appropriately dealt with, avoiding the unnecessary destruction of important remnants of NZ history. - There are other identified heritage sites and places in proximity to the proposed roading project, other than what has been discussed in this submission, however none are identified as potentially affected by the roading project. 0034 The Coastal Oppose in full All Adequate consideration has never been given to the alternative route for SH1. Yes To give particular regard as to whether adequate Highway Coastal Highway Group formed in 1999 to promote the construction of a four lane highway from Wellington to consideration to the alternative coastal route as Group Kapiti. Saw the coastal route as a more affordable practical way of improvement. The proposal included a bypass required by section 171(1) of the RMA. Unless to overcome the major choke point at the one lane Paremata Bridge and through the built up area at Mana. The adequate consideration has been given the bypass would have intruded on the Ngati Toa reserve and Plimmerton beach. Local residents formed a well- applications must be withdrawn. resourced body to build on the hostile response to this proposal. Their campaign painted the coastal route in alarming colours with a picture of the inland route through TG as a simple alternative of similar cost. The applicants have to show that they have made a Some of the misleading claims of the TG advocates have become accepted as facts and have created a public recent, robust and credible investigation of the Coastal perception that TG is good and a Coastal Highway is bad and just as expensive. Accidents and delays on the Route and satisfy the Board that when all matters in coastal section added to the perception that an alternative was needed notwithstanding that since a wire rope detail are weight up TGM is the better option. barrier was installed and speed restrictions applied there have been no fatal accidents on this section. Local

Page 14 of 32 politicians added their voices to the public clamour. Many of the claims made about the cost and possible completion date for TG which can now be seen as fantasises, with support for the new route drive by emotion rather than logic. In the meantime sections of the existing road have been upgraded. There is now a four lane highway from the centre of Wellington to Pukerua Bay. There is a second Paremata bridge and four lanes through Mana (but only available for restricted periods).The section has 50kph speed limit and several traffic lights, but the bottle neck is removed. There have been a number of past comparisons of alternative routes for an improved north-west corridor. - 1986: Ministry of Works and Ministry of Transport: “an inland route through TG is unrealistic and requires no further investigation”. - 1989: WRC GATS study: recommendation of the inland route referred to the PCE. - 1990: PCE report contained some ambiguities but was generally favourably inclined towards TG. Underfunded, limited resources; considered a TG which was to be routed up Takapu Road Valley; main concern was to avoid impact on residential areas on the coastal route which is now offset by the impact on Porirua East; dwelt on environment impact on the coast and did not mention environmental effects from TG; the cut through the Battle Hill Regional Park escaped the Commissioners notice; comparative costs not given serious examination. - 2005: Western Corridor Transportation Study comparison of the costs, risks and benefits of TG and a Coastal Expressway: the findings of the committee chaired by the chairman of the Regional Council Transport Committee which had a declared position in favour of TG should be eyed with some suspicion. - 2009: Study comparing the Route Security of the Coastal Route and TG. Of the 23 technical reports submitted in support of the applications only one of them compares the effects of TG with those of developing the Coastal Route. No previous study of alternatives can be described as the adequate consideration required by section 171(1) of the RMA. They have deficiencies and are now out of date. The Act includes the term particular regard which means that the Board must require the applicants to clearly demonstrate that adequate consideration has been given to comparing the alternative. In more than a decade of close interest in the coastal route, have not seen a proper comparison of the alternatives – in regards to environmental effects, costs, resilience to natural hazards, conservation of resources, public health, welfare and security or safety. Constant repetition of unsupported claims about the virtues of TG and the difficulties and disadvantages of the Coastal Route have built a climate of support for the mountain road regardless of the facts. If adequate consideration was given to the elements of each alternative, the proposal to develop the coastal route form Pukerua Bay to Paekakariki and make some improvements at Mana would be shown to be the much better choice. It is for the applicants to demonstrate that adequate consideration has been given to the alternative rather than for submitters to try to show the opposite. Conservation of resources: - Set out estimated costs and benefits and allow for the fact the coastal route can be developed in stages and major benefits can be obtained much earlier than with TG. - Wider implications of investing a huge amount of money and resources in a project when a much less demanding alternative bringing much the same benefits is available. - Coastal route is much less mountainous with a maximum height of some 100m (versus 262m for TG). Comparison should be made between the implications on fuel efficiency and the carbon emissions of the two alternatives. Environmental effects: - TG – 112 stream crossings. Coastal route – few crossings of minor streams which are already crossed by the existing highway. - TG – add run off into the fragile waters of the Pauatahanui Inlet. Coastal Route – run off into the much more resilient ocean environment - TG – through the centre of Battle Hill Regional Park

Page 15 of 32 - Difficult section of coastal route is north of Paremata Bridge though Mana – there seems to have been no serious study of alternatives to the flyover. Public welfare: - TG – serious noise and air pollution for Cannons Creek residents; Coastal route – by-pass at Pukerua Bay that will benefit that community. Community at Paekakariki will benefit from a much safer intersection with the main highway. - Coastal route – other affected area is at Mana. The position needs analysing rather than depending on unsupported statements. Security: - TG said to provide a second exit from Wellington in the event of a major earthquake. 1997 study shown that both routes could be affected by a major shake but that the coastal cliffs are less subject to failure than the steep sided cuttings in TG and that the coast road would be much more easily and more quickly cleared. - 2009 route security study favoured TG. No doubt events in Christchurch will have expanded knowledge of earthquake science. The study needs to be revisited. - Even if TG was less earthquake prone it would be no help if a seismic even closed the roads out of Wellington in particularly Ngauranga and Ngaio Gorges. Safety: - Even if TG proceeds the coast road will be the shorter and logical route for those travelling north from the western areas of Porirua and from Paremata and Plimmerton. Heavy vehicles to and from further south will also favour the coast road so as to avoid the climb up form Linden to behind Cannons Creek and then after descending to Pauatahanui a further and longer climb up to the Wainui Saddle. The fact that the coast road has attractive coastal views will also give it appeal to those who are not in a hurry. All these factors point to the Coastal route continuing to carry a substantial volume of traffic. - The highway through Pukerua Bay is both inadequate and unsafe and will remain so even if TGM is eventually constructed. The Coastal Highway Group has the strong support of Robert G Norman, former Commissioner of Works and Past President and Distinguished Fellow of the Institution of Professional Engineers of New Zealand. Submission includes extracts from 2004 public address to Kapiti residents. The provisions for the Minister to declare a project to be one of National Significance and then refer it to a BoI provides a way of fast tracking important projects. This cuts out opportunities to frustrate and delay but also creates a danger of a return to days when political considerations were a significant factor in allocation of priorities for public works.

Page 16 of 32 0035 Pauatahanui Support in All PICT charged with overseeing the implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan which was prepared Yes Cannot be too specific about particular measures as Inlet part following concerns about degradation of the Inlet and the way it was being managed. this stage because the first step is probably to extend Community Inlet = Site if Special Wildlife Interest (DoC); Area of Significant Conservation Value (Regional Coastal Plan). the current modelling to enable the effectiveness of Trust (PICT) 2003 assessment of the likely implications for both arms of the Porirua Harbour of proceeding or not proceeding the various possibilities to be tested. Understand that with TG is attached. Report concluded that current impacts on the harbour from roads and traffic were more modelling will be required if the most effective unsustainable. The harbour‟s ecological, recreational, amenity, cultural and economic values were already at real additional mitigation measures are to be assessed. risk, and if the situation were allowed to continue the future of the harbour looked very grim. Identified TG had the potential for creating adverse effect on the harbour and would attract more traffic through the harbour catchment, A condition of approval should be to require NZTA to but would also significantly reduce traffic levels in the immediate vicinity of the harbour. Concluded that if contribute plans contained in the Harbour Strategy accompanied by strict controls both during and after construction, should provide significant benefits in terms of aimed at a) reducing sediment entering the harbour contamination, recreational use, amenity and cultural values, and economic activity. from sources other than the TG project and b) Now - PICT has real concerns relating to the potential short-term and on-going effects of sediment and restoring the tidal prism or increasing the flushing contaminants on the harbour as described in the AEE and the seeming lack of adequate proposals to mitigate ability of the harbour (examples of how provided)). these adverse effects. AEE predicts on-going sedimentation throughout the construction phase and, despite installing current „state of the It should be a condition of consent that NZTA be art‟ treatment for all stormwater run-off during the operational phase, an increase for the foreseeable future in require in mitigation to a) continuously update contaminant loads in the Pauatahanui Inlet. The proposed mitigation methods will not be sufficient to prevent short stormwater treatment methods and b) install treatment term or long term cumulative adverse effects on the Inlet ecology. measures on stormwater run-off from other roads in AEE details the effects of sediment on the harbour during construction and the longer term cumulative sediment the catchment to offset adverse effects. effects. Contaminants during construction - AEE states that “sediment has been assessed as the only contaminant with the PICT seeks that the Board approves the applications, potential to have adverse environmental effects during construction”. It is assumed that other possible risks of subject to the inclusion of conditions requiring the contamination during construction will be handled with good on-site environmental management and procedures. applicants to undertake additional mitigating measures Mitigating (or offsetting) measures should be sufficient to ensure that over time there is no overall adverse impact sufficient to ensure that any increases in sediment or on the harbour in the long term. Would like to see this as an opportunity to redress some of the adverse impacts of contaminants entering the harbour as a result of the past roading related activities. proposal are completely offset by equivalent It‟s clear that the measures to mitigate sediment and contaminant problems outlined in the AEE will only be partially reductions. effective during construction and do not address the longer term situation. 0036 Gail Lois Oppose in NZTA Same as submission 0031. Yes Same as submission 0031. Milner and part [NoR3, 4, Murray 5, 6, RC1, 3] Owen Milner 0037 Pauatahanui Support in All Have concern over some of the potential for adverse effects. Particular reference is made to the potential for Yes In the granting of consents, full consideration is given Residents part adverse effects on the Horokiri, Ration and Pauatahanui Streams, Duck Creak, the Pauatahanui Inlet, Lanes Flat, to the potential adverse effects and that, where these Association [NoR3, RC1, the interchange with SH58, the main site compound and concrete batching works to be sited at the intersection exist, avoidance and mitigation requirements are 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, with SH58. strengthened to ensure that any adverse effects are 9, 10, 13, 14, Supports the submission made by the PICT (0035). minimised or removed. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20;] 0038 Public Oppose in full All TGM will not have overall positive effects on the Wellington transport system. Yes Decline the application. Transport TGM will have significant impacts on the environment Voice There are better alternatives that would deliver net benefits in transport terms. Some positive benefits from a transport perspective and on the amenity of coastal communities - alternatives consistent with the RPS would also achieve this (e.g. modal shift & provision of modest alternative route & provide IT alternatives and improved urban design to reduce travel demand). There are better alternatives that have not been adequately evaluated. Alternatives could avoid or greatly reduce effects. The applications are contrary to the provisions of the RPS (particularly Policy 2 & 3 Chapter 4), the Regional Freshwater Plan RFWP), the NZ Coastal Policy Statement and the NPS on Freshwater and are therefore contrary to the RMA. Effects on freshwater make the proposal contrary to the non-complying activity status under the RFWP and consents therefore cannot be issued. The application does not address all potential effects and the proposed conditions do not address the effects that

Page 17 of 32 are identified. Application is inadequate, does not provide full information on all potential effects and do not cover all possible TGP-related works making it difficult to assess the overall effect of the proposal. At the time TGM was included in RLTS context was different (e.g. cost, peak oil). TGM contrary to many provisions of the RLTS. Accessibility needs for those who cannot or do not wish to use a car. Will reduce funds available to other users. Will induce traffic and cause modal shift from rail to cars (will reduce affordability of public transport, negative effect on resource use, climate change etc.). Will work against modal shift. Significant health impacts from further road provision. Significant amenity impacts. Significant impacts on local environment (freshwater, landscapes, biodiversity and the coastal environment). Effects on Pauatahanui Inlet, natural remnants and wetlands, regional parks and loss of mountain biking routes. Construction will use non-renewable resources. 0039 Z Energy Support in NZTA Supports the construction of the Main Alignment to an expressway design standard as proposed. No Supports proposed condition NZTA.1 insofar as it Limited part, neutral requires the project to be undertaken in general in part accordance with the information provided by NZTA in the Notice of Requirement, and specifically, that the Support in Main Alignment should be constructed to an part [NoR1, 2, expressway standard. 3, 4} 0040 Transmission Support in full All Groups purpose – promote the greenfields alternative route of TG for SH1. Accomplished task to show the 4-laning Yes Not stated. Gully Action Centennial Highway was neither sustainable nor sensible. Group (Inc.) RLTC report and recommendations demonstrates that there is no need to revisit the issue canvassed and determined by the RLTC hearing panel. Will be the region‟s lifeline in the event of civil defence emergency in Wellington. Benefits of roading resilience spread far beyond the region and the Government has recognised this by designating the TGM project part of a RoNS. 0041 Stanley Support in All The roading will run through the back of the submitter‟s property. No Seek consultation and request bank is built up behind Hector and part Seeks to have some earthworks built up at the back of their property to block view of the road and noise (build up a their property and trees planted by roading contractor Cheryl Diane bank and plant trees to minimise noise impact). at time of construction or before. Redit 0042 Paremata Support in All Overviews association‟s involvement in TG issues relating back to 1965. Supports TG but has a number of Yes Approve the application subject to the inclusion of : Residents part concerns/questions to be addressed. - conditions requiring additional mitigating Association Adverse impacts on the harbour. Concern about works which will have the potential to reduce the harbour‟s tidal measures in respect of sediment and Inc. prism or restrict its tidal flows. contaminants, as recommended by the PICT; The effects of tolls. Aware use of tolls is highly likely. Mention / analysis of the environmental consequences of - recommendations or conditions aimed at avoiding tolling not in AEE. A toll that discourages use of TGM will reduce the environmental benefits which will come from the use of tolls or if they are used, maintaining the diverting significant amounts of traffic from the coastal communities and from roads adjacent the harbour. ability to remove such tolls at any time; and The acknowledgement of previous commitments. It is unclear whether the funding to demolish the old Paremata - conditions requiring NZTA to undertake all the Bridge has been included in the current TG costs or which NZTA intends to seek resource consent. Concerned that steps necessary to allow demolition of the old conditions imposed under the Paremata/Plimmerton designation (condition 59) require NZTA to consult on removal Paremata Bridge and removal of the clearways at of the bridge and clearways, they do not appear to place any obligation on NZTA to actually implement such Mana by no later than 6 months after the TG route actions. is opened, and to take such other actions as are Endorse Pauatahanui Inlet Community Trust‟s recommendation entirely (0035). necessary to restore the highway between Paremata and Plimmerton to a local road. 0043 Director- Support in All Effects on significant habitats and species associated with the Porirua Harbour, especially Pauatahanui Inlet, Yes Request further information from the Applicants in General of part [RC13] including the effects on reserves and wildlife refuges in the Inlet. respect of the particular matters where deficiencies in Conservation Oppose in - Pauatahanui Inlet = nationally significant, the Applications have been identified; and either part [NoR1 - - Area of significant conservation value (regional coastal plan) site of national significant for indigenous require the Applicants to obtain a peer review of the 6, RC1 – 12, vegetation or significant habitats of indigenous fauna (PRPS), sediment generation and management assessments, 14, 16-20, - A number of protected ecological sites in and around the Inlet with are identified in the Wellington or procure an independent peer review on behalf of NoR7, 8,] Conservation Management Strategy. the Board.

Page 18 of 32 Are neutral in - High diversity and abundance of invertebrates. part [RC15, - There is inadequate assessment of the potential effects on high value species, particularly estuarine birds Do not grant the Resource Consent applications or NSP11.2.029, and their feeding habitats. confirm the Notices of Requirement in their current NSP11.2.030] - Concerned potential effects from increased sedimentation will adversely affect the ecological values of the form. Inlet. - NZCPS high threshold of protection is not reflected in the Applicants‟ approach to effects management. Not Should the Board decide to grant the resource confident these effects are likely to have only negligible or moderate effects on the ecological values of the consents and confirm the requirements for Inlet and that the effects will be adequately avoided, remedied or mitigated. designations sought by NZTA, including on the basis - Wildlife affected by the proposal are also protected under the Wildlife Act 1953. of refinements to the project and/or additional methods Effects on freshwater habitats and species being adopted for addressing the adverse effects - Supports the removal of the existing perched culverts from Duck Creek and replacement with structures that noted above, seeks that concerns be addressed will provide for fish passage. through the imposition of appropriate and effective - A number of inaccuracies and deficiencies in respect of potential effects on freshwater habitats and fauna conditions and/or modifications, including through including conflicting information about the number of culverts and the length of water course that will be lost changes to the design of the proposal. or modified - Length of culverts and fish ladders may create a barrier to fish passage – rendering habitat above these The nature of the conditions sought include (but are structures inaccessible to native species. not necessarily limited to) the following: - The application underestimates the value of ephemeral/intermittent streams. (a) Conditions to ensure that there is no net loss to - Proposed mitigation is inadequate and lacks clarity about methodology used to determine which culverts indigenous biodiversity as a result of construction should provide for fish passage and operation of the TGP; - Given the freshwater values the SEV model is not the most appropriate method to quantify aquatic (b) Conditions to ensure that there are no more than biodiversity offsets – a lower compensation ratio may have been calculated de minimis effects on the ecological values of the - Consent has not been sought for replacement of temporary culverts with fords and other stream crossings, Pauatahanui Inlet; construction of culverts and earthworks associated with relocation of a transmission line relocation; and water (c) Conditions requiring construction to be managed for concrete batching and dust control. Effects of these activities have not been assessed. to minimise sediment generation, using best Effects on terrestrial habitats and species, particularly where significant and/or threatened indigenous habitats and practice methods and mechanisms and species are present philosophies, in accordance with NZTA‟s stated - Inadequate address of the effects of the works on some species and habitats (incl. kereru, tui, bellbird and intention (Page 1 12 of the EIA); some lizard species and naturally rare ecosystems). (d) Conditions requiring “Avoidance through Detailed - May be as a result of the limitations of the survey techniques used but may affect the type of remediation / Design” as anticipated by NZTA (ETA Page 1 04) mitigation of effects necessary. including minimising effects on high value areas - More details assessment should be made of viability, nature and extent of habitat in release locations, the of mature indigenous forest within the provision of ecological corridors and mechanisms to avoid adverse effects on breeding areas and breeding designation footprint; times. (e) Conditions establishing standards to be The need for further information to rectify deficiencies and inadequacies in the Applications to enable the Board to achieved, rather than leaving “objectives” to be properly assess the potential effects of the TGP and to meet the requirements of Schedule 4 of the RMA, set under management plans at a later date; particularly in respect of construction of the project including (in particular) sediment and erosion generation and (f) Conditions limiting the construction window to that management. actually required, rather than for 35 years as - Sediment Yield estimates currently sought; . methodology used not adequately described (g) Conditions requiring the effects on herpetofauna . other more appropriate and up-to-date methods are available and should be used and invertebrates are appropriately avoided, . do not include any analysis of uncertainty; little measured data to confirm accuracy; unclear how it was remedied or mitigated; applied to the specific works / locations (h) Conditions for mitigating adverse effects of water . magnitude or probability of adverse effects may be greater than predicted if the amount of sediment takes and discharges on the life supporting generated is greater than anticipated capacity of all affected streams, including . assessments of rainfall events & sediment yield should not be limited nly to the 2 year peak construction ephemeral streams; period but should be extended to include modelling information for the 6 year construction timeframe (i) Conditions specifying the mitigation to be proposed undertaken for freshwater habitat loss. - Sediment Retention (j) Conditions requiring works in streams to avoid . Insufficient detail to show which measures can be used and where – may have an impact on the overall peak fish migration times (1 April- 31 May); level of treatment and may mean a lower level of sediment retention may be the outcome (k) Conditions requiring fish passage to be provided

Page 19 of 32 . activities associated with the TGP construction may contribute to the sediment yield but are not and maintained, and for freshwater fish to be addressed by the soil loss estimation model – magnitude/probability of adverse effects may be greater if required to be translocated as indicated in the sediment / erosion controls are less effective than predicted AEE; . Site Specific Environmental Management Plans need to provide more detail on the management of (l) Conditions requiring contingency plans to detail winter works, the location of works and proposed sediment and erosion control mechanisms able to be how wet weather periods will be addressed effectively used at each location. including shut down and limitations on . Unclear whether the modelling of heavy rainfall events during construction factor in climate change. The construction works in the winter months; . effect of larger storm events should be assessed and considered as potential adverse effects. (m) Conditions preventing the disposal of spoil, . These assessments should be peer reviewed. discharges of contaminants to water (including The lack of sufficient detail in the Applications, draft management plans and proposed conditions (including setting concrete, and impacts on water quality occurring of environment standards and triggers, monitoring measures, preferred methodologies and contingencies for failure in locations where this may have an adverse to meet standards) to be assured that the proposal will incorporate measures to adequately and effectively avoid, effect on indigenous flora, fauna, habitats and remedy or mitigate adverse effects. ecologically sensitive areas; The adequacy of proposed avoidance, remediation and mitigation (including offsetting) measures, and the difficultly (n) Conditions requiring NZTA to complete robust to assess estimates of sediment generation and retention levels, and management of effects, as they are not monitoring pre- and post- commencement of adequately quantified and in some cases use methodologies that are not the most suitable or appropriate. As such construction including whether fish passage the scale of required mitigation may be underestimated, particularly in regard to effects on the Pauatahanui Inlet provisions are effective; and the freshwater ecosystems, and the outcome of no net loss sought to be achieved under the proposal may not (o) Review conditions that enable additional be achieved. requirements to be imposed to address adverse - Efforts to follow best practise methodologies and ensure good biodiversity outcomes through the avoidance, effects that arise throughout the life the project; remediation and/or mitigation (including offsets) of adverse ecological effects are warranted. This is not and reflected in the current proposal. (p) A condition recording that NZTA obtain my - More information is needed to better quantify loss and degradation for all habitat types; to quantify or written approval in respect of any disturbance or estimate the proportion of populations and individuals affects; to better provide for recovery of source killing of any protected wildlife as those terms are populations and critical ecosystem processes and functions provided by keystone and other species; to defined under the Wildlife Act 1953. support intended use of stormwater treatment wetlands to offset the loss of wetland areas and their associated biodiversity values; and to assess and incorporate other mechanisms, including pest Conditions on the proposed designations and/or management, to offset adverse effects. modifications to the Proposal similar to those set out The failure of the Applicants to apply for all consents necessary for the construction of TGP, which will affect the above, as appropriate to address my concerns. Board‟s ability to consider all the effects of the proposal and the consistency (or otherwise) other entire proposal with statutory instruments and policy. The failure of the proposal, in its current form, to meet either of the thresholds in s104D and the requirements of Part 2 of the RMA. - Some relevant provisions of various planning documents which are required to be considered have been omitted. Including Policy 5A of the PRPS. - Contrary to some provisions of the RFWP (in particular Policy 4.2.13). At the time of submission private plan change by NZTA is not operative and appeal period has not expired – regardless change does not affect Policy 4.2.13 or other relevant policies). - Inconsistent with NPS – Coastal Policy Statement And Freshwater Management. - Fails to recognise and assess the consistent with the draft “Porirua Harbour and Catchment Strategy and Action Plan”. 0044 Battlehill Neutral in All BHEI and the Wellington, Hutt Valley and Pauatahanui Pony Clubs have licence to use part of Battlehill Farm Park No If the Board decides to grant consent, seek the Eventing part for equestrian activities for a number of days. following conditions be imposed: Incorporated The season for equestrian activities at Battlehill Farm Park generally runs from late October until May each year. - Require NZTA to consult with BHEI prior to June (BHEI) Farm Park trails are widely used by all riders. on the year of commencement of construction and Pony Club level cross country courses are relatively few in the lower North Island, so continued operation of the each following year for the duration of the Battlehill course is pivotal, not only for up and coming Pony Club riders but also the wider riding community of construction period, to agree those dates where those riders choosing to specialise in Eventing. potential construction traffic and construction Concern over potential conflicts and consequent safety risks posed to riders and horses, horse trucks/floats with activities will be halted if necessary so as to avoid construction traffic using Paekakariki Hill Road on Event Days and Training Days and any potential delays or or reduce conflicts with BHEI events including use access restrictions resulting from construction including works to make Paekakariki Hill Road suitable for of Paekakariki Hill Road and the Farm Park on

Page 20 of 32 construction traffic. event days and training days. Potential risk to the safety of riskers and horses arising from construction noise and vibration (particularly blasting) - That signs be placed at “The Dell” at Battlehill if it is possible that this could be heard and felt from the Deer Paddock and Airstrip area. Farm Park – notifying riders when and what trails Potential restrictions of access to Battlehill Farm Park for BHEI events and loss of use of trails for equestrian riders will be closed and what parts of the Farm Park using Battlehill Farm Park. remain open for riding. Potential loss of revenue if the running of events is in any way restricted or affected by the construction on - That if existing trails within the Farm Park are Transmission Gully. affected and lost for future use as a result of the construction and operation of Transmission Gully – that NZTA develop and maintain other trails suitable for horse riding and these be made open to all riders, in agreement and consultation with Greater Wellington Regional Council and BHEI; and that - NZTA make reasonable compensation for any loss of revenue if Events and Training Days are affected by the construction of Transmission Gully or activities associated with that construction, or restrictions to access to the Farm Park – including restrictions resulting from construction traffic using Paekakariki Hill Road. 0045 Road Support in full All Not stated No Not Stated. Transport Association New Zealand 0046 Pukerua Bay Neutral on all All Results or is likely to result in or contribute to significant or irreversible changes to the environment (including the Yes The package of measures detailed in the Pukerua Bay Residents aspects global environment) Neighbourhood Accessibility Plan 2008 be Association Will assist the Crown in fulfilling its public health, welfare, security, or safety obligations or functions implemented as part of the TG project before the road (Iain Public Safety is handed over the local authority, and that similar MacLean) - Pukerua Bay community is split in 2 by SH1 – this creates dangers for residents and those driving through. exercise be carried out in the other communities Focus of association on mitigating the immediate effects of the heavy traffic flows on Pukerua Bay currently bisected by SH1. - Need to cross SH1 for schools, shops, railway station, tennis club etc. - Heavy traffic flows make crossing the highway difficult and unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists and makes it Local communities to be consulted on any measures dangerous for vehicles to ensure /leave the stream of traffic. People are more likely to rely on cars instead of implemented in the coastal route package. walking or cycling. - Currently approx. 23,400 vehicles (1780 heavy) per day (avg. month). With TG, approx. 17,000 vehicles per Any actions taken to mitigate the effects of runoff into day - still enough to cause major disruption and danger to residents. the Porirua Harbour catchment during the construction - Association prepared Neighbourhood Accessibility Plan (NAP) in 2008 (attached to submission) – in and operation of the road through Transmission Gully conjunction with PCC and funding from Transit NZ. NAP proposed a package of solutions to the severance must be consistent with the Porirua Harbour and and safety issues in Pukerua Bay – changes of government priority means they have not been funded and Catchment Strategy and Action Plan. the issues remain. - NAP measures benefit residents as well as people driving through the Bay by reducing the number of pedestrians or vehicles trying to cross the highway. - NAP Safety improvements are supported by two of the goals in the NZTA‟s National State Highway Strategy 2007; consistent with some of the impacts in the Governments Policy Statement on Land Transport Funding (2012/13 – 2021/22); consistent with the priority area of „Safe walking and cycling‟ in the Safer Journey‟s: New Zealand‟s Road Safety Strategy 2010-2020. - Any mitigation actions should begin before the TG road is completed in order to ameliorate the dangers from the forecast increase in traffic along SH1 in the next 10 years. Environmental Changes - Construction will increase the amount of sedimentation and runoff into the streams leading into the catchment of the Porirua Harbour. Road operation may result in increased pollution runoff from vehicle emissions.

Page 21 of 32 0047 Suresh and Oppose in NZTA Visual amenity effects in relation to their property (3 residences & a 4th is approved at 55 Collins Ave – immediately Yes A condition be imposed: Nilu part adjacent Little Collins Ave). - that requires the Requiring Authority to undertake Senadeera [NoR4] Residential amenity effects, especially noise from the new merge lanes. consultation at the detailed design stage with the Current level of detail does not give sufficient comfort that the proposal will not have unreasonable effects on their residents of Little Collins Ave with regard to the property. final alignment and location of the merge lanes. From discussions with NZTA understand it may be possible to move the merge lanes 20m further north, submitter - that requires the Requiring Authority locate the suggests that if it were moved an additional 20m further north, then highway widening adjacent their property would merge lanes as far to the north as possible to not be necessary and sufficient space would be available for amenity planting and planting of/along the acoustic reduce the adverse effects on the properties of fencing. Little Collins Ave and will allow for sufficient space To ensure adverse noise effects are mitigated to a point where they are less than minor then minor acoustic to be provided for boundary and amenity planting. insulation should be provided to the residential dwellings at 55 Collins Ave. - requiring amenity and boundary planting to be Considers that the effects on residences have been down played on the basis that they are an incremental change undertaken adjacent to the properties of Little rather than new effects. Not from the view of those living on the site and the effects should not be dismissed of Collins Ave. small „incremental‟ changes. The effects will be permanent. - requiring amenity planting on/along all noise The Isthmus report identifies that visual amenity effects of the proposal will be very high and that comprehensive attenuation fences where these are in visually planting and amenity planting of noise walls will be undertaken, the same report outlines that this is little to no sensitive areas and where those fences are opportunity for effective mitigation in respect of the properties at Little Collins Ave. located immediately adjacent to residential Considered the impact on their property unreasonably high. properties. The proposed noise fence in addition to the Collins Ave over bridge will further degrade the visual amenity. - requiring the Requiring Authority to provide A fence higher than 2m may cause undue shading. information and consult with adjoining residential Amenity planting on / along such fences is a must to discourage graffiti. properties at the detailed design stage with regard One of the site compounds located just to their north of the submitters property. According to the Construction to the proposed acoustic fencing and planting Management Plan construction traffic will be passing daily for three years. Support the use of mini vans for the of/along such fences. transport of workers. - that requires transportation of workers to and from Although the construction effects will be annoying and irritating these effects can be tolerated if the long term the site via mass transport options to reduce the effects of the proposal are reduced and in this regard the submitter is seeking the merge lanes be moved towards potential effects generated by traffic from the north reducing the adverse effects on their properties and other properties on Little Collins Ave. construction workers for the duration of Outline plan process. As detailed design is yet to be completed and is to be done via the outline plan process construction which has no public participation process associated with it, that unless concerns are addressed now, once the - that stipulated the time frame in which designation is in place there will be no ability to have further input into the process with regard to the SH and the construction noise barriers are constructed, how potential effects on their property. they will be maintained and how long they will be in place - that stipulates that the Requiring Authority or their delegate give at least one weeks‟ notice to all residents who will be in the vicinity of night works - that as part of the outline plan process the Requiring Authority be required to consult with immediately adjoining residential properties with regard to detailed design and the provision of boundary and amenity planting.

Acoustic insulation be provided for the dwellings on 55 Collins Ave. 0048 Information Oppose in full All Overwhelmingly destructive effect of the TGM project on the Kapiti Coast environment. Yes Oppose on the grounds detailed in the submission. Management There are inadequate transport benefits to justify the costs to be incurred, plus there are demonstrable “more than Services (Mt minor” environment effects on the area that cannot be mitigated. Victoria) Applicant has failed to show how it will be funded. Toll would make a double disincentive for trucks to use the TGM because of the steepness of the gradient in part s of the motorway (crawl lanes for truck traffic don‟t save fuel burnt ascending hills). SH1 coastal road is flatter and cheaper. Will impact regionally significant streams and their outflow points.

Page 22 of 32 Significant long term adverse effects on the Wellington transport network, the natural environment and also the ability to implement Part 2 of the RMA and achieve energy and climate change objectives of the RPS. To accept the change would further erode the validity and relevance of the RPS and RFWP. Contravenes the intent of the RPS policy 2 & 3. Is not a regionally important infrastructure project and will not contribute to sustainable management. Will not increase accessibility. Will create adverse effects on human health, water, air, noise and ecosystems, will encourage long distance commuting and have significant energy demands, increase the overall roading footprint and associated contaminated surface run-off. 0049 Rational Oppose in full All Not consistent with the RMA. Yes Decline the applications. Transport Significant negative environmental effects which are not outweighed by positive social and economic benefits. Society TGP does not meet RPS policy 2 & 3. - Does not provide for the accessibility needs of those who cannot or do not wish to use car for their transport needs and will reduce funds available to provide for the other users. – Will encourage the use of private cars which are difficult to convert to renewable energy fuels. The positive benefits could be equally or better provided by alternative projects that are more consistent with the RPS provisions. Submission provides a number of examples of alternatives. Modal shift to public transport and active modes, together with reducing travel demand is the only way to significantly reduce vehicle kilometres. Is likely to encourage dispersed development. Significant health impacts. Significant amenity impacts. Significant impacts on water, soil, landscapes and ecosystems incl. internationally significant wetlands of Pauatahanui Inlet. Will not encourage more energy and resource efficient transport modes. Will use new non-renewable resources during its construction including land and construction materials. Will have significant actual / potential adverse effects on natural values which are identified in a number of plans. Some affected streams identified as regionally significant and the habitats of rare species; Pauatahanui Inlet (nationally important estuary that is the subject of a regional restoration plan); land environment identified as a national priority for protection; regional parks; landscape values and natural character. NZTA sought a freshwater plan change because they were concerned that the project would be contrary to the provisions of the plan. No plan change has come into effect so the project is still contrary to those provisions. The application does not contain full information, does not evaluation all potential impacts, does not cover all work that would be required (making it impossible to determine full impacts) and does not propose conditions that would reliably address all the impacts identified. 0050 Mana Cycle Oppose in full All Current SH1 poses a barrier to safe and comfortable cycle transport between Wellington and Kapiti. Yes Decline the application. Group The creation of a new SH route on its own will not solve the problem. The traffic figures provided in the AEE will still be so high that separate cyclist provision should be provided. This is not provided. The proposal will therefore result in an on-going barrier to cycle movements. Will destroy existing mountain biking opportunities and facilities. The proposed remedies are not adequate. It is not well designed because it retains a barrier to a major and beneficial transport mode and therefore is not the best alternative for resolving the identified transport issues. Because it is not a well-designed transport project and will have significant adverse effects on the environment it cannot be consistent with Part II of the Act or the RPS policies or other relevant policy and plan requirements. 0051 Jainfei Li Oppose in NZTA Same as submission 0031. Yes Same as submission 0031. part (NoR3, 4, 5, 6, RC1, 3, 0052 Judith Esther Oppose in NZTA Same as submission 0031. Yes Same as submission 0031. Gray part [NoR3, 4, 5, 6, RC1, 3]

Page 23 of 32 0053 Brent Dowie Oppose in NZTA Submitter has uninterrupted views and enjoys rural peace and quiet. Property located between SH58 interchange Yes The road be lowered (reduce the level in the area and Terri part [NoR3] and Pauatahanui Golf Course. directly in front of the submitters property) and be Maguire TG will change current situation both during construction and once in use. lower than a cut on the east side so the visual effect The area of highway directly in front of property and heading north is directly in view and submitter wishes to work on their property is mitigated, this would also work with the board to reduce the visual, environmental and sound effects as much as possible. somewhat as a sound bugger.

Request that a road surface is used that reduces the sound of vehicles travelling in the area in front and north of their properties. 0054 Gavin Tombs Oppose in NZTA Submitter has uninterrupted views and enjoys rural peace and quiet. Property located between SH58 interchange Yes The road be lowered (reduce the level in the area part [NoR3] and Pauatahanui Golf Course. directly in front of the submitters property) and be TG will change current situation both during construction and once in use. lower than a cut on the east side so the visual effect The area of highway directly in front of property and heading north is directly in view and submitter wishes to work on their property is mitigated, this would also work with the Board to reduce the visual, environmental and sound effects as much as possible. somewhat as a sound bugger.

Request that a road surface is used that reduces the sound of vehicles travelling in the area in front and north of their properties. 0055 Peter Oppose in full All Major adverse impact on the environment. Yes The project be rejected in its entirety. Skrzynski Construction of a major highway on a fault line. The applicants should spend more time considering Excessive scale of the project. other alternatives to the construction of a major Dubious Cost Benefit Ratio. highway through a challenging geographical area. Excessive cost of the project in a challenging economic environment. 0056 Dudley Support in All Property will be adjacent to TG. No Two conditions be imposed: James Harris part [Support Wholly supports the submission subject to two conditions being imposed. - That an earth sound barrier be constructed NoR1, 2, 4, 5, between my property and TG to reduce the 6, 7, 8, RC2, harmful effects that would be caused otherwise. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, Considering the amount of earth required to be 8, 10, 11, 12, removed that could instead be used as a sound 13, 14, 15, barrier this condition should not negatively impact 16, 17, 18, the applicants. 19, 20, - Currently I have a leave of Transmission land for NSP11/2.029, track use, so that I can access a large paddock on NSP11.2.030; the other side of a gully. TG will remove this track Support in and render my top paddock inaccessible. As part part NoR3, of condition 1 a track could be constructed as part RC9] of an earth sound barrier to ensure that I can still easily access part of my land. 0057 Poppe Oppose in All Trust owns 504 Paekakariki Road, Pauatahanui. Personal statement by Mr Poppe in regards to vista from home, Yes That the EPA direct Opus to move the highway centre Family Trust part [NoR3, and the value of the home to the family. line and the designation 100m east from the current RC11.2.030] In agreement with the requests made in the submissions of E Deuss and D Christensen (0019, 0020). proposed route across the submitters property. Neutral in Change in Route part - In 2001 when the property was purchased the proposed TG highway was approximately 200m east of the property and not affected by the designation zone. - In 2008/09 received a request for access to the property for further testing and drilling investigations. Access included the use of a ROW across the northern section of the property to access a forestry block which boarders the eastern perimeter of their property. - At this time were not provided with any opportunity for engagement into the planning process. Consultation - First submitter knew about the encroachment of the highway onto their property was on receipt of a letter dated 5/10/10 from NZTA.

Page 24 of 32 - Attended open day on 16/10/10. There was no consultation on the revised highway location. NZTA officials just spoke in a directive manner about how they would acquire submitters land. Their closing remark was that they should come and see them when they were prepared to sell. Found the experience totally offensive. - No opportunity to put forward their views has eventuated, until now. - Early 2011 a landscape architect sought access to their property for highway planning purposes and provided an outline of what was going to happen. This was the first time anyone had entered their property and engaged directly with them. He had assumed such onsite engagement would have occurred well prior to his visit and appeared surprised to find this was not the case. - Since early 2011 have had offsite and onsite meetings involving Transpower, Opus and NZTA officials to discuss concerns. It rapidly became apparent that these agencies had no intention of doing anything to placate concerns and the meetings were simply a charade as part of the process to deal with affected landowners. This was confirmed by Mr Peter Ward of Opus, when we asked him what he proposed to do for us and his answer was “Nothing - you will have to put in a submission to the EPA”. - Consultation process has been appalling and the management of the requirements and dealings with affected landowners has been abysmal. - Applicants to the designation have all acted with an air of arrogance and compulsion which has been distressing. - The designation did not include any consultation or consideration of impacts to their property. - Consider the process so far to be an unjustifiably draconian use of the Public Works Act 1981 to acquire part of their property. Impact on property - Current highway alignment and designation profoundly diminishes the utility and value of their property - Impact of the new highway on market value (around $2.5-3.0million). Would likely have considered not renovating in 2010 and instead offered NZTA the opportunity to buy the home had they known how seriously impacted the property would be. - New highway alignment wipes out the entire rear portion of the property – main paddock. Submitters are dependent on current stock carrying capacity for the beef cattle rearing operation to be economically viable. - Under section 119 of the Public Works Act: the taking of the land proposed under the current designation application would have a significant detrimental effect on the property. - Have witnessed a significant increase in the native wood pigeon populations on the property as well as parakeets, lorikeets and tuis that obviously thrive on the peacefulness and quiet surroundings that exist in this region coupled with an abundance of the right type of food for them. Fears that if the road is too close and the noise and dust and air problems as well as the impact on their water sources will be so severe that they will be lost from the immediate environment. - In the much longer-term future has been a plan to subdivide the property. This would be possible if the PCC were to change its minimum subdivision rules, and understand that the Council is now considering such a change. However the sites with the best elevation that they considered most suitable for building on would now be too close to the proposed route to be feasible to consider, face a huge opportunity loss if the designation is approved in its current form. - Route chosen destroys their quality of life and investment interest in the property. - Current designation results in their property being unfairly impacted by the highway design. Suggested realignment - The angle of the bridge across the Toomey property needs to be „tweaked‟ slightly in an anticlockwise direction to enable the highway to pass some 100m further east of the property. This would not involve any significant change in the road gradient from the currently proposed. - There is a proposed large cut into a hillside to the north of the bridge on Battle Hill Station to accommodate an eastward kink in the road to line up the approach to the bridge. Recommendation is to remove this curve and follow the same proposed contour and curvature of the road as it passes through Battle Hill and crosses Bridge 7. The road would be curved more gently around in the south-easterly direction and enable a straight run onto the bridge in the axis proposed in this submission. - Request to move the road centre-line could largely be accommodated within the proposed designation as it

Page 25 of 32 crosses Battle Hill and the Toomey property. - If the road is changed based on their recommendations neither towers 31 or 33 would need to be moved. - Alternative proposal is to take the road through the Toomey house which is planned to be removed or demolished anyway. - No different impact on the Lucic property from the route recommended or to the Szeto forest property. - Puts the westerly designation limit right on their back boundary fence so not to lose the most productive land on the property; substantial reduction in road noise and reduced visual impact of the road. - Where the road would exit the Szeto property and enter the Deus property is much flatter area and would require less excavation as it crosses at a slightly high elevation across the gully. - Believe that the request for a „tweak‟ to the existing proposed route rather wholesale changes is fair and reasonable. - Accepts the current route is based on the bridge crossing the Horokiri Stream but see no reason why the bridge orientation cannot be altered slightly to ensure a more easterly exit off the bridge. - Accept they will not going to be living in a quiet tranquil rural setting anymore but the impacts of noise, visual impact, air pollution, damage to the waterways and the wildlife in the region are major and real and believe these effects can be reduced substantially if their proposal is accepted. - As a goodwill gesture, if the designation and road was moved as requested would be happy to work with NZTA if they required temporary land to hold silt runoff. 0058 Living Oppose in full All Was formed to promote walking friendly communities. Given that, would welcome the improvements to the coastal Yes Decline all applications. Streets communities that the application claims would occur however 1) the benefits are unlikely to be delivered in practise Wellington unless there are specific steps taken within the project to ensure they are achieved and 2) even if there were such conditions, the cost of achieving those gains is far too high, in terms of the overall net negative effect on the transport system, the high economic cost, and the impacts on the environment. Consider expected benefits could be provided by alternative projects without the negative effects. Simply reducing traffic is not enough to make an environment walking friendly. For a road to be pedestrian friendly and not act as a barrier to pedestrian movements: Traffic volumes must be low enough to allow safe crossing without long waiting, or there must be frequent crossing points where pedestrians have priority over traffic (e.g. zebra crossings) - Even the lowest vehicle volumes predicted by NZTA for the coastal route will still be too high to achieve excellent levels. - Where special crossings are needed, the road will still present a severance issue for the community. Have to walk to such a crossing will frequently add to the distance that needs to be travelled to get to destinations and creates a perception of separation. Traffic speeds must be slow enough to reduce the risk of collision and reduce the risk of injury posed by collisions. - The proposed consent conditions do not require that there will be any reduction in speed limits on the coastal highway. Traffic must be slow enough and reduced enough to seem part of the community rather than an alien presence. Roads must be designed with pedestrians as the priority users, rather than cars. The road must not create a significant visual, physical or aural barrier through the community. The changes that the project is designed to cause on the coastal route will not in themselves remove the community severance problems created by the current SH1 and at the southern end will be too low to deliver any noticeable benefits at all. To provide meaningful benefits, the project would have to include major changes to the coastal route and these would need to be required as conditions of the project. Changes that would have to be made to the coastal highway to allow the TG to generate benefits for communities along the current SH are: - reduce motor vehicle capacity and road width; - convert excess road capacity to active modes and amenity uses; - ban heavy vehicles; - set appropriate speed limits; - change intersections and road arrangements to facilitate local traffic movement ; - change the corridor environment to reduce the “highway” feel; and

Page 26 of 32 - Road design, speed limits, signage, parking facilities, lookouts etc. should encourage exploration of local features by people using the corridor for transport purposes. Even with the above changes included as conditions on the consent, TGM would still not be acceptable as a transport project because it increases overall road capacity, inducing traffic; it is too expensive, depriving other transport projects of needed funds; the benefits could be provided by a far smaller road built to a lower standard; a smaller road that wasn‟t designed as an expressway could be designed to avoid many of the serious impacts on the environment. Given that there are better alternatives available, the designations for TG should not be granted. Given the size of the impacts of the TG and the lack of benefits, the consents should also not be granted. 0059 Karen Support in All Rest areas are built at the summit of the Wainui Saddle with signage that provides aid to motorists and that No Not stated. Phillips part. passengers could have a break before continuing their journey. Passenger busses be allowed to use TG run non- stop from Paraparaumu to Wellington and return as back up for train service. Chemically treated to control sediment of the Kenepuru Stream. 0060 Whitby Support in NZTA For the last 15 years the submitters company has owned land the land where the Whitby Link Road would be built. Yes That the designations and permits/consents for the TG Coastal part [NoR3, 7, PCC Also owns the former Duck Creek Golf Course land in the lower reaches of the Duck Creek catchment. project and associated Porirua Link Roads are Estates 8, RC1, 2, 3, Have for many years monitored the creek at the south boundary of the property. Aware of the significant amount of approved subject to the following: Limited 10, 13, 17, silt and nutrients carried down Duck Creek through their land. Believe the source is primarily from the Greater 1. The Bridges 17, 18 & 19 are replaced with (WCEL) 18, 19, 20] Wellington farm and Belmont Park. culverts and earth embankments for the main TG Sees this as a perfect opportunity to solve a number of problems at once. alignment that also control flood flows for events Suggest that in addition to putting culverts across Duck Creek and its tributaries, that a series of small „choker greater than the 20% AEP event (5 year event) in dams‟ be built on each tributary of Duck Creek upstream of TG to restrict flood events to around 50% of the peak the Duck Creek catchment; flow. If the silt and nutrients can be retained on the farm‟s paddocks for a period, this could perform a significant 2. The culverts on the Waitangirua Link Road and environmental benefit for the Pauatahanui Inlet and hold back the flood water „peaks‟ that would otherwise freely the main TG alignment of the Duck Creek flow through submitters land. catchment should be sized to control flood flows The alignment of the proposed Whitby Link Road and the associated earthworks differ in some places to that which for events greater than the 10% AEP event (10 submitter envisage for the roading network necessary to further develop the land. The submitter‟s interest is to year event) with any necessary provision for seek some amendments to the alignment and earthworks for the Whitby Link Road so as not to hinder submitters upstream flood water storage future residential development in the area. 3. The solution for control of flood flows in the Duck The proposal to construct three bridges over Duck Creek and its tributaries introduces unnecessary costs Creek catchment should also include the use of compared with a more traditional approach of using culverts and an earth embankment to cross these streams. small choker dams on the tributary streams to Also reduces surplus fill material that would otherwise have to be deposited at another site, provides a mechanism control flood flows for events greater than the for control of flood flows, the impounding of flood water allows sediment and nutrients to settle out of the water 50% AEP event (2 year event) column rather than being transported downstream and into Pauatahanui Inlet. 4. That the sizing of sediment ponds for the Duck Technical Report 14 includes mid-range climate change parameters. For submitters Duck Creek South application, Creek catchment is based on a 20% AEP (5 year GWRC and PCC required the development be designed to accommodate peak flows for the 1% AEP with high event) with mandatory chemical flocculation range climate change parameters. 5. Additional monitoring points are established for Supports the proposed use of the Waitangirua Link Road box culvert to control flood flows, however Technical Duck Creek Report 14 does not provide the necessary assurance that sufficient control and storage of flood flows can 6. The alignment and associated earthworks for the practically be achieved for the peak flows. Whitby Link Road is amended as per attached Culverts – may necessitate some adjustment of the size of culverts and the designation boundaries to plan W07172-P105.R1; accommodate flood water storage. 7. That full access is available to / from the Whitby Series of small choker dams – an efficient and environmentally sustainable method to control flood flows. The Link Road to facilitate future residential removal of nutrients in the water (that originate from the farm) would have particularly positive effects for the development of the land adjacent to the road Pauatahanui Inlet. 8. That the design of the earthworks for the Whitby The replacement of Bridges 17, 18 & 19 would create additional adverse ecological effects through loss of stream Link Road facilities access to the adjacent land environment. This loss can be mitigated by the undertaking of additional planting on the streams. for future residential development Wish to ensure the construction of TG and Porirua Link Roads does not undermine or jeopardise the works and 9. That temporary construction access is from measures proposed to improve the water quality and freshwater ecology of Duck Creek as part of the submitter‟s Navigation Drive and not form Spyglass Lane development of the land beside Duck Creek. 10. That some of the surplus material excavation for Submitters experience at Duck Creek with Whitby soils is that it is prudent to design ESCP measures for a 20% the main TG alignment could be placed at AEP (5 year event) which requires sediment ponds to be sized at 370m2 per hectare of catchment on slopes less appropriate locations on the land adjacent to the

Page 27 of 32 than 10 and that chemical flocculation is necessary. Whitby Link Road to facilitate future residential The Water Quality Performance Monitoring Plan proposed monitoring of catchments as a whole with some development of the land adjacent to the road additional monitoring at direct impact sites. Submitter considers that a further direct impact site should be and/or placed at other sites within Whitby. established downstream of the Waitangirua Link Road. Whitby Link Road is almost entirely on submitters land and bisects submitter‟s site. The proposed alignment differs from the submitters preferred route in some key places. Proposed alignment is mainly designed to avoid/minimise impacts on the PCC ecological site. However this does not minimise earthworks and does not give consideration to future residential development on surrounding land. Supports a design speed of 50kmh for the link road. Side access to / from the Whitby Link Road should not be restricted unless there are specific traffic safety issues arising from the road network design. Wish to ensure that future access to the road is available for anticipated subdivision of the adjacent land (indicative subdivision scheme plan attached to submission). The intended construction access to the Whitby Link Road and James Cook Interchange from Spyglass Lane would not be practical as the submitter is currently extending and developing sections around the end of Spyglass Lane. Access between Spyglass Lane and the East Whitby Reservoir would not be possible in the near future as this area is to be developed for a road extension between Navigation Drive and Resolution Drive. Preferred construction access should be from Navigation Drive. Consider that it would be appropriate and beneficial for some of the better quality surplus cut material to be deposited beside the Whitby Link Road (as indicated on attached plan) or in other appropriate locations at Whitby. This would likely reduce the need for clean fill sites beside the main TG route and instead place some of the surplus material where it would be used to facilitate future development on submitters land. 0061 Powerco Specifically NZTA There are four locations where the proposed TG road alignment will impact Powerco‟s gas pipeline Yes Proposed designation conditions NZTA.17 and Limited relates to the PCC Supports the general intent of conditions NZTA.17-NZTA.20 and PCC.16-PCC.19 PCC.16 be retained without further modification. Network Requests an expansion to the scope of the NUMP to address the following: Utilities NUMP should include a clearer statement around the sharing of costs associated with any required protection, re- The following amendments to proposed designation Management alignment and /or re-instatement of the gas distribution pipelines. (Powerco has existing use rights – Gas Act conditions NZTA.18 and PCC.17 Plan (NUMP) 1992). A copy of the NUMP shall be submitted for the proposed as If the process of realigning and / or re-instating pipelines is not managed appropriately there is some risk of approval of provided to the Manager at least 10 a condition of interrupted has supply to customers. As such the NUMP should address appropriate contingency measures working days prior to the commencement of any the including a requirement for any new or relocated pipes to be operational prior to the termination of existing gas enabling or construction works on any part of the designations. lines. Project located within the District. Table 28.3 of AEE identifies the potential for the TG project to change maintenance regimes for network utility operators. No condition is proposed but separate agreements will be reached to maintain appropriate access for The addition of the following to the proposed maintenance. The appropriate and necessary time to ensure adequate access is provided for the on-going designation conditions NZTA.19 and PCC.18 maintenance of network utilities is at the outset of the project. Powerco seeks that the scope of the NUMP be d. The methods the Requiring Authority will use to expended to ensure that the need to provide and deliver on-going access to network utilities for maintenance reimburse infrastructure providers for costs of any purposes is addressed in the NUMP. works required to protect, relocate and/or reinstate Supports the requirement to consult with the relevant infrastructure provides in preparing the NUMP, however there existing network utilities. is no means for resolution of disputes should NZTA and an infrastructure provide be unable to agree on a particular matter. Powerco requests the inclusion of a requirement for Council approval of the NUMP prior to commencement The addition of the following wording to the proposed of works. designation conditions NZTA.20 and PCC.19 b. Measures for the protection, relocation and/or reinstatement of existing network utilities, including contingency measures to ensure a continuous supply of infrastructure services. Such measures shall include, but need not be limited to, a requirement for any new or relocated gas pipes to be made operational prior to the termination of existing gas lines; h. Measures to enable access to existing network utilities for maintenance purposes on an ongoing basis

Page 28 of 32 following completion of the Project.

0062 David Oppose in NZTA Same as submission 0031. Yes Same as submission 0031. Barnes part [NoR3, 4, 5, 6, RC1, 3] 0063 Sallie B Hill Oppose in NZTA Same as submission 0031. Yes Same as submission 0031. part [NoR3, 4, 5, 6, RC1, 3] 0064 Kylie Gamble Support in Not stated Supports in part the concept of the draft AEE No Not stated. part Would like to see modifications of existing SH1 – TG technical report 4 does not address this adequately or in any detail. Does not support proposed Traffic Lights at Pukerua Bay once TG is built. Would require seven sets and a widened road would have to go through the heart of the community and all the vehicles starting and stopping would be a nightmare. A significant amount of vehicles will continue to use the coastal road. This has not been acknowledged or documented on Traffic Volumes between Plimmerton to Paekakariki 2031 in the report when it should be. TG and the Revised Draft Porirua Transport Plan have removed the Pukerua Bay Bypass. It needs to remain included and should be built in tandem with TG. Disagree that the Bypass is no longer required because of TG – TG is many years from completion, longer and heavier Trucks will be going through the village very soon. After TG still 17,000 vehicles travelling through Pukerua Bay – this would justify a bypass now and in the future. TG a RoNS – Pukerua Bay Bypass should no longer be perceived as a threat to TG as it would be built to improve the safety of the road for the users and the people living in Pukerua Bay and the CBR would easily justify the project. A 2002 petition (attached) supported the Pukerua Bay Bypass. Road has got even busier since. Three fatalities and numerous injuries in less than three years show just how challenging the road is. Disagree with the downgrading of the existing SH1. Elderly uncle knocked down – not reported in media. Pukerua Bay is also in urgent need now for Median strips. Pedestrian refuges are also required to separate traffic which will also slow traffic and ease pedestrian movement. Additional road markings like rumble strips between lanes would be helpful to reduce head on crashes and would be a step in the right direction for Pukerua Bay. Neither NZTA or PCC have described how they will discourage Trucks from the Coastal Route when TGM is built. Trucks will continue using the Coastal Route as it will be the most energy efficient route. No acknowledgement of submission on Porirua Transport Strategy Draft Consultation and Porirua Transport Plan not yet produced. Difficult to make an informed submission when not armed with the information of what will happen to the existing SH1 through the heart of the community. NZTA have KCDC have consulted with their community with (current SH1 modifications between MacKay‟s Crossing and Peka Peka) providing a concept of the existing road – it is time NZTA and PCC did the same. A fact sheet on the Pukerua Bay bypass is attached to the submission. Submission on the Porirua Transport Plan is attached to the submission. 0065 Transpower Neutral on all NZTA Protection of Transpower‟s existing and future transmission assets. Yes If the BoI is of the mind to grant the resource consents New Zealand aspects PCC Transpower has agreed to undertake relocation existing transmission line to enable the SH project to proceed. and approval of the NoRs, Transpower seeks that Limited [NoR1, 2, 3, Most of the appropriate conditions have been offered as part of NZTA‟s application – submits there are some minor these are subject to the recommended conditions and 4, 7, 8 refinements that should be made to those conditions. advice notes. The transmission line runs most of the length of the proposed main motorway alignment – MacKays Crossing to the Takapu Road substation. Has a number of other assets in the area (listed). NZTA and Transpower have agreed to a set of The National Grid is an essential part of the servicing infrastructure of the Wellington Region and the nation as a potential conditions (attached as Appendix B to the whole. AEE and Appendix B to the submission). RMA and NPS highlight significance of the transmission resource. Management of the effects of third party activities on the national grid is necessary to ensure that – Conditions NZTA.201A to NZTA20G should also apply - integrity of electricity supply is maintained by appropriately managing and locating activities able to affect or to the two NoR‟s for the designation of land in the

Page 29 of 32 damage transmission lines; Porirua City District Plan for the construction, - people and property are reasonably protection from „live‟ transmission lines in the event of an emergency, operation and maintenance of the Whitby Link Road resulting in a line failure; (NoR7) and the Waitangirua Link Road (NoR8). - existing lines can continue to be operated, including routine inspections and maintenance, repair and emergency works; Following minor amendment to Condition NZTA.20.G - the option of upgrading existing, rather than building new, lines to meet increased electricity demand, is not NZTA shall ensure that the discharge of contaminants precluded by development under or immediately adjacent to existing lines; and to air form the site during the construction of the - an appropriate level of amenity is retained for those living in close proximity to lines. Transmission Gully Project does not create any dust Inappropriate management would be inconsistent with the NPSET2008 and be unlikely to meet the purpose of the hazard or nuisance to the transmission lines assets RMA managed by Trustpower New Zealand Limited… The following matters are relevant: - maintaining transmission line corridors free of development where possible; - managing earthworks so increase in ground levels (filling) beneath transmission lines do not result in unsafe clearances between the ground and the transmission lines, and any decrease in ground levels (excavations) do not impact on the structural integrity of the support structures; - maintenance of adequate safe distances between transmission lines and mobile plant and avoiding adverse effects on human health and safety; - maintenance of access to existing assets; - managing dust emissions so particulate matter does not build up on the transmission lines and insulators, and result in an increased risk of circuit trippings or flashovers; - ensuring any vegetation used for landscaping is appropriate in terms of its location and height relative to the transmission line and towers; and - ensuring compliance at all times with the NZ Electrical Code of Practise for Electrical Safe Distances. AEE identified 3 components of the National Grid that could potentially be adversely affected – Transmission lines, Pauatahanui Substation & Takapu Road substation Protection and/or relocation of existing utilities are identified within the AEE as an important aspect of the Project‟s construction (in particular condition NZTA.17). Transmission Lines: With the inclusion of the conditions proposed by NZTA, in combination with Transpower‟s proposed realignment (simultaneous resource consent applications), most of the adverse effects on Transpower‟s existing transmission lines will be able to be avoided or adequately remedied or mitigated. Pauatahanui Substation: access and dust issues, mainly due to the location of the proposed main construction compound. Maintenance of access to be covered in a Project MoU which can be implemented as part of the Construction Traffic Management Plan. Access will be retained through the creation of a cul-de-sac road along the existing SH58 alignment. Potential dust effects will be managed through the Construction Air Quality Management Plan (CAQMP) and through agreement with Transpower. Potential vibration effects have not been covered within the AEE – however NMP is required to include vibration management for works in close proximity to existing network utility (conditions NZTA.20 and PCC.19). Takapu Road Substation: vehicular access and the effect of dust. Vehicular access currently from Takapu Road – may be times during construction when use of this road is restricted. CTMP contains communication protocols so that NZTA and Transpower can manage any potential disruption to the operation and maintenance of the substation. Implementation of the dust control methods in the CAQMP will enable works to be managed such that effects of dust on the substation will be able to be managed. Policy 10 of the NPSET (attached to submission as Appendix C) would be satisfied if the relevant consents and NoRs 1-4 and 7-8 were made subject to the recommended conditions. These conditions would appropriately avoid, remedy or mitigate any potential adverse effects on, or from, the Transpower transmission assets within the Project area. Seeks to ensure that the decisions of NZTA‟s NoRs and resource consent applications are consistent and

Page 30 of 32 compatible with Transpower‟s existing assets.

0066 NZ Support in full All Has conducted 3 separate surveys of members as to whether TG should be the preferred route for SH1 north of Yes Not stated. Automobile Wellington. Every one of these surveys has overwhelmingly supported the early construction of TG. Association With careful construction practices there will be little or no effect on the various environments the TG route passes Wellington through. Recent Wellington NZTA projects such as Dowse-Petone and Muldoon‟s corner have been completed District with no significant environmental effects. Agree with the benefits listed for the project, especially: - Route security in the event of storm or earthquake events. - Improved safety – not only for motorists but also for cyclists and pedestrians who will be able to use the existing Coastal Route with reduced traffic flows. - Reduced severance to coastal communities as through traffic especially trucks will no longer use the coastal route. - Better access to both Porirua and the Hutt cities via the Interchange at SH58 and the Porirua access points - No traffic delays or significant effects on residents during construction. - Reduced travel times. Requests that if possible the construction period be reduced from the 6 years proposed. Notes that the Melbourne Eastlink project (47km long) was completed in 3.5 years and cannot see why the 27km TG could not be built in a similar time-frame. 0067 Craig Edge Oppose in NZTA Submission specifically applies to the major works site to be situated alongside SH58 at Pauatahanui, directly Yes That the BoI consider that NZTA (or other relevant part [NoR3] opposite and within 20m of private residence. TG Major Works Site on SH58 beside the proposed Pauatahanui stakeholder) take measures to ensure that noise / Interchange. vibration is maintained at a satisfactory level: NZTA informed submitter of proposed plans in August 2011. Likely effects on property only became clear when - By erecting a fence of appropriate height along the met with Hill Young Cooper on property on 28 October 2011. boundary of the Works Site along SH58 and / or Property included in „Designation Zone‟. erecting a „front fence‟ of appropriate height on Informed no planes to „force‟ the vacation or sale of property; should he chose to vacate and rent property for the and at the front of the residence concerned. duration of the project NZTA/contract may wish to rent it for use as office / accommodation. - That heavy machinery and plant machinery at the Submissions concerns points of concern. Notes there may be other factors he is not aware of or NZTA has not Work Site operate on days and between times communicated (or be aware of). agreed to by the occupier of the residence NZTA advise that there will be extensive noise and vibration from the works site caused by trucks and other heavy concerned and NZTA/BOI (e.g. 0700-1700 (mobile) machinery and fixed machinery (i.e. concrete batching plant etc.) which will significant affect house / Monday to Friday, 0800-1600 Saturday, Nil work property. on Sundays). NZTA advise that the Works Site is likely to create extensive dust problems throughout the duration of construction - That the concrete batching plant (and any other due to earthworks, concrete batching plant, and heavy machinery movement which will significantly affect house / fixed machinery) and movement of heavy trucks / property. machinery is situated as far away from the Works site will significantly change the landscape and visual effects of the outlook from property over the duration residence concerned as practically possible. of the Project which will significantly affect house/property. Changes to landscape, all and any movement will by - It may be of benefit to situate a Site Office along persons / machinery will be seen from submitters dwelling daily. the inside boundary of the Work Site opposite the Having been shown the geographical „3D‟ photos of the Works Site and Interchange with construction completed residence concerned so as to assist in reducing and fully landscape, more than happy with how the area will look in 2021 and beyond. noise/vibration (and dust). At times, access to residence may be restricted, and due to property being inside the proposed Designation Zone - That Site access (gate) is not situated in front of may be required to vacate or sell. the residence concerned. Property may depreciate in value. - Early planting of trees (evergreen) at and/or around the Site and in front of the residence concerned. - That the planting of trees around the boundary of the Work Site occurs so as to reduce the impact the site has on the environment (and submitter‟s residence) due to the extended duration of this project. Early planting prior to the Project commencing in 2015 would be a significant

Page 31 of 32 positive initiative for the community of Pauatahanui with trees becoming partly established prior to construction commencing. - That the planting of trees (evergreen) would assist with dust and noise pollution. - That an assurance is obtained from NZTA that submitter will not be required to vacate or sell residence. - that an assurance is obtained from NZTA that access to submitters residence will not be hindered during or after construction - That on completion of the TG project, the Designation around my property, if considered desirable for a property owner with regard to future value, will be lifted/moved so as not to include it in the Designation zone. - That NZTA advise if the value of submitters property is likely to depreciate between now and the start of the Project (2011-2055) during the Project (2015-2021) and on completion. 0068 Pip Piper Support in full All Not stated No Not stated

0069 Deborah Oppose in full All Not stated Yes Not stated Gavin & Tim Hall

Page 32 of 32