Before a Board of Inquiry Northern Corridor Improvements Project
Under the Resource Management Act 1991 (‘the Act’)
In the matter of a Board of Inquiry appointed under section 149J of the Act to consider notices of requirement for designations and resource consent applications by the New Zealand Transport Agency for the Northern Corridor Improvements Project
Statement of evidence of Shannon Bray for the New Zealand Transport Agency (Urban design, landscape and visual) Dated 20 April 2017
KENSINGTON SWAN
18 Viaduct Harbour Avenue Ph +64 9 379 4196 Private Bag 92101 Fax +64 9 309 4276 Auckland 1142 DX CP22001
Solicitor: C M Sheard/N McIndoe [email protected]/[email protected] 1
Table of contents
1 Qualifications and experience 2
2 Involvement with the Project 3
3 Code of conduct 4
4 Scope of evidence 4
5 Executive summary 5
6 Methodology 7
7 Project description 7
8 Landscape context 8
9 Policy context 10
10 Design process (urban design and landscape) 10
11 Urban design assessment 14
12 Landscape effects assessment 22
13 Visual effects assessment 26
14 Response to submissions 47
15 Response to section 149G(3) key issues report 55
16 Conclusions 56
List of Annexures 58
Annexure A: Urban Design and Landscape Framework 59
Annexure B: Colliston Rise Map and Cross Sections 60
Annexure C:Plans, Cross Sections and 3D Digital Model of SH18 61
6270488 2
STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF SHANNON BRAY FOR THE NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY
1 Qualifications and experience
1.1 My full name is Shannon Bray.
1.2 I am the director and owner of my own landscape architectural practice, Shannon Bray Ltd, in Hawke’s Bay, and have been in this position since June 2016. Previously, I was a Senior Principal and Landscape Architect at Boffa Miskell Ltd (‘BML’) a national firm of consulting planners, ecologists and landscape architects, from November 2012 to May 2016.
1.3 I hold the qualifications of Bachelor of Landscape Architecture with Honours from the University of Lincoln (1996) and Bachelor of Forestry Science from Canterbury University (1994). I am a registered member and current President of the New Zealand Institute of Landscape Architects.
1.4 I have practiced as a landscape architect, principally in the landscape planning arena, for over 13 years. I have undertaken assessments of a wide number of development proposals across New Zealand, including many infrastructure and utility related projects, and have provided consultancy services for a wide range of clients, including local authorities, land developers, and the infrastructure and electricity sectors.
1.5 My experience includes the assessment and mitigation design of a number of roading projects throughout the country, including several in the past few years for Auckland Transport (‘AT’) and the New Zealand Transport Agency (‘Transport Agency’). Key projects include:
a Southern Corridor Improvements project, Auckland;
b Waterview Connection (including the re-consenting elements of the Great North Road Interchange of the Waterview Tunnel proposal) and the Waterview Shared Use Path, Auckland;
c Penlink, Auckland (involves a significant vehicle bridge across the Duck Creek Estuary in Silverdale); and
d Transmission Gully, Wellington.
6270488 3
1.6 I have also been involved with the design, development and consenting of several Shared Use Paths (‘SUP’) across the Auckland and Hawke’s Bay regions.
1.7 I am a qualified Hearings Commissioner, having completed the Ministry for the Environment’s Making Good Decisions course.
1.8 My evidence relates to notices of requirement and resource consent applications lodged by the Transport Agency with the Environmental Protection Authority (‘EPA’) on 14 December 2016 for the Northern Corridor Improvements Project (‘Project’).
2 Involvement with the Project
2.1 I provided preliminary landscape and urban design advice to the Project Team when I was employed at BML from November 2015 to May 2016. I was engaged to prepare expert evidence for this Project in March 2017. John Goodwin, of BML, who oversaw the preparation of the Assessment of Landscape and Visual Effects (‘LVE Report’) and intended to present evidence, will be overseas during the period of the hearing.
2.2 I am familiar with the area that the Project covers including the State highway and local roading network in the vicinity of the Project. I undertook several site visits in early 2016 and several more recent visits to the Project area in March and April 2017.
2.3 I have reviewed the LVE Report prepared by Thomas Lines from BML and reviewed by John Goodwin and I agree with and support the contents of that report except where stated in my evidence below. Following further investigation and analysis, I have been able to further refine the assessment of effects included in the LVE Report, although with a few exceptions as a result of more detailed analysis (as I will outline below). Overall, I largely support the conclusions of the LVE Report.
2.4 I was not involved in the preparation of the draft Urban Design and Landscape Framework (‘UDLF’) but I have undertaken an intensive review of that document since it was lodged with the EPA. A revised version of the UDLF is attached to my evidence as Annexure A, and I will be referring to the updated information throughout my evidence below.
6270488 4
The methodology used to assess landscape and visual effects is outlined in paragraph 6.1 and in Appendix A of the LVE Report.
3 Code of conduct
3.1 I have read and am familiar with the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses in the current Environment Court Practice Note (2014), have complied with it in the preparation of this evidence, and will follow the Code when presenting evidence to the Board. I also confirm that the matters addressed in this statement of evidence are within my area of expertise, except where I rely on the opinion or evidence of other witnesses. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions I express.
4 Scope of evidence
4.1 This evidence addresses the following matters:
a A summary of my evidence;
b Methodology;
c Project description;
d Landscape context;
e Policy context;
f Design process (urban design and landscape);
g Urban design assessment;
h Landscape assessment;
i Visual effects assessment;
j Comments on submissions lodged in relation to the Project;
k Response to section 149G(3) key issues report; and
l Conclusions.
4.2 In preparing this evidence, I have reviewed the following evidence:
6270488 5
a Mr Glucina, Transport Agency;
b Mr Moore, Project Design;
c Mr Hale, Construction;
d Mr Clark, Transportation – General Overview;
e Mr Rama, Iwi Consultation;
f Ms Strogen, Social Effects;
g Ms Wilkening, Noise and Vibration;
h Mr Don, Terrestrial Ecology;
i Mr Ridley, Earthworks;
j Mr Schofield, Alternatives; and
k Mr Greenaway, Reserves and Recreation.
5 Executive summary
5.1 I have undertaken a detailed assessment of the proposed urban design outcomes, and the potential landscape and visual effects of the Project. In undertaking this assessment, I have visited the site on several occasions, worked with the Project Team to review the design and make changes to it, and have undertaken a detailed review of the UDLF.
5.2 I am of the opinion that, through the UDLF, the Urban Design Landscape Plans (‘UDLPs’) and the conditions of consent, the Project will provide good urban design outcomes. Principally this results from greater connectivity across this part of the city, its connections to the region, and the improved cross-connectivity over the existing road corridors. Detailed design principles and outcomes sought are provided for in the UDLF, and I consider that the conditions and design process will allow for sufficient ongoing review by both the Project Team and key stakeholders (such as Auckland Council).
5.3 From a landscape perspective, I also consider that the Project will deliver positive outcomes. I accept that it will result in a change to parts of the
6270488 6
landscape, particularly when existing vegetation is removed, but I am of the opinion that the extensive proposed planting more than mitigates for this loss, indeed it will provide an enhancement. The road corridor will have approved landscape amenity, lower whole of life costs, and contribute to wider landscape outcomes (such as wildlife corridors). These outcomes are driven through the UDLF, which is required to be implemented through various conditions proposed.
5.4 Generally, the potential visual effects across the Project will be low, rising to moderate in Character Area D (as assessed in the LVE Report). However, from the detailed assessment of the Project, I consider that there are some properties that will experience higher levels of visual effect, as follows:
a The western-most residences at 60B Masons Road that overlook the proposed Albany Busway Overbridge. It is recommended that lower height lighting be used on this bridge.
b Four properties in Colliston Rise (Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28) directly adjacent to retaining walls. Mitigation options are set out in the UDLF.1
c Four properties in Barbados Drive (numbers 39, 41B, 43 and 45) directly adjacent to the proposed Paul Matthews Road overbridge, and a further four properties (numbers 33, 35, 37 and 47) who will experience moderate effects. Mitigation options include a new 2.4m fence extending the length of the boundary from Caribbean Drive to Rook Reserve, and the retention and enhancement of boundary planting.
5.5 The mitigation of these potential visual effects is also driven by design principles and outcomes sought in the UDLF, and there is opportunity for the proposed mitigation to be reviewed by Auckland Council during the Outline Plan of Works (‘OPW’) process.
5.6 Overall, I consider that the Project has positive urban design outcomes, positive landscape effects, and low to moderate visual effects. There are some properties adjacent to the Project that will experience higher effects,
1 Section 5.7 of the revised UDLF, page 38.
6270488 7
but these can be mitigated to a no more than minor level through the outcomes sought in the UDLF.
6 Methodology
6.1 Firstly, the methodology used to assess landscape and visual effects involved a site visit to refresh my knowledge of the Project area and locality. I then reviewed the LVE Report in detail, and then undertook a second site and locality visit to specific sites of interest (e.g. Albany Bus Station, McClymonts Road, Colliston Rise, and State Highway 18), accompanied by Thomas Lines from BML.
6.2 During my assessment process, I requested the development of a 3D digital model of Paul Matthews Road bridge (which I refer to later in my evidence), in addition to further cross-sections and photographs. I also undertook a final site visit prior to the completion of my evidence to ground-truth my recommendations.
7 Project description
7.1 A detailed description of the Project is set out in Mr Moore’s evidence, and I refer to the General Alignment (‘GA’) drawings included in Volume 5 of the Assessment of Environmental Effects (‘AEE’). From a landscape and urban design perspective, the key components of the Project are as follows:
a Widening of parts of the existing State Highway 1 (‘SH1’) from Constellation Bus Station to Albany (including widening of some existing bridges), and the upgrading of State Highway 18 (‘SH18’) to a full motorway standard including the provision of additional lanes;
b The construction of two north-facing ramps to connect SH18 to SH1, including one ramp that passes over the top of SH1;
c The construction of a new double-lane busway from Constellation Bus Station to Albany, including the construction of an overbridge across SH1 to connect to Albany Bus Station;
d The construction of a SUP along the eastern side of SH1 within the Project area, and along SH18 on the southern side of the
6270488 8
Constellation Drive Interchange before transferring to the northern side of SH18 via the proposed Paul Matthews Road overbridge;
e The realignment of Paul Matthews Road, including the construction of an overbridge across SH18, to retain its connection with SH18;
f The installation of various retaining walls to allow the construction of the elements outlined above;
g The installation of various noise walls and barriers to mitigate the effects of increased noise in some areas (as outlined in the evidence of Ms Wilkening); and
h Significant planting across the Project area to enhance the motorway corridor, as outlined in the UDLF (refer in particular to the Landscape Mitigation and Enhancement Plans included in Section 6 of the UDLF).
8 Landscape context
8.1 Section 3 of the LVE Report provides a detailed description of the landscape context in which the Project is located, including its topography, hydrology, land use, vegetation patterns, landscape features and the visual catchment.2 I agree with the description provided in this report, and do not consider it necessary to replicate that information in this evidence.
8.2 Section 4 of the LVE Report provides more detail on the landscape context as part of the assessment of potential effects, splitting the Project into five broad ‘Site Areas’.3 These largely overlap with the four ‘Character Areas’ that are described in Section 3 of the UDLF, with Character Area D essentially being the combined Site Areas 4 and 5 described in the LVE Report. The Character Areas in the UDLF provide a similar contextual description to the LVE Report, accompanied by photographs and a broader description of the Character Area history, heritage, community and surrounding built form.
2 Pages 7 to 9 of the LVE Report. 3 Pages 10 to 24 of the LVE Report.
6270488 9
8.3 For the sake of simplicity and clarity, I have determined that my evidence would be best aligned with the UDLF so that the recommendations I make (in later sections of this evidence) can be brought through to that document. In this regard, I have therefore made some minor text changes to the design context section (Section 3) of the UDLF, and throughout my evidence going forward I will refer only to the Character Areas, not the Site Areas as referred to in the LVE Report. In other words, I have generally followed the LVE Report, but have combined Site Areas 4 and 5 into Character Area D to ensure consistency with the Character Areas in the UDLF.
8.4 An important consideration from a landscape and visual effects perspective is that the Project area already includes a busy, operational motorway and a number of busy arterial roads. These dynamic road corridors contain a variety of vehicles, including heavy freight trucks, buses (including double-decker buses), and cars. They also contain structural items normally associated with such infrastructure, including retaining walls, lighting poles, noise walls and motorway signage. In addition, SH18 and in particular the SH1 motorway already sever the landscape, especially in regard to the cross-connectivity between communities either side of these roads. It is also worth noting that much of the existing corridor (particularly SH1) is largely devoid of vegetation, with embankments and unused areas largely managed in grass.
8.5 It is also important to highlight that the surrounding landscape is a heavily modified urban environment that is continuing to undergo significant change and development. Much of the area through which the Project passes has been, or is currently being, developed for industrial, commercial or residential purposes, and there are few signs of any natural landscape features.
8.6 Whilst the landform may retain some natural characteristics, it too has been heavily earthworked and altered, including (for example) the Rosedale Landfill site. Whilst the Rosedale Wastewater Treatment Plant (‘RWWTP’) ponds may have a perceived natural appearance and exhibit open space qualities, they are man-made treatment facilities.
6270488 10
8.7 This is not to suggest that there are no natural landscape features. As outlined in the UDLF,4 there are several waterways that retain natural qualities (especially Lucas Creek to the north of the Project), and various parks and reserve spaces that have naturalised elements (such as native vegetation and grassed open space).
9 Policy context
9.1 Mr Burn and Mr McGahan have set out the policy context in their evidence,5 which I rely on.
9.2 From a landscape and visual effects perspective, I note that there are no specific landscape policies or overlays related to the Project area. None of the area is identified as an Outstanding Natural Landscape or Outstanding Natural Feature, and there are no Volcanic Cone viewshafts located over any part of the Project area.
9.3 I note that the Project does pass through and adjacent to some Significant Ecological Areas, as outlined in the evidence of Mr Don.6
10 Design process (urban design and landscape)
Project background
10.1 Mr Glucina provides an overview of the Project background, including its development through an Indicative Business Case (‘IBC’), Detailed Business Case (‘DBC’) and then into the notice of requirement and consenting phase.7 As part of my earlier involvement in the Project, I reviewed the internal urban design and landscape reports (prepared by others) which helped shape some of the earlier decisions in these earlier stages of the Project. As the Project has progressed, various landscape and urban design experts have further refined the Project into what is currently being presented, and on which my evidence is now based.
10.2 During the DBC phase of the Project, a preliminary draft UDLF document was prepared by Beca (which I have read). That UDLF has been continually refined as further design decisions have been made (and I
4 Section 3.7 of the revised UDLF. 5 Section 10 of Mr Burn’s evidence in chief (Planning – Designations) and section 10 of Mr McGahan’s evidence in chief (Planning – Consents). 6 Paragraph 7.2 of Mr Don’s evidence in chief (Terrestrial Ecology). 7 Section 8 of Mr Glucina’s evidence in chief (Transport Agency).
6270488 11
have again refined it based on my assessment of the Project). It is the nature of a project of this scale that such changes will occur as more detailed design decisions are made and more information becomes available (as illustrated in the diagram on page 5 of the UDLF which shows the design process through the various stages of the Project). I am aware that many of the early Project decisions have been continually challenged (as I have also questioned and challenged), such that the design is continually refined.
10.3 As a result, I am confident that the design process to date has been very cognisant of potential urban design and landscape issues, and has addressed these appropriately in balance with other requirements (such as operational requirements, constructability, budget restraints, and avoidance or mitigation of other potential effects such as noise or ecological).
10.4 This refinement will continue as the Project is further detailed and final design decisions are confirmed. However, it is also recognised that stakeholders and the community seek a degree of certainty around the urban design and landscape outcomes within the Project, particularly in regard to any issues they raise in submissions through the Board of Inquiry process, or through direct engagement (such as with Auckland Council). This is the purpose of the UDLF (and the associated conditions of consent) as outlined below.
Urban Design Landscape Framework
10.5 The UDLF is a high-level document that is aimed at directing the ongoing urban design and landscape development of the Project through to the detailed design stage. It is given effect to by various designation conditions (as referred to by Mr Burn8), and will guide the contractor during the detailed design and construction phases.
10.6 The UDLF includes a variety of ‘Outcomes Sought’ (sections 5 and 6) across the Project area, which have both informed many of the design decisions to date, and on which some of the conditions are based around.9 Implementation of the UDLF through the conditions provides
8 Paragraphs 9.5 and 17.4 - 17.5 of Mr Burn’s evidence in chief (Planning – Designations). 9 Conditions UDL.4 and UDL.5 of the designation conditions attached to Mr Burn’s evidence in chief (Planning – Designations).
6270488 12
assurance to both the Transport Agency and stakeholders that the required urban design and landscape outcomes will be delivered as part of the Project.
10.7 The purpose of the UDLF is to capture the broader setting of the Project, explain the design principles, and set out the anticipated outcomes from an urban design and landscape perspective. Importantly, the UDLF has a focus that is wider than the immediate Project area. It considers longer term strategic outcomes sought either by the Transport Agency or by stakeholders (such as the establishment of wildlife corridors across the North Shore), and then directs how the design within the Project can best respond to this context. This approach is consistent with best practice landscape and urban design whereby the surrounding context helps to shape the Project outcomes.
10.8 The UDLF also responds to the Transport Agency’s social and environmental responsibilities, which often sit outside (but complement) specific RMA requirements. In this regard, the UDLF is informed by the Transport Agency’s own published documents ‘Bridging the Gap’10 and the ‘Landscape Guidelines’11, recommending outcomes that provide more than just the minimum required mitigation of urban design, landscape or visual effects (such as the anticipated outcome of widespread planting to ‘green the corridor’).
10.9 As outlined above, as part of my recent involvement in the Project I have undertaken a review of the UDLF to ensure it provides for the design outcomes required as mitigation against potential urban design, landscape or visual effects, and addresses any appropriate concerns raised by submitters. The updated version differs to the version lodged with the application documents as follows:
a Slightly revised text in Sections 1, 2 and 3, including moving Section 3.1 (which relates to design principles) to Section 4.4.
b Full review of Section 4 – Design Strategy, including:
10 Bridging the Gap: New Zealand Transport Agency Urban Design Guidelines, 2013. 11 New Zealand Transport Agency Landscape Guidelines (final draft), 2014.
6270488 13
i Revision of the Project design objectives to more closely align with the Transport Agency’s broader urban design and landscape objectives, as well as the Project overall;
ii Refinement of the design principles (including moving Section 3.1 to Section 4 as described above);
iii Revision of the design korero to provide a more narrative description (but retaining the core Mana Whenua values outlined in the previous version and within the Cultural Impact Assessments); and
iv The relocation of much of the Matauranga Māori Project outcomes into Section 5.
c Extensive revision of Section 5, including changing the title to ‘Outcomes Sought’. This section now considers each urban design or landscape element (such as bridges, walls, busway, etc.) from a broad, strategic perspective before focusing on individual or specific structures that are related to these elements (for example Albany Bridge anticipated outcomes, previously located at the back of Section 6, have now been brought into the Bridges section), and further clarity is provided around each feature.
d Review and update the plans in Section 6, which now becomes the ‘Landscape Mitigation and Enhancement Plans’. Largely the plans remain the same, however additional annotation is provided to outline the specific anticipated outcomes referred to in Section 5.
10.10 Most of the graphics and images within the UDLF remain the same as the lodged version. However, I have refined some of them to make them clearer or to provide more annotations.
Next stages
10.11 The process of design refinement will continue as the Project is further advanced towards construction. It is anticipated that detailing individual aspects of the Project, adding cultural references and ensuring good design outcomes will continue right down to the placement of plants.
6270488 14
10.12 As the detailed design of the Project is commenced, a UDLP will be prepared, which under the conditions is required to be submitted as part of the OPW. Although similar to the UDLF, the UDLP will provide the actual design solutions that will be delivered across the Project (and only within the Project area), rather than setting out the anticipated outcomes. The idea of the UDLP is that it will essentially inform the construction drawings – those being the plans that actually tell the construction contractor what to build (and how).
10.13 Mr Burn’s evidence sets out the proposed conditions that require the UDLF and UDLP to be given effect to.12 As part of the OPW process, Council will have an opportunity to review the UDLP to ensure it follows the outcomes sought in the UDLF.
10.14 The Transport Agency has an internal review process that involves urban design and landscape advisors both within and outside of the Project. The role of these advisors is to ensure that the UDLP (and the construction drawings) accurately reflect what is set out in the UDLF. The UDLP must also comply with all consent and designation conditions, and the Transport Agency’s own internal specifications and standards (for example the P39 specification for planting).
11 Urban design assessment
General approach
11.1 The general approach to urban design across the Project is to undertake as many design improvements as possible that are appropriate and within the overall scope of the Project. The anticipated urban design outcomes are integrated with the anticipated landscape outcomes, and are informed by the following urban design and landscape design visions:13
a Reinforce a sense of place and cultural identity through the application of design elements and response to the principles of Matauranga Māori;
12 Paragrapsh 9.5 and 17.4 of Mr Burn’s evidence in chief (Planning – Designations). 13 Section 4.1 of the revised UDLF, page 24.
6270488 15
b Creation of a multi-choice transport corridor that provides strong lineal and cross-connections for the wider community;
c Green the corridor to provide increased amenity and contribute to wider ecological strategies, whilst responding to a sense of openness around the RWWTP, and retain important views and vistas of the surrounding landscape; and
d Integrate all structures into the landscape (particularly landform) to reduce their prominence and engineered form.
11.2 In addition, adequate and appropriate Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (‘CPTED’) principles have been (and will continue to be) applied across the Project.14
11.3 It is important to recognise that the delivery of good urban design outcomes requires a balancing exercise. Notwithstanding overall funding limitations, there are a number of physical constraints, road alignment requirements (for example minimum curve radii), property ownership issues, and other potential adverse effects to consider (such as noise). My evidence below outlines where such balancing decisions have been made.
11.4 The next three sections of my evidence focus on the urban design visions outlined above, namely the response to Mana Whenua and sense of place, lineal and cross-connectivity, and CPTED. I will address ‘greening the corridor’ and ‘integration of structures’ in the Landscape and Visual Effects sections of my evidence below.
Mana Whenua, Cultural Identity and Sense of Place
11.5 The Transport Agency considers the involvement of Mana Whenua in the urban design (and landscape) aspects of the Project crucial to its successful delivery. The Project seeks to explore ways in which cultural values can be expressed, and aims to align environmental outcomes with Mana Whenua who have kaitiaki over the land.
11.6 Mr Rama’s evidence provides an overview of the iwi engagement process that the Transport Agency has undertaken, and how it is
14 Section 4.5 of the revised UDLF, page 28.
6270488 16
proposed to continue this relationship through to the end of the Project. Importantly, Mana Whenua have contributed to the development of the UDLF, and will continue to have an integral role in the delivery of the Project.
11.7 One of the key contributions of Mana Whenua has been through the development of a korero, or design narrative (refer to the UDLF15). This narrative captures some of the history and significant cultural markers in the surrounding landscape, and suggests a high level artistic theme for the Project. It is intended that this narrative will be further refined and interpreted into specific design elements (as explained further below), providing not only cultural connections within the Project, but also strengthening the sense of place or cultural identity of the surrounding area.
11.8 Further Matauranga Māori input is guided by the Te Aranga principles which are based on those developed for the Auckland Design Manual.16 The principles are set out in Section 4 of the UDLF17 with the outcomes sought for each principle then provided in Section 5.18 Ongoing engagement with Mana Whenua through the Iwi Integration Group (‘IIG’) will ensure that achievement of these outcomes can be continually measured and considered.
11.9 In addition, the Transport Agency has worked with Mana Whenua to appoint an ‘Iwi Artist’ for the Project. Graham Tipene is a well-known Auckland-based artist who has been involved with a variety of large infrastructure projects, such as Waterview Tunnel and Otahuhu Railway Station. His role will be to work with the Transport Agency’s urban design and landscape advisors, the appointed construction contractor and with Mana Whenua to interpret the design narrative into textures and patterns that can be applied across the Project structures (e.g. on the sides of bridges, retaining walls, noise barriers, etc.). Mr Tipene will also work closely with the designers to find other appropriate mechanisms for cultural references (such as signage, SUP furniture, and/or possible standalone artwork pieces).
15 Section 4.2.3 of the revised UDLF, page 26. 16 http://www.aucklanddesignmanual.co.nz/design-thinking/maori-design/te_aranga_principles 17 Page 25 of the revised UDLF. 18 Page 32 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 17
11.10 During the Project, Mana Whenua have also been asked to explore historical names, or whakapapa, within and around the Project area, and it is anticipated that these names will be celebrated and socialised through signage throughout the Project (such as on bridges or along the SUP).
11.11 The Project area currently has very little in the way of cultural references or any specific sense of place. It is acknowledged that there are a few locations where views to surrounding tohu (landmarks) can be achieved (such as north of the Spencer Road cutting to Lucas Creek), and the UDLF seeks to retain these visual (and cultural) connections. However, it is important to note that the existing motorway corridor does not currently reference the surrounding landscape through which it passes.
11.12 Condition UDL.9 also requires the UDLP to be prepared in partnership with the IIG. Any comments from the IIG must be clearly documented in the UDLP, along with a clear explanation of where any comments or suggestions have not been incorporated and the reason why.
11.13 I therefore consider that the proposed mechanisms set out in the UDLF and the designation conditions for engaging with Mana Whenua and exploring cultural interpretation will result in positive outcomes from an urban design perspective. The completed Project will, in my opinion, help to reinforce a local cultural identity and strengthen the connection between the community and the area in which they live or pass through.
Lineal and Cross-Connectivity
11.14 The Project provides multi-functional, multi-nodal transport solutions. It does not simply provide for widening of an existing motorway corridor, but it also provides an important extension to a separate busway network and includes a SUP along the whole length of both road corridors. From an urban design perspective, the inclusion of these two elements is a positive outcome in terms of connecting the community.
11.15 Mr Clark in his evidence provides an outline of the anticipated transportation benefits of the Project, including the contribution the Project makes to the Western Ring Route.19 The creation of this alternative
19 Paragraph 9.2 of Mr Clark’s evidence in chief (Transportation – General Overview).
6270488 18
motorway network through the city provides for greater choice and freedom of movement, and I consider these are significant positive outcomes from an urban design perspective.
11.16 Mr Moore in his evidence provides an overview of the design considerations in regard to the busway.20 A key urban design benefit is the future-proofing of the busway so it could be converted to light rail in the future (subject to policy and funding decisions). The inclusion of the busway, and the provision for it to be further extended to the north of Albany, will be of considerable benefit to local commuters. Providing good, reliable public transport is critically important in a growing and intensifying city, and the relocation of buses outside of the regular vehicle lanes assists in achieving this outcome.
11.17 I note the recent change in design to the proposed busway overbridge at Albany, in that it will now turn more sharply to the south after crossing the motorway, and connect into the existing bus station from the eastern side (preventing an extended bridge across the car park).21 From an urban design perspective I support this revised design. The shorter structure is a more efficient use of space (reducing the number of existing car parks that might need to be removed), eliminates potential CPTED issues around the columns and structure in the car park, and also provides reduced visual effects (as outlined later in my evidence, paragraph 13.16).
11.18 The SUP contributes to a much wider cycling and walking strategy being delivered by Auckland Council and AT. Throughout the Project, the SUP is designed as the backbone or arterial link within the broader AT network, and will provide good lineal connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians between the bus stations and local roads. It is worth noting that the existing motorway corridor already provides a high degree of severance for pedestrians and cyclists, and so the inclusion of the SUP and new connections is a significant positive outcome of the Project from an urban design perspective.
11.19 In order to achieve optimum effectiveness, the SUP needs to be well connected into the surrounding communities and activity centres, and these connections are provided for across the Project. However it is
20 Section 7 of Mr Moore’s evidence in chief (Project Design). 21 Section 7 of Mr Moore’s evidence in chief outlines the proposed change in detail.
6270488 19
important to note that the scope of the Project does not provide for pedestrian and cycle facilities beyond these connections (as these are outside the Project area). It also does not provide for connections to potential future paths, but its design does not rule out such connections when they might be required (such as into the Rosedale Landfill site).
11.20 At the north end of the Project, the SUP will connect to existing and proposed cycle and pedestrian facilities on Oteha Valley Road that will be provided by AT separately to this Project.
11.21 At McClymonts Road, the bridge upgrade allows for off-road pedestrian footpaths on both sides of the road (currently there is only a narrow footpath on the north side), and an on-road cycle lane (by request of AT). Both these facilities will improve the current situation at McClymonts Road.
11.22 The Spencer Road Pedestrian Overbridge is being delivered as a separate project, and has already been granted resource consent. There is a significant (greater than 10m) grade difference between the SUP and this overbridge, and I understand from Mr Moore that providing a ramped connection in this location is not possible.22 Therefore, the Project proposes a stepped connection on the north side of the bridge, with an adjacent wheel track to run bicycles up and down.
11.23 Ramped connections are provided to existing pedestrian and cycle facilities at Greville Road, Rosedale Road and Arrenway Drive. At Greville and Rosedale, proposed works underneath the motorway bridges will provide for improved cross-connectivity. Space restrictions at Rosedale Road prevent a fully off-road SUP in this location, but new road markings will provide a safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
11.24 The GA drawings show a potential connection to the north side of Pond 2, immediately south of Arrenway Drive. As mentioned above, it is not within the scope of the Project to provide a SUP along the north side of the pond as this is outside of the Project area, so at this time the connection is provided as a service access only and will be gated.
22 Section 9 of Mr Moore’s evidence in chief (Project Design).
6270488 20
11.25 Connections will be provided from the SH1 SUP to Constellation Bus Station, and to the SH18 SUP that passes under the motorway in this location. These connections will also connect into existing paths that link through to Sunset Road.
11.26 It is proposed that a SUP will be provided on the south side of SH18 from the Constellation interchange to Paul Matthews Road, where it will cross over SH18 on the proposed new bridge. This will provide a new crossing facility for pedestrians and cyclists, as the existing Paul Matthews Road intersection has no formal footpaths or pedestrian crossings.
11.27 A connection will also be provided between the SUP on SH18 and the existing footpath to Cabello Place. Although this is not shown on the GA drawings, I have included it in the UDLF.23 I note that it is not within the scope of the Project to widen this existing accessway.
11.28 From Paul Matthews Road to Albany Highway, a SUP will be provided on the north side of SH18, with connections provided to Alexandra Creek and William Pickering Drive. Having reviewed the constraints created by the width of the available corridor in this location, and having looked at other possible alignments with Mr Moore,24 I consider that locating the SUP on the north side of the motorway, in this location, is the most appropriate approach at this time for the reasons outlined below.
11.29 My understanding is that it is not possible, without extending the designation into private residential properties and Bluebird Reserve, to fit a SUP on both sides of SH18. Locating the SUP on the north side locks this facility in for the long term, without the need to acquire commercial properties, and leaves open an option to install an additional SUP on the south side in the future, if it is considered necessary to meet demand. However, if the SUP was delivered on the south side as part of the Project, rather than the north side, I understand from Mr Moore that this would require shifting the road alignment to the north, and eliminating any future possibility to construct a SUP on this side (without significant property purchases). Essentially, the proposed design provides for the
23 Section 6 of the revised UDLF, pages 48-50. 24 Section 9 of Mr Moore’s evidence in chief (Project Design).
6270488 21
future investigation, and if necessary delivery, of a SUP on the south side without affecting the works proposed by this Project.
11.30 The existing underpass at Alexandra Creek (Rook Reserve) is proposed to be retained. I recognise that the current design of this underpass is less desirable from a CPTED perspective, and that a widened facility (at least 3m width by 3m height) would be beneficial (as well as increased visibility on the south side). However, I also understand from Mr Moore and Mr Hughes that there are constructability and stormwater challenges associated with installing an improved facility. At the time of writing, potential options in relation to the Alexandra Creek underpass are still being explored by the Transport Agency, and I hope to be in a position to provide an update on these investigations prior to the hearing.
11.31 Considering the overall proposed SUP facilities from an urban design perspective, in my opinion the Project delivers positive lineal and cross- connectivity design outcomes. The SUP will provide a strong arterial route that can be connected into at any time, and will facilitate increased pedestrian and cycling activity along the corridor. In almost all locations (the exception being Unsworth Drive), the cross-connections over the motorway will be enhanced, providing for increased and safer movements between key activity centres. It is also important to note that at Unsworth Drive, the current proposal does not reduce the existing cross-connectivity (there is no formal footpaths or crossings in this location.
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
11.32 Both the ‘Bridging the Gap’ and the ‘Landscape Guidelines’ documents previously referred to place crime prevention as a critical aspect of design. Not only is it desirable to reduce potential crime from a social perspective, the reduction in unwanted behaviour (such as tagging, vandalism, sleeping rough, etc.) also reduces the longer term maintenance costs of the Project following construction.
11.33 I understand from my involvement with the Project Team that throughout the design process there has been a continual focus on CPTED principles. The key CPTED principles are included within the UDLF (such as reducing potential hiding spots, integrating lighting into structures, and considering visibility along the SUP). Condition UDL.4 requires Section 5
6270488 22
of the UDLF (including CPTED) to be given effect to in the UDLP and condition UDL.5 requires the UDLPs to be in general accordance with Section 6 of the UDLF.
11.34 Overall I consider that the Project appropriately responds to best practice delivery of CPTED principles.
12 Landscape effects assessment
Definition
12.1 As outlined in section 2.4 of the LVE Report, ‘landscape effects’ can be summarised as follows:
Change in the physical landscape elements and features, including vegetation and earthworks, which may change its character (including natural character, if within the coastal environment, streams or waterbodies) or value.
12.2 The approach I have taken to assessing landscape effects is to firstly describe the nature of potential effects, then consider potential mitigation opportunities, before finally determining the overall level of significance. This assessment is set out over the next three sub-sections.
Potential adverse landscape effects
12.3 Before considering the potential adverse landscape effects that might result from the Project, I consider it important to remember that the Project area contains an existing busy motorway and highway network.
12.4 These existing motorway and road networks strongly contribute to the existing character of the surrounding landscape. As outlined in paragraph 8.4, the Project is located within a heavily modified urban environment that contains large commercial and industrial buildings, various street lights, overhead utility structures, bridges, retaining walls and other structures.
12.5 The proposed lane additions, busway and SUP will require additional landform modifications along the length of the SH1 corridor. In locations such as the Spencer Road cutting, this will result in increased batter slope angles and the introduction of large concrete retaining walls. In other
6270488 23
locations, such as north of this cutting and between Greville Road and Rosedale Road, the opposite occurs, emphasising the elevation of the corridor above the surrounding landform. In both types of scenarios, there will be an increase in engineered forms, reducing the perceived naturalness of existing landforms.
12.6 Such changes are, however, inevitable for a project of this nature. The existing corridor through which the motorway passes is narrow, and grading back batter or cut slopes to achieve more ‘natural’ gradients would require significant land purchases, displacing existing activities and communities. The decision to use retaining walls and steep batter slopes is part of the balancing exercise that must be undertaken during the design process, as I referred to earlier in my evidence (paragraph 10.3). Nevertheless, the increased engineered and retained slopes will have an adverse effect on landscape character, albeit at a low level.
12.7 The addition of the busway, SUP and connection ramps bring with them additional motorway infrastructure, including structures, lighting and motorway signage. Whilst these will not change the overall character of the road corridor, they will increase its prominence, particularly where existing sloped batters will be replaced for retaining walls. This increased prominence, together with overall widening of the corridor, will emphasise the perceived severance of the landscape by the motorway, further separating activities and communities either side. As outlined in my evidence above (paragraph 11.18), this can be largely mitigated from an urban design perspective (in terms of pedestrian and cycle cross- connectivity), but remains a landscape effect regarding a perceived division of the wider landscape. Such an effect is more likely to be experienced across Ponds 1 and 2, where the motorway will feel notably wider, and may also be experienced through the Spencer Road cutting.
12.8 In addition, the increased infrastructure across the RWWTP is likely to reduce their perceived naturalness, even though they are actually man- made structures. Together with the encroachment of SH18 and the connecting ramps into the Constellation Reserve, there will be a notable reduction in open space. This will also occur elsewhere, such as Rook Reserve and Alexandra Creek, where there will also be removal of some existing vegetation to make way for earthworks and a stormwater
6270488 24
treatment pond. However, I consider that the change in character associated with the works will largely be appreciated during construction of the Project, and can be adequately mitigated over time, as outlined below.
Potential landscape enhancements and mitigation
12.9 In part to help mitigate the potential adverse effects outlined above, and in part to keep with the design vision to ‘green the corridor’ (paragraph 11.1), extensive planting is proposed throughout most ‘plantable’ areas of the Project. Such planting has become a common sight throughout the Auckland Motorway Network, enhancing the overall amenity of the corridor and providing enhanced environmental outcomes.
12.10 Section 5.9 of the UDLF25 provides details of the planting principles and anticipated planting outcomes, which are then summarised in the plans contained in Section 6. Reference is made to the Transport Agency’s P39 planting specification, which also requires all plants to be sourced within the local ecological region as well as planting rare and threatened species (all of which helps to enhance biodiversity). All planting will be of native species, and consideration will be given to plant layering (tall and short species) that reflects natural systems.
12.11 The planting plans recognise that in some places, such as across Ponds 1 and 2, it is important to retain a sense of openness, or allow views of more distant landscape features. It is anticipated that in these locations a different, low-level planting mix is used, also adding a sense of variety and interest to the corridor. In other places, such as around the proposed ramps just to the south of the ponds, more dense planting is proposed which will help to integrate the landform changes into the surrounding landscape. This planting also provides mitigation for potential visual effects, as outlined in the next section of my evidence.
12.12 The UDLF recognises wider biodiversity and ecological strategies across the North Shore, such as the North-West Wildlink Project. Whilst it is not the purpose of a roading corridor to provide for wildlife (and this is not intended by the planting), Mr Don notes that there will be ecological
25 Page 39 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 25
benefits in creating areas of naturalised habitat.26 This is beneficial from a landscape perspective also in that it helps to restore natural patterns and connections across the landscape.
12.13 The proposed planting is also a desired outcome from a cultural landscape perspective. The Te Aranga principles (referred to earlier in my evidence, paragraph 11.8) include objectives to enhance the natural environment (Taiao) and environmental health (Mauri Tu). Achieving these outcomes helps to reconnect iwi and hapu with the wider cultural landscape (Tohu) and enhance the living presence (Ahi Kā). Mana Whenua, through the IIG process, will have an opportunity to review and input into the species selection.
12.14 Greening the corridor also assists in reducing landscape maintenance costs, such as reducing mowing requirements, and providing for more sustainable landscape management.
12.15 Rook Reserve is currently a largely undeveloped, sloping grass reserve that is open to the existing SH18 road corridor on the north side. It has limited recreational facilities (a small collection of fitness trainers), and is not ideally suited as a recreational reserve. Whilst the loss of the lower part of the reserve, adjacent to the road, to a proposed stormwater pond could further diminish the quality of the reserve, it also presents an opportunity to reconsider how the reserve could be appreciated both from a landscape and community perspective.
12.16 At the time of writing, I am involved in developing a concept plan for Rook Reserve that will introduce significant planting alongside the road corridor, help to develop the stormwater facility as a landscape feature, improve connectivity from Wren Place and Barbados Drive to the Alexandra Creek underpass, and potentially provide a flat area at the top of the reserve for ball play. Whilst the concepts are subject to discussion and approval with Auckland Council Parks, I am confident that a proposal can be developed for Rook Reserve that provides for overall positive landscape outcomes, alongside increased community and recreational outcomes.
26 Paragraph 9.4 of Mr Don’s evidence in chief (Terrestrial Ecology).
6270488 26
Overall assessment
12.17 In my opinion there will be perceived landscape effects as a result of the Project, largely related to the widening of the roading areas requiring increased slopes and the introduction of retaining walls. The introduction of additional infrastructure items will not necessarily change the character of the landscape, but will increase the overall motorway prominence, enhancing its severance effect.
12.18 However, the proposed planting throughout the corridor is extensive, and in my opinion is a significantly positive landscape outcome. It will provide enhanced biodiversity outcomes, stronger cultural connections, reduced landscape maintenance, and enhanced amenity. The severance is also mitigated in an urban design sense, through the introduction of enhanced cycling and pedestrian facilities.
12.19 On balance, I consider overall that the landscape effects will be positive. I acknowledge that some of the changes to the landform as a result of the Project could potentially be mitigated or reduced through extending the designation boundary, but recognise that this would result in an even wider corridor and create significant disruption to existing land use activities. In contrast, keeping the corridor as narrow as possible and undertaking extensive planting will help the Project better integrate with the more natural forms of the surrounding environment, and help to diminish its engineered character.
12.20 I also recognise that it will take time for the mitigation to become fully effective. As most of the landscape mitigation will be provided in the form of planting, which is likely to be undertaken towards the end of each phase of the Project, these will need to establish and grow. Based on my experience with other projects in the wider Auckland area, I would anticipate this to take in the region of 3-5 years.
13 Visual effects assessment
Definition
13.1 Building on the definition of visual effects in the LVE Report (Section 2.4), I consider visual effects to be created when a view normally experienced by people from any given location (such as their house) is noticeably
6270488 27
altered. This can occur when a particular activity (or group of activities) becomes more (or less) prominent in that view, or when an activity screens a view that would otherwise be appreciated. Visual effects can be fixed, or may be transitory as people traverse across a landscape. They can also be caused by a loss (either real or perceived) in privacy (e.g. the feeling of being overlooked), or a reduction in light in a particular area (including shadow effects).
13.2 It is important to recognise that seeing an element of the Project does not necessarily mean it creates an adverse visual effect. The existing motorway and road corridors are already visible from many locations across the wider landscape, with a number of viewers already experiencing views of moving traffic, tall walls, structures and other highway infrastructure. The measure of visual effect must therefore be based on an assessment of the additional prominence the Project (or Project elements) might have in any specific view.
13.3 Further, I know from my experience with other roading projects that there are some people who enjoy seeing a motorway (or elements of a motorway), although I acknowledge such people are a minority. However, it reinforces that I prefer not to consider whether visual effects are positive or adverse, but rather seek to understand (and describe) the nature and severity of the effect.
13.4 In addition, the way in which people experience a view depends not only on the view itself, but also the activity they are undertaking at the time of viewing. Generally speaking, people in a working environment will experience less effects than those sitting at home in their living room. Large parts of the wider landscape contain large windowless warehouses, surrounded by car parking and other infrastructure, and where the Project corridors are considered in the context of functionality and necessity. To a large extent, I have discounted the potential views of the Project from commercial and industrial areas, and I have focused my attention on views from private residences and public parks.
13.5 I have also not considered potential visual effects on people using roads (either driving, walking or cycling) unless the Project potentially impacts a desirable existing view (such as a view to a volcanic cone).
6270488 28
Approach to avoiding or mitigating visual effects
13.6 Taking into account the scope and nature of the Project, I consider that there are three potential ways in which a visual effect can be avoided or mitigated:
a Undertaking changes to the structure or road alignment to reduce its visual prominence (either by reducing its height or locating it further away from the viewer), and integrating structures into the landforms or surrounding landscape.
b Retaining, enhancing and adding screen planting. I recognise that such planting can take time to establish, but provided that the maintenance procedures set out in the Transport Agency’s P39 Planting Specification are followed, there is no reason why most of the planting through the Project could not achieve an appropriate level of screening within five years following completion of the Project.
c The application of good urban design, such that structures are well designed, have good proportions, and/or are adorned with appropriate artwork or patterning. A key purpose of the UDLF is to ensure that such outcomes is achieved.
13.7 As outlined earlier in my evidence, the determination of what combination of avoidance and mitigation techniques to undertake requires a balancing of Project considerations beyond just visual effects. For example, there might be places where a tall noise wall will create a potential visual effect, but provides significant noise mitigation, or a retaining wall might become a prominent structure but it prevents significant land take and potential associated social effects.
13.8 During the preparation of my evidence, I have challenged the location and alignment of various elements of the Project as part of that balancing exercise. I have also been involved in Multi-Criteria Analysis (‘MCA’) workshops, and worked closely with the Project Team (as I have outlined already) to consider alternative solutions.
6270488 29
Potential adverse visual effects
13.9 In a general sense, I concur with findings of the LVE Report in terms of the assessment of visual effects, in that:
a The visual effects in Character Area A (loosely Site Area 1 in the LVE Report) will be low (with potential for moderate effects during periods of construction);
b The visual effects, both during construction and following completion, in Character Area B (loosely Site Area 2 in the LVE Report) will be low;
c The visual effects in Character Area C (loosely Site Area 3 in the LVE Report) will be low (with potential for moderate effects during periods of construction); and
d The visual effects, both during construction and following completion, in Character Area D (loosely Site Areas 4 and 5 in the LVE Report) will be moderate.
13.10 However, I consider it useful to re-explore some of the finer aspects of the Project in more detail, to provide greater clarity around the potential visual effects of some of the key structures. I set out my analysis below.
Albany Busway Bridge
13.11 The visual catchment which will have the greatest visibility of the proposed Albany Busway Bridge are a group of terraced houses on elevated land to the southeast of the bridge location. Several of these properties have broad views over the existing motorway corridor and bus station car park, with the vegetated hillside above Lucas Creek providing a backdrop.
13.12 In assessing the view from common-land to adjacent to the ground floor of one of these properties, I have assessed the view as being essentially split into two halves. The lower half is occupied by urban infrastructure, including not only the hard surfaces and vehicles, but also motorway signage, shelter buildings, overhead powerlines, and street lights. The tops of the street lights generally contain this part of the view, with the
6270488 30
more natural outlook across to Lucas Creek hillside being the more dominant feature, drawing the eye away from the motorway.
13.13 I have reviewed the cross-sections, long-sections and GA plans for the revised overbridge, and following conversations with Mr Moore, I understand that the bridge itself will be located approximately 6.0m above the existing motorway carriageway, with the main bulk of the bridge (the base and railings) being lower than the existing 12.0m street lights along the motorway. In essence, the bridge sits within the element of the view considered to be urban infrastructure, and does not interrupt the broader view of the Lucas Creek hillside.
13.14 The only exception is the elevation of the street lights on the bridge itself, and I have confirmed with Mr Moore that it will be possible to install lower- height (6.0m) lights on the structure, as well as position them further apart than what is standard on the motorway itself. I have included this requirement in the ‘Outcomes Sought’ section of UDLF.27
13.15 Other views of the bridge might be possible from more elevated areas to the north and east of the motorway (such as Fairview Heights). However, in my opinion, it will meld into a broader view that includes a variety of infrastructure and commercial development. It will not interrupt any specific views to natural landscape elements or features.
13.16 The revised bridge design will lessen the overall prominence of the structure, eliminating the elevated section across the car park. Whilst this was within the ‘infrastructure’ part of the view described above, its form and linearity across the view would have heightened people’s awareness of it. In my opinion, the revised design will be better integrated with the existing arrangement, and provides greater opportunity for planting to provide visual screening.
13.17 Overall I conclude that the potential visual effects of the proposed busway bridge will be low, consistent with the overall level of visual effects assessed in the LVE Report.
27 Section 5.4 of the revised UDLF, page 34.
6270488 31
McClymonts Bridge
13.18 The nature of the topography around the McClymonts Bridge means that there are virtually no static views of it from the surrounding landscape. In any case, the replacement bridge will essentially be in the same location, at the same height, and approximately the same bulk as the existing bridge. I do not consider there will be any notable visual effects as a result.
Spencer Road Cutting
13.19 The GA drawings show the likelihood of tall retaining walls through the cutting below the consented Spencer Road footbridge. At the highest point, these could be up to 8.6m in height, although that will be through the middle portion only.
13.20 As the road is within a cutting, there are no immediate views of this part of the Project from the surrounding landscape, and so all the effects will be internalised to the Project, experienced only by users of the road, busway or SUP.
13.21 The UDLF provides strong guidance on the treatment of retaining walls such as this, and I have specifically identified these walls in the Landscape Mitigation and Enhancement Plans28 as requiring patterning and planting. I do not consider that planting is required from a visual mitigation perspective, but rather contributes to better urban design and landscape outcomes described earlier in my evidence.
Colliston Rise
13.22 A short section of retaining wall is required on the eastern side of the SH1 motorway adjacent to the newly constructed Colliston Rise. At the highest point, these could be up to 11.4m in height, although the walls directly adjacent to residential properties would all be less than 9.0m. The wall supports fill (so is viewed as a wall from outside the Project) from Lots 28 to Lot 63 (as shown on the plan contained in the UDLF29).
28 Page 44 of the revised UDLF. 29 Page 45 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 32
13.23 It is proposed that the SUP would be located on the top of these walls, raising the potential for privacy effects if users of the SUP were able to look down into the neighbouring properties.
13.24 Mr Moore has arranged the production of a series of cross-sections that run along the alignment and show the relationship of the retaining walls against each property, the existing topography, and the availability of clear-space where mitigation planting might be available. These are attached as Annexure B to my evidence, together with a map of the subdivision showing lot numbers.
13.25 In considering the potential mitigation, I have developed the following options which are included in the UDLF:30
a Install a 2.0m solid wall on top of the retaining wall to prevent users of the SUP viewing into the neighbouring properties (and to prevent people climbing over it). This wall would appear to be integrated with the retaining wall – therefore perceived from the outside as a single wall. I recognise that this solution will effectively raise the height of the wall seen from the residential side by a further 2.0m, increasing both visual effects and potential shading. However, in my opinion, protecting privacy is an important visual amenity outcome that over- weighs other such effects in this instance. As part of the design process, I did work with the design team to consider alternatives to a solid wall (such as louvres), but these presented other challenges (such as climbability).
b Where there is greater than 1.0m separation between the base of the wall and the adjacent property boundary, plant tall growing vegetation against the wall to help screen the wall itself, and help it to be visually recessive. In addition, where possible, use a creeping plant to help green the wall.
c Where there is greater than 3.0m separation between the base of the wall and the adjacent property boundary, plant a mixture of tall and shorter growing vegetation to help screen the wall and help it to be
30 Section 5.7 of the revised UDLF, page 38.
6270488 33
visually recessive. The shorter plants would be closest to the property boundary, helping to ensure the retention of light onto the property.
d Where there is greater than 0.3m and less than 1.0m separation between the base of the wall and the adjacent property boundary, use a creeping plant to help green the wall.
e Where there is less than 0.3m separation between the base of the wall and the adjacent property boundary, encourage creeping plants from adjacent areas to grow onto the wall.
f In all circumstances, consider an appropriate patterning or artwork on the residential side of the wall to help reduce its prominence.
13.26 I understand that (prior to my involvement in the Project) the land developer on Colliston Rise was consulted and provided with the cross- sections, and I note that there are no submissions from landowners in this area. I also note that Transport Agency has purchased Lots 23 and 24 (so these are not included in my assessment below).
13.27 Based on the cross-section information and potential mitigation available, I provide the following assessment of the level of visual effects for each property:
Lot Wall height Distance to Assessed level of effect Number at centre boundary (including 2.0m SUP Screen) 22 8.0m 7.5m Low minimum Significant space for planting 23 & 24 N/A N/A The Transport Agency owned properties. UDLF principles still apply. 25 8.4m 0.3m Very High No room for any planting or climbers, although climbers may creep from adjacent locations
6270488 34
26 7.7m 0.8m High Some space for planting 27 7.4m 1.0m High Little space for planting 28 6.0m 0.8m High Little space for planting 29 0.8m 3.1m Very Low (But would At this point the main retaining would be built to be below the residential property, 2.0m and so the purpose of the wall height) becomes to prevent people from the residential side climbing over. 56 7.2m 23.4m Very Low Significant space for planting 57 10.7m 20.0m Very Low Significant space for planting 58 11.7m 11.6m Very Low Significant space for planting 59 7.6m 5.3m Low Significant space for planting 60 5.4m 2.1m Moderate Some space for planting 61 3.6m 1.6m Low Low wall with some space for planting 62 2.9m 0.7m Low Low wall akin to a high fence 63 2.6m 2.0m Low Low wall akin to a high fence
13.28 Overall, I consider that there will be high to very high visual effects on four properties in Colliston Rise. Whilst some mitigation can be provided through planting and patterning of the walls, they will be very prominent structures in close proximity to residential dwellings. In addition, they will create a degree of shading effect in the afternoon and evening. However,
6270488 35
I recognise that they will also eliminate all views of the motorway which are currently experienced, and may bring some level of noise benefit.
Greville Road Intersection
13.29 The existing motorway interchange at Greville Road is large, containing several multi-lane local roads and complex intersections. It is located within a depression in the landscape, and as a result is looked down on by some areas of the surrounding landscape. However, it remains relatively recessive overall due to its location within a predominantly commercial land use area (where there are large format buildings).
13.30 The proposed works will widen the designation area significantly as the proposed busway swings eastward to bypass existing local road intersections. However, this, in turn, provides significant space for planting. This planting will help to integrate the engineered landforms into the surrounding landscape, and in time reduce visibility of vehicles. This planting is identified in the UDLF.31
13.31 Overall, I consider the visual effects of the Greville Road intersection to be very low.
Rosedale Road Area
13.32 The existing motorway alignment in the Rosedale Road area is elevated above the surrounding topography (on embankments), which means the widening associated with the Project will require some large fill retaining walls, such that these walls will be visible from outside the Project area. In places these walls will reach heights of 13.3m.
13.33 This part of the landscape is described as Character Area B in the UDLF32 and is dominated by commercial and light industry land use. For the most part, large buildings (tall height with windowless walls) and car parking areas are located directly adjacent to the corridor, and there are several advertising and signage hoardings vying for the attention of the motorway driver. The retaining walls will not be out of character with many of the surrounding building forms.
31 Page 45 of the revised UDLF. 32 Page 11 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 36
13.34 In nearly all places along this part of the corridor, despite the increase in lanes and addition of the busway and SUP, the switch from embankments to walls allows the retention of a small amount of space (less than 3m) along the designation boundary for planting. However, given the nature of the adjacent activity, such planting may not be desirable, and may also be difficult to effectively maintain. I have therefore noted in the UDLF that any such planting should only be undertaken in consultation with the neighbouring land owner.33
13.35 With or without planting, the higher retaining walls will provide opportunity for patterning treatment, to be directed by the appointed iwi artist. With such patterning, I consider that the walls are likely to become visually attractive, potentially lessening their perceived impact.
13.36 Overall, I consider that the visual effects of the proposed road through this section will be low. Whilst there will be high retaining walls, these are unlikely to dwarf the surrounding commercial buildings, and can be mitigated to some extent through planting or patterning.
SH1/SH18 Connection Ramps, SH18, and Paul Matthews Overbridge
13.37 The Project includes two connection ramps between SH1 and SH18. The SH18 to SH1 (northbound) ramp will largely be constructed at the existing grade of the motorway, and the SH1 to SH18 (westbound) ramp raises up to pass over the top of the existing motorway, before dropping down to the proposed grade of SH18. Paul Matthews Road is proposed to be connected to SH18 by a bridge that passes over a slightly lowered motorway, in relatively close proximity to a cluster of properties located on Wren Place.
13.38 In the next few paragraphs I will provide an overview of the nature of the visual effects from a general perspective, the proposed mitigation, and then in section 13.49 I provide a detailed assessment of all the directly adjacent properties alongside SH18 from Constellation Interchange to Rook Reserve. Firstly, however, I provide a brief outline of the information I have used to support my assessment (in addition to the GA drawings) that is attached to my evidence as Annexure C:
33 Page 46 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 37
a Pages 1 to 3 contain a series of aerial photographs prepared by Mr Moore at 1:1,000 scale (A3), overlaid with various Project outlines. These outlines show the location of the SUP, SH18, and the embankments, in relation to neighbouring properties. For readability, I have also added the house numbers and street names.
b Pages 4 to 7 contain a series of photographs together with a map marking the photograph positions. These have been taken looking towards the properties adjacent to SH18. The images contain multiple frame photographs that have been stitched together using Adobe Photoshop. Again, for readability, I have added house numbers for those properties that are visible.
c Page 8 contains a screenshot of the 3D PDF model prepared by Mr Bain. This is not to scale. The darker green colour indicates existing ground terrain, the lighter green showing where earthworks would change the existing terrain, white shows the Project works, and orange shows existing dwellings. Also shown are trees and a boundary fence. Mr Bain provides in his evidence an outline of how the model was constructed.34 I note that the model is not well represented in print form, and is best used ‘live’ as a flexible, digital tool.
d Pages 9 to 14 provide screenshots of a series of cross-sections through the 3D PDF model, intersecting with the location of adjacent house numbers. The house through which the cross-section is run is numbered, and its location is shown by the small inset on the top-right (the black section having been cut away from the model). The colours referred to above then show the relative arrangements of the Project elements, relative to the location and height of the neighbouring properties (these having been derived from LiDAR data as outlined by Mr Bain). I note that these screenshots are not to scale, and have been provided to show the type of information I was able to derive from the model in its live form (digitally rather than by print). I did not use the model to calculate actual measurements, but rather to assess relativities.
34 Section 5 of Mr Bain’s evidence in chief (3D Modelling).
6270488 38
13.39 In response to requests from Auckland Council’s Urban Design Panel, BML prepared a selection of preliminary photo-simulations of SH18 as viewed from various locations within Unsworth Heights. I have not included those simulations as part of my evidence because I consider that the digital model subsequently prepared by Mr Bain provides a much better representation of the bulk, height and mass of the Project from various locations.
13.40 The closest properties to the connection ramps will be a collection of large commercial buildings immediately to the east (north side of Constellation Drive). In order to achieve the gradients and accommodate the busway, these properties will also be closest to a series of fill retaining walls that extend up to 8.2m in height. However, all of the commercial properties in this location face ‘away’ from the motorway corridor, with their public- facing sides opening onto a public car park accessed from Constellation Drive. There are few, if any, windows in the walls facing the Project area, and for the most part the buildings are already located below the grade of the motorway. Overall, I consider the visual effects on these properties will be very low. Nevertheless, I have ensured that the walls do receive good urban design treatment through the application of appropriate patterning (as outlined on page 48 of the UDLF).
13.41 There will be views of the ramps from the Constellation Bus Station, but these are relatively distant, across an already extensive motorway interchange and in the context of a transport connection facility. I consider the visual effect of the proposed ramps from this location to be very low.
13.42 There will be some visibility of the ramps from properties located in the eastern end of the Unsworth Heights subdivision, particularly around Cabello Place. However, many of these properties have limited views of the existing SH18 area due to a series of large, semi-mature pohutukawa and other native trees along the SH18 designation line, and an approximately 1.8m high fence. It is proposed that these existing trees be retained, with further enhancement planting undertaken as necessary to provide a dense vegetative screen along the road boundary in this location.
13.43 In addition, significant planting is considered to be an outcome sought between SH18 and the ramps, and further in-fill planting along the
6270488 39
southern side of SH18, which is likely to fully screen (over time) any view of the motorway infrastructure itself.
13.44 Further to the west, including the area around Paul Matthews Drive (and the new overbridge), it is likely that some vegetation will need to be removed in order to allow for bridge construction. Although SH18 is proposed to be lowered in this location by several metres (through the crest of the hill), the GA and structural drawings for the proposed bridge indicate that this will be raised by up to 4 metres. Whilst the existing road is currently below the immediately adjacent properties when it passes through Paul Matthews Road intersection, the new bridge (to the top of the barriers) will be located above several properties in close proximity.
13.45 To help mitigate the visual effects of the proposed road and bridge along SH18, I recommend the construction of a 2.4m high boundary fence between Caribbean Drive and the end of the proposed noise wall near Rook Reserve. I suggest a height of 2.4m, 400-600mm high than a typical boundary fence, as this would bring the fence height above a majority of the ground floor windows, therefore eliminating views of not only the motorway infrastructure itself, but also of vehicles using it. In addition, I have included visual mitigation planting along the road side of this fence.
13.46 I recognise that the higher fence will potentially create shadow effects, although these are not likely to be experienced in any greater degree than the shadows already cast by existing vegetation. I am also of the opinion that the fence will be considered beneficial by most (if not all) adjacent property owners.
13.47 From the more elevated sections of Unsworth Heights in this area, views are restricted by surrounding residential dwellings, as well as the vegetation outlined above. I consider the visual effects of the ramps for this area will also be negligible.
13.48 There will be a view of the proposed ramps from the area of open space west of the Watercare site, in the location of the existing hockey grounds. However, the proposed planting will be seen to be significant from this location, and screen most of the motorway infrastructure. The ramps will also be seen in the context of an existing motorway and local road
6270488 40
network. I consider the potential visual effects of the ramps from this location will be low.
13.49 The following table provides a detailed assessment of all directly adjacent properties from Constellation Drive to Rook Reserve (refer also to Annexure B):
Address of Approximate Approximate Mitigation Overall Potentially distance of Height of Assessment Affected Proposed Proposed of Potential Property New Works New Works Effect to Property relative to Boundary Boundary 19 Cabello Over 70m to SUP 2m Existing Negligible Place SH1 lower vegetation, 30m to SUP Ramps view blocked several by 21 Cabello metres higher 21 Cabello Over 70m to SUP 2m Existing Very Low Place SH1 lower vegetation Over 90m to Ramps and fence. ramps several Enhancement 3m to SUP metres higher planting possible on boundary, and between SH18 and ramps 23 Cabello Over 70m to SUP 2m No existing Low Place SH1 lower vegetation, Over 90m to Ramps but fence and ramps several enhancement 3m to SUP metres higher planting possible, and between SH18 and ramps 25, 27 and Over 80m to SUP 2m Existing Very Low 29 Cabello SH1 lower vegetation Place Over 70m to Ramps and fence. ramps several Enhancement 3m to SUP metres higher planting possible on boundary, and between SH18 and ramps
6270488 41
Address of Approximate Approximate Mitigation Overall Potentially distance of Height of Assessment Affected Proposed Proposed of Potential Property New Works New Works Effect to Property relative to Boundary Boundary 31 and 30 Over 70m to SUP 2m No existing Low Cabello ramps lower vegetation, Place 3m to SUP Ramps but fence. several Some metres higher opportunity for vegetation but need low planting around pedestrian alleyway for CPTED. Planting between SH18 and ramps 28, 26, 24 Over 60m to SUP 1.5m Existing Very Low and 22 ramps lower vegetation Cabello 3m to SUP Ramps and fence. Place similar grade Enhancement planting possible on boundary, and between SH18 and ramps 18 and 20 Over 60m to SUP 1.5m No existing Low Cabello ramps lower vegetation, Place 3m to SUP Ramps but fence and similar grade enhancement planting possible, and between SH18 and ramps Meadowood 30m to link Most works Existing Very Low Community road approximately vegetation House Upgraded 1m lower and fence. intersection Link road Enhancement on boundary overbridge a planting 3m to SUP few metres possible on higher boundary,
6270488 42
Address of Approximate Approximate Mitigation Overall Potentially distance of Height of Assessment Affected Proposed Proposed of Potential Property New Works New Works Effect to Property relative to Boundary Boundary and around intersection. 1A, 3B, 5B, Over 40m to Most works Patchy Low 7B, 9 and new SH18 approximately existing 11 motorway 1m lower. vegetation Barbados 5m to SUP Motorway a and a new Drive few metres 2.4m fence. higher Enhancement planting possible on boundary and between Highway and Motorway. 13, 15, 17, Over 40m to Most works at Patchy Low 19, 21 and new grade or existing 23 motorway slightly lower, vegetation Barbados 5m to SUP motorway and a new Drive approximately 2.4m fence. at grade Enhancement planting possible on boundary and between Highway and Motorway. 23, 25, 27, 10m to Paul Paul Existing Low 29 and 31 Matthews Matthews vegetation Barbados Road Road largely and a new Drive 5m to SUP at grade or 2.4m fence. very slightly Enhancement higher as it planting rises. possible on boundary and between Highway and Motorway. 33, 35 and 10m to Paul Paul Existing Moderate 37 Matthews Matthews vegetation Barbados Road Road and may need Drive 5m to SUP SUP up to 2m removal. New higher 2.4m fence.
6270488 43
Address of Approximate Approximate Mitigation Overall Potentially distance of Height of Assessment Affected Proposed Proposed of Potential Property New Works New Works Effect to Property relative to Boundary Boundary Enhancement planting possible on boundary and between Highway and Motorway. 39, 41B, 43 8m to Paul Paul Existing High and 45 Matthews Matthews vegetation Barbados Road Road and may need Drive 3m to SUP SUP up to 4m removal. New higher 2.4m fence. Some enhancement planting possible on boundary. 41A Over 20m to Paul View Negligible Barbados Paul Matthews restricted by Drive Matthews Road and dwelling and Road SUP up to 4m new 2.4m Over 15m to higher fence at 41B. SUP 47 10m to Paul Paul Existing Moderate Barbados Matthews Matthews vegetation Drive Road Road and may need 5m to SUP SUP up to 4m removal. New higher 2.4m fence. Enhancement planting possible on boundary. 49, 51 and Over 10m to Paul Existing Low 57 Paul Matthews vegetation Barbados Matthews Road and and new Drive Road SUP up to 4m 2.4m fence. 5m to SUP higher Large area for enhancement planting on boundary
6270488 44
Address of Approximate Approximate Mitigation Overall Potentially distance of Height of Assessment Affected Proposed Proposed of Potential Property New Works New Works Effect to Property relative to Boundary Boundary 59 15m to Motorway 3m Existing Very Low Barbados motorway lower vegetation Drive 25m to SUP and new 2.4m noise wall. Enhancement planting possible on boundary. 9, 11, 13 Over 5m to Motorway 2m Existing Very Low and 14 motorway lower or more vegetation Wren Place and new 2.4m noise wall. Enhancement planting possible on boundary.
13.50 In summary, I consider that a majority of properties directly adjacent to SH18 will experience low or very low visual effects once mitigation is established.
13.51 For Cabello Place residents, the motorway is some distance away and will be screened by planting, and whilst the SUP is closer it will be at a lower grade and screened by existing and enhanced vegetation.
13.52 For most Barbados Drive residents adjacent, the installation of a 2.4m wall will screen nearly all of the proposed roads, particularly with the establishment of additional vegetation on the boundary. Only where Paul Matthews Road rises higher than the existing grade will residents be able to see moving vehicles. During construction this will be heightened, as some vegetation in this area will need to be removed. I conclude that properties 33, 35, 37, and 47 Barbados Drive will experience moderate visual effects, and 39, 41B, 43 and 45 Barbados Drive will experience high visual effects. In time these effects will be mitigated by the establishment of boundary vegetation.
6270488 45
13.53 The last few properties in Barbados Drive, and those in Wren Place, will experience low to very low visual effects, as the existing road is essentially being lowered to form the motorway. The proposed noise wall will also provide additional mitigation.
SH18 west of Paul Matthews Road Bridge
13.54 West of Paul Matthews Road, the motorway will have a very similar appearance to the existing SH18 highway, albeit without a connection to Unsworth Road. There will be the addition of gantry signage across the road, which may be visible from some more elevated properties, and some changes to Rook Reserve (as outlined earlier, section 12.16) and Bluebird Reserve. However, overall I consider that the increased visual prominence, and resulting visual effects, will be very low.
13.55 A 2.4-2.5m high noise wall is proposed alongside Alexandra Creek and a cluster of MetLife Care dwellings, on the southern side of the road. This wall will have a similar form and height to a typical boundary fence, albeit slightly higher, and I consider that it will be beneficial at reducing potential visibility of the motorway. The dense arrangement of the dwellings in this location, and their aspect away from the motorway, leads me to the conclusion that the visual effect of the Project on these properties will be low.
Potential Visual Effects During Construction
13.56 As outlined earlier in my evidence (section 8.5), the landscape in which the Project is located is in a state of change. Construction activity is taking place across wide areas, particularly around Rosedale and Greville Roads, but also along SH18 in the MetLife Care property. Future construction activity is likely on vacant lots around the Albany Bus Station.
13.57 Nevertheless, construction of the Project will create increased levels of activity and movement within and around the Project area. From a visual effects perspective, this is more likely to be of concern to private residents in close proximity to the motorway, particularly around SH18 and the new Colliston Rise / Spencer Road subdivision.
13.58 The mitigation of visual effects along SH18 can largely be achieved through the construction of the boundary wall recommended above
6270488 46
(section 13.45), however this would need to be installed prior to the main construction works starting. I also recommend that the proposed planting adjacent to this wall be undertaken as quickly as practicable.
13.59 Unfortunately there are few mitigation opportunities available around Colliston Rise, and many of the adjacent properties as well as some of those more elevated will have views of the construction activity in this part of the Project. Whilst new residents in this area will also be experiencing other construction around them, I consider that the construction visual effects in this area, although temporary, will be high.
Overall Assessment of Potential Visual Effects
13.60 Given the scale and nature of the Project, I consider that overall the potential visual effects are very low. There will be places and properties where new elements of the motorway, busway or SUP will be visible, but generally these are in the context of busy commercial/industrial activity, or in the context of the existing road network. However, there are a few locations that will experience higher levels of visual effect, namely:
a The western-most residences at 60B Masons Road that overlook the proposed Albany Busway Overbridge. It is recommended that lower height lighting be used on this bridge.
b Four properties in Colliston Rise (Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28) directly adjacent to retaining walls (and one property with moderate effects). Mitigation options are set out in the UDLF.35
c Four properties in Barbados Drive (numbers 39, 41B, 43 and 45) directly adjacent to the proposed Paul Matthews Road overbridge, and a further four properties (numbers 33, 35, 37 and 47) who will experience moderate effects. Mitigation options include a new 2.4m fence extending the length of the boundary from Caribbean Drive to Rook Reserve, and the retention and enhancement of boundary planting.
35 Section 5.7 of the revised UDLF, page 38.
6270488 47
14 Response to submissions
14.1 Below I have provided a response to those submitters that have raised urban design, landscape or visual effects concerns with the Project.
Submitter 6 – Mr Syddall, Syds Investments Limited
14.2 I understand from the submission that this submitter owns the land on which the Tile Depot and Mico Bathrooms is situated, in Titoki Place, Rosedale, and also operates the Tile Depot business. I have visited the area surrounding the submitter properties, and viewed the buildings currently on the property from the existing motorway.
14.3 Views of the property are reasonably restricted from the motorway. For vehicles travelling north, closest to the property, the traveller does not get any view until they pass over a small rise in the landform, only a few hundred metres to the south. As they pass the property, the roof signage of the Tile Depot is visible, but relatively low, below the road level. Mico Bathrooms has greater visibility, but is still restricted. For travellers heading north, the building is not in the immediate frame of view of travellers looking along the road, visible only across several lanes of traffic.
14.4 Although there is currently no vegetation along the road verge, undertaking planting is a permitted activity in the road corridor, and is an activity that has been undertaken by the Transport Agency in other areas of the motorway network. Planting in this location is possible, and if it were present it would further restrict views to the submitter property.
14.5 The proposed widening of the road in this location to add an additional northbound lane will actually bring the road closer to the submitter building, likely enhancing its visibility from the outside lanes. In addition, in response to the submission, I have noted on the UDLF plans that any planting above the retaining wall in this location should be of a low height.36
14.6 I am therefore of the opinion that the visual effects on this submitter’s property will be very low.
36 Page 46 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 48
Submitter 7 – Mr Shasha, Shasha Services Limited
14.7 This submission refers to the property located at 5 Wren Place, Unsworth Heights. I have visited the street area around this property on more than one occasion, and am familiar with the views experienced and described in the submission.
14.8 As outlined above in section 12, I have addressed the potential visual effects of the proposed works around Paul Matthews Road and SH18, and recommended visual mitigation by way of a 2.4m high fence along the boundaries adjacent to the Project area. In addition, I have outlined in the UDLF the required outcome to retain and enhance planting in this location.37 These outcomes will be beneficial in reducing, or even eliminating, views of the motorway from 5 Wren Place.
14.9 I consider that the fence and planting proposed will result in the visual effects experienced from this property to be very low.
Submitter 13 – Meadowood Community Crèche
14.10 The Meadowood Community Crèche is located within the Meadowood Reserve.
14.11 I have addressed the potential visual effects of the proposed connection ramps in section 13.49 above, and conclude that the potential visual effects on properties in the vicinity of Meadowood Community Crèche will be negligible.
14.12 As requested in the submission, the existing native screen planting currently adjacent to the SH18 boundary is proposed to be retained, with further infill planting also undertaken. In addition, significant planting will be undertaken on the opposite side of SH18, providing positive landscape effects.
14.13 The submitter suggests that ‘it would be of benefit to the Meadowood community to have the community house and playground upgraded to compensate for the loss of reserve land’. The Project will involve the extensive development of Rook Reserve as I have outlined above, and as
37 Section 6 of the revised UDLF, page 51.
6270488 49
outlined in Mr Greenaway’s evidence, this development will provide positive community and recreation outcomes.38
14.14 Overall, I consider that the potential landscape and visual effects experienced at Meadowood Community Crèche will be low to very low.
Submitter 32 – Kiwi Self Storage Limited
14.15 This property is located on the eastern side of the road, accessed from Constellation Drive. I have visited public areas around the submitter property, and viewed it from both the motorway and opposite Pond 2 on Arrenway Drive. I have seen the glass feature area displaying storage units as referred to in the submission, and the flag pole and signage.
14.16 However, despite the location of the site, visibility of the building and signage is not without its obstructions. The best visibility is achieved when travelling south on an outside lane of the motorway, but even then views can be restricted by buses travelling along the hard shoulder (an existing recognised bus lane).
14.17 Further, the existing planting, although patchy (currently a row of palm trees), is distracting and does not provide a clear view of the site. The clearest view is across Pond 2 where there is no vegetation. For the last few hundred metres until the traveller is adjacent to the property, the view of it largely disappears as the site is located below the existing grade of the motorway.
14.18 As outlined in regard to Mr Syddall’s submission, planting within the existing corridor is a permitted activity, and if undertaken in this location would significantly reduce or even eliminate views of the submitter property. In addition, there is no guarantee that the Watercare land adjacent to Pond 2 also could not be planted, or developed, in the future.
14.19 However, I have already referred to the desire to retain a sense of openness across Ponds 1 and 2 (section 12.11), and I have noted in the UDLF that low planting be placed in this area to retain outward views.39 This will involve the removal of some, or potentially all, of the existing palm trees, opening up views to the submitter property. I accept that such
38 Paragraphs 8.6 and 10.4 of Mr Greenaway’s evidence in chief (Recreation and Reserves). 39 Page 47 of the revised UDLF.
6270488 50
views (from the motorway) will be across the proposed busway, but these will be affected in a similar way as they are now.
14.20 I also note that the SUP will pass directly adjacent to the submitter property, so views will be clearer for SUP users. I have included in the UDLF a requirement to provide an open fence at the top of the retaining wall (unlike the closed wall adjacent to residential properties) to ensure visibility of the commercial area generally is retained.
14.21 I am therefore of the opinion that the visual effects on this submitter’s property will be very low.
Submitter 26 – Melanesian Mission Trust Board and St John’s College Trust Board
14.22 This submitter supports the mitigation measures outlined in the AEE for the MSE retaining wall including the use of visually recessive colours, vegetation in front of walls and keeping structures as low as possible. The submitter specifically acknowledges that the implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the visual effects of the MSE retaining wall on its site.
Auckland Council
14.23 The submission from Auckland Council is extensive, and responds to the Project as it was submitted, including the UDLF at the time of lodging. As I have outlined earlier in my evidence (paragraph 10.9), I have since undertaken an extensive review of the UDLF and consider that the new version provides the landscape and urban design information the Council is seeking. In undertaking this review, I have focussed on a number of specific details throughout the Project, and worked to ensure there is a better alignment between the UDLF and GA drawings.
14.24 As I have mentioned, Mr Burn provides an overview of the proposed conditions that will ensure the outcomes sought in the UDLF can be realised through conditions.
14.25 Throughout my evidence, I have also addressed many of the concerns Auckland Council has raised as I have provided my own assessment
6270488 51
conclusions. I address the specific concerns raised by Council below (using the paragraph references from Auckland Council’s submission).
14.26 Paragraph 4.1.2 – Implementing the recommended design opportunities – Auckland Council requests that the following outcomes in the UDLF are delivered:
a 4.1.2a and 8.1.4 – New stormwater pond at Lucas Creek – As explained by Mr Hughes, the reference to an additional stormwater pond at Lucas Creek has been removed from the UDLF as this is no longer required.40 The proposed stormwater ponds will ensure that all stormwater from new and existing High Use Road within the Project area is treated to 75% TSS in accordance with TP10. Adding an additional stormwater pond would not be of any benefit.
b 4.1.2b – The Spencer Road Bridge – The Spencer Road Bridge is not part of this Project and has been approved by Auckland Council under an OPW (refer to the evidence of Mr Burn). As outlined in paragraph 11.22 above, a connection from the SUP to this bridge is included in the Project.
c 4.1.2c – A SUP connection over Greville Road to the Rosedale Landfill future open space – An off-road SUP connection is provided alongside Greville Road underneath the motorway corridor. A connection from the Rosedale Landfill future open space can be made in the future but is not appropriate at the current time as the Landfill is not open for public use. There are a number of at-grade locations where this could be achieved. Equally, there are a number of at-grade locations along the SUP adjacent to SH1 where a connection to the future open space could also be made, and there is a connection provided between this SUP and Greville Road.
d 4.1.2d – Details of the cultural design narrative for the Constellation Bus Station – A cultural narrative has been developed with Mana Whenua and is included in the UDLF.41 All design within the Project,
40 Paragraph 13.5 of Mr Hughes evidence in chief (Stormwater). 41 Section 4.2.3 of the revised UDLF, page 26.
6270488 52
including any works to the Constellation Bus Station, will be an interpretation of this narrative.
e 4.1.2e – Mound between the SH1/SH18 ramps – I do not consider that an earth mound between the ramps and SH18 is required in the vicinity of Caribbean Drive, as the ramps are located some distance to the east of this location. Whilst the intersection at the base of Caribbean Drive will get notably larger, it will be mitigated to a significant degree by extensive planting between the motorway and SH18, and within the traffic islands.
f 4.1.2f – Shift the retaining wall south of Rosedale Road to accommodate planting – I have reviewed the alignment of this wall with Mr Moore and I understand it cannot be moved for safety and alignment reasons. I have updated the UDLF to indicate that this will need artistic patterning in keeping with the iwi narrative interpretation.
14.27 4.1.3 – Design details – the Council has requested further information for the following:
a 4.1.3a – Retaining walls and railings – The UDLF has been updated to demonstrate the anticipated outcomes in regard to retaining walls with railings.42
b 4.1.3b – Bridge and elevated lanes, including railings for key bridges – These drawings have been provided by Mr Moore as part of the overall design package.43 I have outlined in my evidence (paragraph 11.7) how the iwi narrative will be interpreted through the detailed design stage and applied to the materiality, theming and design aspects of all the structures and bridges within the proposal, as outlined in the UDLF.44
c 4.1.3c – Noise walls Barbados Drive, the Greenwich Gardens Retirement Village and part of Bluebird Crescent – The updated UDLF contains details about how the noise walls will be integrated into the Project.45 These will be developed under the guidance of the
42 Page 38 of the revised UDLF. 43 Sections 2, 3 and 4 of Volume 5 Scheme Plan and Drawings of the AEE. 44 Section 5.4 of the revised UDLF, page 33. 45 Section 5.7 of the revised UDLF, page 37.
6270488 53
iwi appointed artist in accordance with the design principles and narratives in the UDLF.
d 4.1.3d – SUPs and cycleways including surface treatment and railings – The updated UDLF details relating to the outcomes sought around the SUP.46 These outcomes include the consideration of boundary fences, signage (both wayfinding and in relation to whakapapa, or naming) and surface treatments.
e 4.1.3.e – Planting proposed – The UDLF planting section has been updated and provides guidance on achieving successful establishment of plants.47 This also reflects the Transport Agency’s internal P39 Specification for planting.
f 4.1.3f – Detailing for bus station walling and other key structural elements – A cultural narrative has been developed with Mana Whenua. It is anticipated that all design within the Project, including any works to the Constellation Bus Station would be an interpretation of this narrative, as outlined in the UDLF.48
14.28 4.1.4 – Assessment of Visual Effects – I have provided a more extensive assessment of the potential visual effects in section 12 of my evidence and Annexures B and C of my evidence than what was provided in the LVE Report, and consider that I have covered off all of Auckland Council’s concerns in this regard.
14.29 5.1.1 – Reserve Remediation Plan – Mr Greenaway’s evidence outlines that a reserves reinstatement package will be agreed with Auckland Council Parks.49 The Landscape Mitigation and Enhancement Plans in the UDLF50 contain details of the planting proposed for the reserves. In addition, a draft concept plan is being prepared for Rook Reserve which shows the outcomes that can be achieved within this reserve following construction of the stormwater management pond in this location.
14.30 5.1.5 – Design Narrative – Council’s submission seeks conditions requiring retaining walls and other structures on public open spaces are
46 Section 5.10 of the revised UDLF, page 40. 47 Section 5.9 of the revised UDLF, page 39. 48 Section 5.8 of the revised UDLF, page 39. 49 Paragraph 8.5(a) of Mr Greenway’s evidence in chief (Recreation and Reserves). 50 Section 6 of the revised UDLF, page 53.
6270488 54
designed to mitigate adverse visual and amenity effects – The proposed mitigation measures are set out in Sections 5 and 6 of the UDLF (which is in turn required to be implemented through the UDLPs required by the conditions of consent as set out above).
14.31 5.1.6 – Additional assessment of Rook Reserve – I have provided an updated assessment of the potential landscape effects of Rook Reserve in section 12.16 of my evidence.
14.32 5.1.7 – Provision of additional SUPs:
a 5.1.7a – SUP on both sides of SH18 – I have provided an extensive overview of the urban design outcomes in regard to the SUP along SH18 and why I consider the north side option to be the preferred option in paragraph 11.29 of my evidence.
b 5.1.7b(i) – SUP from the Greville Road Interchange to the Landfill – refer to point 4.1.2c above.
c 5.1.7b(ii) – SUP from Constellation Drive Interchange to Rosedale Park South – The suggested SUP connection from Constellation Drive along Atlas Place or Vega Place is outside the boundary of the Project, but remains something that could be added in the future if there was demand and funding was made available.
d 5.1.7b(iii) – Pedestrian bridge to supplement the Alexandra Creek underpass – I have provided an extensive overview of the existing Alexandra Creek underpass and the proposed upgrade in paragraph 11.30 above.
e 5.1.7b(iv) – SUP around the periphery of Pond 2 – The suggested SUP connection to Centorian Reserve is outside the boundary of the Project, but remains something that could be added in the future if there was demand and funding was available.
f 5.1.7b(v) – Various connections to the local road network – The suggested local road SUP connections are outside the boundary of the Project, but remain something that could be added in the future if there was demand and funding was available.
6270488 55
g 5.1.7b(vi) – Separated cycle facilities on the McClymonts bridge – As outlined in paragraph 11.21 of my evidence, the design of the footpaths and on-road cycle-lanes across McClymonts bridge responds to the request from AT.
14.33 By way of general comment, I note that there are a number of SUP connections outside the Project area that would be beneficial in general terms. As I have indicated earlier in my evidence, the Project does not prevent these connections being made as the SUP network is expanded in the future. However, the current connections represent the best practicable option within the Project area.
14.34 The concerns raised by Auckland Council and responded to above are derived from feedback on the Project provided by the Auckland Urban Design Panel Recommendations, therefore I do not consider it necessary to cover Attachment 2 of Auckland Council’s submission separately. I will make the note that no noise walls are proposed adjacent to any public open spaces, and so the use of translucent materials for such walls is not a necessary consideration.
15 Response to section 149G(3) key issues report
15.1 Paragraph 51 of the key issues report raises the issue of whether the positive effects of the proposed SUP counterbalance the adverse effects associated with loss of open space and reserves. I consider that the SUP will provide significant benefits to the wider community, providing both lineal and cross-connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists. In addition, as outlined by Mr Greenaway,51 the development of Rook Reserve will provide for a more usable recreational facility that has, in my opinion, good community and recreation outcomes. Overall, I consider that the combined landscape and urban design effects, even considering the loss of public open space, will be positive.
15.2 Paragraph 74 of the key issues report states that it is unclear whether the Project will contain the proposed replanting, or whether this mitigation will be offset at other sites. The report states that the plans provided do not evidence the nature, species and density of mitigation planting, and the visual coherence of the final landscape requires consideration. In
51 Paragraph 10.4 of Mr Greenaway’s evidence in chief (Recreation and Reserves).
6270488 56
response, I have increased the details in the UDLF relating to the outcomes sought around planting, so that it is clear that these outcomes will need to be delivered as part of the Project. Auckland Council will have further opportunity to review the proposed planting as part of the OPW submission, which will include a UDLP.
15.3 Paragraph 154 of the key issues report refers to the extent to which the Project and conditions provide for appropriate urban design, landscape and amenity of the finished work in the context of a varying urban environment. I consider that the UDLF addresses this concern, and that the multi-staged design process has allowed for the refining of design principles and outcomes sought. The involvement of the iwi artist will help to ensure that the Project reinforces both the cultural connection to the wider landscape, and reinforces a sense of place and identity.
15.4 Paragraph 160 of the key issues report states that a key issue is the extent to which the Project avoids and remedies effects on trees in open space and roads, having regard to the policies in E16 and E17. I acknowledge that there will be the loss of some roadside vegetation throughout the Project, most of which sits alongside the existing corridors being upgraded. However, extensive planting is proposed throughout the Project area – to the extent that it will become a feature of this part of the road (as planting has done on other parts of the Auckland motorway network). I am of the opinion that this planting more than remedies the effects on trees in open spaces and roads, indeed I consider the overall landscape outcomes to be an enhancement on the existing situation.
16 Conclusions
16.1 From an urban design and landscape perspective, I consider that the outcomes to be delivered by the Project will be positive. The outcomes driven through the UDLF and conditions of consent will result in improved amenity, lower whole of life costs and contribute to wider landscape outcomes (such as wildlife corridors). The Project provides greater connectivity across this part of the city, improved connections to the region, and improved cross-connectivity over the existing road corridors.
16.2 Overall I concur with the findings of the LVE Report that the potential visual effects across the project will be low, rising to moderate in
6270488 57
Character Area D (as assessed in the LVE Report). However, during the detailed assessment of the Project, I conclude that there are some properties that will experience higher levels of visual effect, as follows:
a The western most residences at 60B Masons Road that overlook the proposed Albany Busway Overbridge. It is recommended that lower height lighting be used on this bridge.
b Four properties in Colliston Rise (Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28) directly adjacent to retaining walls (and one property with moderate effects). Mitigation options are set out in the UDLF.52
c Four properties in Barbados Drive (numbers 39, 41B, 43 and 45) directly adjacent to the proposed Paul Matthews Road overbridge, and a further four properties (numbers 33, 35, 37 and 47) who will experience moderate effects. Mitigation options include a new 2.4m fence extending the length of the boundary from Caribbean Drive to Rook Reserve, and the retention and enhancement of boundary planting.
16.3 The mitigation of these potential visual effects is driven by design principles and outcomes sought in the UDLF and the conditions of consent. The proposed mitigation will be reviewed by Auckland Council during the OPW process.
16.4 Overall, I consider that the Project has positive urban design outcomes, positive landscape effects, and low to moderate visual effects. There are some properties adjacent to the Project that will experience higher effects, but these can be mitigated to a no more than minor level through the outcomes sought in the UDLF.
______Shannon Bray 20 April 2017
52 Section 5.7 of the revised UDLF, page 38.
6270488 58
List of Annexures
Annexure A: Urban Design and Landscape Framework (Revision 2, April 2017)
Annexure B: Colliston Rise Map and Cross Sections
Annexure C: Plans, Cross Sections and 3D Digital Model of SH18
6270488 59
Annexure A: Urban Design and Landscape Framework
(Revision 2, April 2017)
See separate volume
6270488 60
Annexure B: Colliston Rise Map and Cross Sections
6270488
Northern Corridor Improvements
PlansDraft and Urban Cross SectionsDesign Landscape Colliston Rise Framework Residential Properties Adjacent to SH18 Project No: 250310 ProjectDocument No: Ref: 250310 NCI-3PRE-1PLA-RPT-0104 Revision:Revision: 1 1 Date: 20 April 2017 12 December 2016
Annexure B to Shannon Bray’s Evidence LEGEND
COXTON LANE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY FILL SLOPE
ALTERATION TO EXISTING CUT SLOPE
RATHMULLEN PLACE RATHMULLEN 1250 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED BORED PILERW WALL 2-6 (CUT) PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED
1300 MAX H = 5.6m PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED CULVERT
A PROPOSED RETAINING WALL RW 13050
1350 - COLLISTON RISE
13100 1400 LOT 28 RW 3-1
LOT 27 MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) 13150
1450 LOT 26 MAX H = 11.4m RW RW LOT 25 RW RW RW
RW 1500
13200 RW RW RW
RW RW 1550 RW
RW 1600 RW 13250 RW 1650 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
RW 13300 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13350 RW
RW 13400 NEW MAINTENANCE BAY RW EX 825Ø
RW 13450
STEEL UC WALL WITH CONCRETE PANELS (CUT) RW 2-8 MAX H = 2.7m
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) PLAN 1:1000
BARRIER NORTHERN BUSWAY EXISTING SH1 MOTORWAY ROLL ALLOWANCE 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE SHLD SHARED SHLD SHLD BUS LANE BUS LANE SHLD SHOULDER TRAFFIC LANE 1.4m HIGH FENCE PATH EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY RL = 72.41m
4.0m PROPOSED WALL
RETAINING GROUND LEVELS
RL = 68.08m EXISTING 0.8m GROUND LEVELS C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0336.DWG Filename: PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION Auckland
Office: SECTION A 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1435, LOT 28/DP 489308) - 1:100
19/4/2017 10:41:45 AM 19/4/2017 1 0 2 4m 10 0 20 40m
SCALE 1:100 SCALE 1:1000 Plot Date: CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS A 13/04/17 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION G. MOORE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN APPROVED PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION J. LOZANO . DATE TITLE 70 SPENCER ROAD DESIGNED 19/04/17 M. FAN J. HIND SHEET 1 CHECKED PROJECT No. STAGE WP TYPE NUMBER REV DRAWING No. M. FRANCIS J. HIND 250310 5DOC 1PRP DRG 0336 A LEGEND
COXTON LANE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY FILL SLOPE
ALTERATION TO EXISTING CUT SLOPE
RATHMULLEN PLACE RATHMULLEN 1250 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED BORED PILERW WALL 2-6 (CUT) PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED
1300 MAX H = 5.6m PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED CULVERT
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL RW
13050 1350 B COLLISTON RISE
-
13100 1400 LOT 28 RW 3-1
LOT 27 MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) 13150
1450 LOT 26 MAX H = 11.4m RW RW LOT 25 RW RW RW
RW 1500
13200 RW RW RW
RW RW 1550 RW
RW 1600 RW 13250 RW 1650 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
RW 13300 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13350 RW NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
RW 13400 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13450
STEEL UC WALL WITH CONCRETE PANELS (CUT) RW 2-8 MAX H = 2.7m
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) PLAN 1:1000 BARRIER NORTHERN BUSWAY EXISTING SH1 MOTORWAY ROLL ALLOWANCE
SHLD SHARED SHLD SHLD BUS LANE BUS LANE SHLD SHOULDER TRAFFIC LANE PATH 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE
1.4m HIGH FENCE
RL = 72.06m
PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS 5.4m RETAINING WALL BOUNDARY EXISTING PROPERTY
RL = 66.16m EXISTING 1.0m GROUND LEVELS C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0337.DWG Filename: Auckland
Office: PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SECTION B 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1450, LOT 27/DP 489308) - 1:100
19/4/2017 10:42:23 AM 19/4/2017 1 0 2 4m 10 0 20 40m
SCALE 1:100 SCALE 1:1000 Plot Date: CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS A 13/04/17 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION G. MOORE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN APPROVED PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION J. LOZANO . DATE TITLE 70 SPENCER ROAD DESIGNED 19/04/17 M. FAN J. HIND SHEET 2 CHECKED PROJECT No. STAGE WP TYPE NUMBER REV DRAWING No. M. FRANCIS J. HIND 250310 5DOC 1PRP DRG 0337 A LEGEND
COXTON LANE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY FILL SLOPE
ALTERATION TO EXISTING CUT SLOPE
RATHMULLEN PLACE RATHMULLEN 1250 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED BORED PILERW WALL 2-6 (CUT) PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED
1300 MAX H = 5.6m PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED CULVERT
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL RW
13050 1350 COLLISTON RISE C
-
13100 1400 LOT 28 RW 3-1
LOT 27 MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) 13150
1450 LOT 26 MAX H = 11.4m RW RW LOT 25 RW RW RW
RW 1500
13200 RW RW RW
RW RW 1550 RW
RW 1600 RW 13250 RW 1650 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
RW 13300 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13350 RW
RW 13400 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13450 NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
STEEL UC WALL WITH CONCRETE PANELS (CUT) RW 2-8 MAX H = 2.7m
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) PLAN 1:1000 BARRIER NORTHERN BUSWAY EXISTING SH1 MOTORWAY ROLL ALLOWANCE
SHLD SHARED SHLD SHLD BUS LANE BUS LANE SHLD SHOULDER TRAFFIC LANE PATH 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE
1.4m HIGH FENCE
RL = 71.54m
PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS 5.7m RETAINING WALL BOUNDARY EXISTING PROPERTY
EXISTING RL = 64.73m 0.8m GROUND LEVELS C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0338.DWG Filename:
Auckland PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION Office: SECTION C 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1470, LOT 26/DP 489308) - 1:100
19/4/2017 10:43:01 AM 19/4/2017 1 0 2 4m 10 0 20 40m
SCALE 1:100 SCALE 1:1000 Plot Date: CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS A 13/04/17 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION G. MOORE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN APPROVED PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION J. LOZANO . DATE TITLE 70 SPENCER ROAD DESIGNED 19/04/17 M. FAN J. HIND SHEET 3 CHECKED PROJECT No. STAGE WP TYPE NUMBER REV DRAWING No. M. FRANCIS J. HIND 250310 5DOC 1PRP DRG 0338 A LEGEND
COXTON LANE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY FILL SLOPE
ALTERATION TO EXISTING CUT SLOPE
RATHMULLEN PLACE RATHMULLEN 1250 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED BORED PILERW WALL 2-6 (CUT) PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED
1300 MAX H = 5.6m PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED CULVERT
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL RW
13050 1350 COLLISTON RISE D
-
13100 1400 LOT 28 RW 3-1
LOT 27 MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) 13150
1450 LOT 26 MAX H = 11.4m RW RW LOT 25 RW RW RW
RW 1500
13200 RW RW RW
RW RW 1550 RW
RW 1600 RW 13250 RW 1650 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
RW 13300 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13350 RW
RW 13400 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13450 NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
STEEL UC WALL WITH CONCRETE PANELS (CUT) RW 2-8 MAX H = 2.7m
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT BARRIER NORTHERN BUSWAY EXISTING SH1 MOTORWAY AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) ROLL ALLOWANCE PLAN SHLD SHARED SHLD SHLD BUS LANE BUS LANE SHLD SHOULDER TRAFFIC LANE 1:1000 PATH 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE
1.4m HIGH FENCE
RL = 71.11m
PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS 6.4m RETAINING WALL BOUNDARY EXISTING PROPERTY EXISTING GROUND LEVELS
0.3m
RL = 62.13m C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0339.DWG
Filename: PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION
Auckland SECTION D 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1485, LOT 25/DP 489308)
Office: - 1:100
19/4/2017 10:43:39 AM 19/4/2017 1 0 2 4m 10 0 20 40m
SCALE 1:100 SCALE 1:1000 Plot Date: CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS A 13/04/17 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION G. MOORE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN APPROVED PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION J. LOZANO . DATE TITLE 70 SPENCER ROAD DESIGNED 19/04/17 M. FAN J. HIND SHEET 4 CHECKED PROJECT No. STAGE WP TYPE NUMBER REV DRAWING No. M. FRANCIS J. HIND 250310 5DOC 1PRP DRG 0339 A LEGEND
COXTON LANE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY FILL SLOPE E
- ALTERATION TO EXISTING CUT SLOPE
RATHMULLEN PLACE RATHMULLEN 1250 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED BORED PILERW WALL 2-6 (CUT) PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED
1300 MAX H = 5.6m PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED CULVERT
LOT 51 PROPOSED RETAINING WALL RW
13050 1350 COLLISTON RISE RW 3-1
LOT 30 MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL)
13100 1400 MAX H = 11.4m LOT 28
LOT 27
13150 1450 LOT 26 LOT 22 RW RW LOT 25 RW RW RW
RW 1500
13200 RW RW RW
RW RW 1550 RW
RW 1600 RW 13250 RW 1650 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
RW 13300 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13350 RW
RW 13400 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13450 NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
STEEL UC WALL WITH CONCRETE PANELS (CUT) RW 2-8 MAX H = 2.7m
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
PLAN 1:1000
4.5m BARRIER NORTHERN BUSWAY ROLL ALLOWANCE BOUNDARY RL = 82.92m EXISTING PROPERTY SHLD SHARED SHLD SHLD BUS LANE BUS LANE SHLD SHOULDER TRAFFIC LANE PATH
RL = 80.68m 7.1m RETAINING WALL C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0340.DWG Filename: Auckland
Office: PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SECTION E 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1360, LOT 51/DP 489308) - 1:100
19/4/2017 10:44:16 AM 19/4/2017 1 0 2 4m 10 0 20 40m
SCALE 1:100 SCALE 1:1000 Plot Date: CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS A 13/04/17 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION G. MOORE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN APPROVED PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION J. LOZANO . DATE TITLE 70 SPENCER ROAD DESIGNED 19/04/17 M. FAN J. HIND SHEET 5 CHECKED PROJECT No. STAGE WP TYPE NUMBER REV DRAWING No. M. FRANCIS J. HIND 250310 5DOC 1PRP DRG 0340 A LEGEND
COXTON LANE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY FILL SLOPE
ALTERATION TO EXISTING CUT SLOPE
RATHMULLEN PLACE RATHMULLEN 1250 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED BORED PILERW WALL 2-6 (CUT) PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH F EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED
1300 MAX H = 5.6m - PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED CULVERT
LOT 51 PROPOSED RETAINING WALL RW
13050 1350 COLLISTON RISE RW 3-1
LOT 30 MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL)
13100 1400 MAX H = 11.4m LOT 28
LOT 27
13150 1450 LOT 26 LOT 22 RW RW LOT 25 RW RW RW
RW 1500
13200 RW RW RW
RW RW 1550 RW
RW 1600 RW 13250 RW 1650 RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW RW
RW 13300 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13350 RW
RW 13400 RW EX 825Ø
RW 13450 NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
STEEL UC WALL WITH CONCRETE PANELS (CUT) RW 2-8 MAX H = 2.7m
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) PLAN 1:1000
3.8m BARRIER NORTHERN BUSWAY ROLL ALLOWANCE
SHLD SHARED SHLD SHLD BUS LANE BUS LANE SHLD SHOULDER TRAFFIC LANE PATH
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY RL = 72.41m RL = 77.85m 5.4m RETAINING WALL C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0341.DWG Filename: PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION Auckland SECTION F 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1400, LOT 30/DP 489308) Office: - 1:100
19/4/2017 10:44:54 AM 19/4/2017 1 0 2 4m 10 0 20 40m
SCALE 1:100 SCALE 1:1000 Plot Date: CLIENT REV DATE REVISION DETAILS APPROVED SCALE SIZE PRELIMINARY PROJECT NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS A 13/04/17 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION G. MOORE AS SHOWN A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWN APPROVED PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION J. LOZANO . DATE TITLE 70 SPENCER ROAD DESIGNED 19/04/17 M. FAN J. HIND SHEET 6 CHECKED PROJECT No. STAGE WP TYPE NUMBER REV DRAWING No. M. FRANCIS J. HIND 250310 5DOC 1PRP DRG 0341 A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:45:32 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0342.DWG
RW
1 SCALE 1:100 1250
0
13050
RW RW
2
RW
1300
4m (CUT) PANELS CONCRETE WITH WALL UC STEEL
RW 13100 10
SCALE 1:1000 RW
COXTON LANE
0
MAX H = 2.7m = H MAX
BORED PILE WALL (CUT) WALL PILE BORED
RW
RW 2-8 RW MAX H = 5.6m = H MAX
20 1350
RW RW 2-6 RW
LOT 51 LOT 13150
40m RW
CLIENT
RW
LOT 30 LOT
1400 RW
NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
13200
RW
LOT 28 LOT
RW
RW
RW
LOT 27 LOT
1450 RW
PLAN
1:1000
13250 RW
LOT 26 LOT
RW
RW
LOT 25 LOT
RW
1500
RW
13300
RW MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE
LOT 22 MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
COLLISTON RISE
RW
RW 3-1 RW
REV A 1550
EX 825Ø
G
-
RW
13/04/17 DATE
13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE RW REVISION DETAILS FOR INFORMATION
RL = 63.02m EX 825Ø
RW
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
1600
RW EXISTING PROPERTY 13400
BOUNDARY RW
RW
1650
RW (MINIMUM 7.5m) 9.9m 13450
RW SECTION RL = 72.41m
6.0m RETAINING WALL APPROVED G - G. MOORE ROLL ALLOWANCE SHLD 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1540, LOT 22/DP 489308) BARRIER SHARED PATH PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN SHLD 1:100 SIZE BUS LANE A1 NORTHERN BUSWAY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . BUS LANE
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 SHLD DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION SHOULDER PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP OFF-RAMP WP TAPER SHEET 7 TRAFFIC LANE DRG TYPE 0342 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:56:47 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0361.DWG
RW
1 SCALE 1:100 1250
0
13050
RW RW
2
RW
1300
4m (CUT) PANELS CONCRETE WITH WALL UC STEEL
RW 13100 10
SCALE 1:1000 RW
COXTON LANE
0
MAX H = 2.7m = H MAX
BORED PILE WALL (CUT) WALL PILE BORED
RW
RW 2-8 RW MAX H = 5.6m = H MAX
20 1350
RW RW 2-6 RW
LOT 51 LOT 13150
40m RW
CLIENT
RW
LOT 30 LOT
1400 RW
NEW MAINTENANCE BAY
13200 LOT 29 LOT
RW
LOT 28 LOT
RW
RW
-
Z
RW
LOT 27 LOT
1450 RW
PLAN
1:1000
13250 RW
LOT 26 LOT
RW
RW
LOT 25 LOT
RW GROUND LEVEL FOR 70 SPENCER STAGE 1
1500
RW
13300
RW MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE
LOT 22 MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
COLLISTON RISE
RW
RW 3-1 RW
REV A 1550
EX 825Ø
RW
13/04/17 DATE
13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE RW REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
EX 825Ø
RW
CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) 1600
RL = 72.94m RW
13400 RW
RL = 73.84m
RW 1650
SECTION EXISTING PROPERTY RW
BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 13450 3.1m SHLD
RW
1.2m RETAINING WALL ROLL ALLOWANCE Z - BARRIER SHARED PATH 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1415, LOT 29/DP 489308) RL = 73.96m APPROVED G. MOORE SHLD PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE BUS LANE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN 1:100 NORTHERN BUSWAY BUS LANE SIZE A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND SHLD J. HIND APPROVED . DEFLECTION ZONE BARRIER &
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT SHOULDER 250310 PROJECT No. TRAFFIC LANE NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP WP SHEET 8 DRG TYPE 0361 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:46:09 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0343.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT
H - EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE
1600 MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
20
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RL = 59.52m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 RW
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY RW 1700
LOT 63
RL = 61.39m PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
23.4m LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850 13650 LOT 72 RL = 63.04m CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73
1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE EXISTING DESIGNATION 1900 BOUNDARY RL = 67.99m
3.7m EXISTING 13700 STORMWATER POND TO BE REMOVED 5.2m RETAINING WALL SHLD ROLL ALLOWANCE
BARRIER 1950 SHARED APPROVED PATH SECTION G. MOORE SHLD H - SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1570, LOT 56/DP 489308) SIZE A1 PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD 1:100 EXISTING GROUND LEVELS
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DEFLECTION DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT BARRIER 250310 PROJECT No. SHOULDER BARRIER /KERB NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION TRAFFIC LANE PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP WP SHEET 9 DRG TYPE 0343 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:46:47 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0344.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
- I MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64 RL = 58.59m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
LOT 65
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND 1750
PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850
20.0m 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73
1900 13700 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE RL = 67.09m EXISTING DESIGNATION
SECTION BOUNDARY 1.9m 8.7m SHLD 1950
APPROVED RETAINING WALL G. MOORE ROLL ALLOWANCE BARRIER SHARED I - PATH SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1590, LOT 57/DP 489308) M. FAN SHLD PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION BUS LANE SIZE A1 NORTHERN BUSWAY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS J. HIND 1:100 BUS LANE APPROVED . LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING
SHLD 19/04/17 DATE EXISTING GROUND LEVELS DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT DEFLECTION BARRIER 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION SHOULDER BARRIER /KERB PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 10 WP TRAFFIC LANE DRG TYPE 0344 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:47:25 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0345.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400 J
- 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND 13600
REVISION DETAILS PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ISSUED FOR INFORMATION RL = 56.00m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850 13650 LOT 72 11.6m CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73
1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 1900
9.7m RL = 66.13m RETAINING WALL 13700 SHLD EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ROLL ALLOWANCE 0.3m
SECTION
BARRIER 1950 SHARED APPROVED PATH G. MOORE SHLD J - SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1610, LOT 58/DP 489308) M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SIZE A1 PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND 1:100 APPROVED . SHLD EXISTING GROUND LEVELS
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT DEFLECTION BARRIER 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW SHOULDER BARRIER 5DOC /KERB STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD TRAFFIC LANE 1PRP SHEET 11 WP DRG TYPE 0345 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 11:08:31 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0346.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m
LOT 59 LOT K -
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70 RL = 58.35m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
LOT 71 1850 13650 LOT 72 EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE
5.3m 1900 RL = 65.13m
SECTION 5.6m SHLD RETAINING WALL 13700 ROLL ALLOWANCE 1.8m BARRIER
EXISTING SHARED PATH K
- DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE SHLD 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1630, LOT 59/DP 489308) SHLD PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION AS SHOWN BUS LANE SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN NORTHERN BUSWAY GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED 1:100 BUS LANE SIZE A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SHLD
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . EXISTING GROUND LEVELS
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT DEFLECTION BARRIER 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW SHOULDER BARRIER 5DOC /KERB STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD TRAFFIC LANE 1PRP SHEET 12 WP DRG TYPE 0346 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:48:03 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0347.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT
1650 L -
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850 13650 LOT 72 RL = 60.29m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) RL = 64.13m LOT 73
1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 1900
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED 13700 SECTION 2.1m DESIGNATION BOUNDARY SHLD 3.4m RETAINING WALL ROLL ALLOWANCE
BARRIER SHARED 1950 PATH L - APPROVED G. MOORE SHLD
EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1650, LOT 60/DP 489308) SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY EXISTING GROUND LEVELS SIZE GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED A1 1:100 BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED SHLD .
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT DEFLECTION 250310 PROJECT No. BARRIER NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION SHOULDER PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD BARRIER /KERB 1PRP SHEET 13 WP TRAFFIC LANE DRG TYPE 0347 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:48:40 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0348.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
M RW -
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850 RL = 60.99m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) RL = 63.13m
LOT 73 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 1900
EXISTING PROPERTY SECTION SHLD
1.6m BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED 1.6m DESIGNATION BOUNDARY RETAINING WALL 13700 SHARED PATH M -
SWALE DEFLECTION BARRIER 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE SHLD EXISTING GROUND LEVELS 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1670, LOT 61/DP 489308) SHLD PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS
DESIGNED EXISTING DESIGNATION CHECKED J. LOZANO BUS LANE DRAWN
M. FAN BOUNDARY NORTHERN BUSWAY PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS 1:100 SIZE A1 BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND SHLD APPROVED .
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. DEFLECTION BARRIER NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHOULDER SHEET 14 WP BARRIER /KERB DRG TYPE 0348 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:49:18 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0349.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
N
-
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION RL = 60.92m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850 1.4m HIGH FENCE
0.9m 13650 LOT 72 1.8m HIGH RETAINING WALL SECURITY FENCE RL = 62.13m CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73
SHLD EXISTING PROPERTY 0.7m 1900
SECTION BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED
DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 13700 SHARED PATH N
-
SHLD 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER EXISTING GROUND LEVELS 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1690, LOT 62/DP 489308) PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY 1:100 SIZE A1
EXISTING DESIGNATION BUS LANE BOUNDARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD SWALE 1PRP SHEET 15 WP DRG TYPE 0349 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:49:55 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0350.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW RW 1700
LOT 63
O
- PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70 RL = 60.46m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
LOT 71 1850 13650 LOT 72 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) RL = 62.13m
LOT 73
EXISTING PROPERTY
BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED
SHLD 2.0m DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 1900 0.6m
RETAINING WALL
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH
O
- SHLD 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1710, LOT 63/DP 489308) PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS AS SHOWN PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SHLD SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY 1:100 SIZE A1 BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD EXISTING LEGEND GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY
EXISTING DESIGNATION ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE BOUNDARY DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 16 WP SWALE DRG TYPE 0350 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:50:33 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0351.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64 P
-
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70 RL = 60.32m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
LOT 71 1850
1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY RL = 60.38m LOT 73 AND PROPOSED DESIGNATION
BOUNDARY 2.5m
SHLD 1900
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH
SHLD
P - 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1725, LOT 64/DP 489308) SHLD PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION AS SHOWN SCALE PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY 1:100 SIZE A1 EXISTING GROUND LEVELS BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT
EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 17 WP SWALE DRG TYPE 0351 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:51:11 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0352.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
Q
-
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850
RL = 59.83m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE
LOT 73
EXISTING PROPERTY
BOUNDARY RL = 59.63m 1900
3.1m
SHLD 13700 SECTION
SHARED
PATH 1950 Q APPROVED SHLD - G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1740, LOT 65/DP 489308) AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS M. FAN PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SHLD BUS LANE SIZE NORTHERN BUSWAY A1 1:100 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUS LANE PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE EXISTING GROUND LEVELS DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310
PROJECT No. EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 18 WP DRG TYPE 0352 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:51:49 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0353.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
R
-
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850
RL = 59.08m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 13650 LOT 72 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73 EXISTING PROPERTY
BOUNDARY RL = 58.67m 1900
3.0m
SHLD SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH
R - 1950 SHLD APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1760, LOT 66/DP 489308) PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS AS SHOWN SCALE PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO SHLD DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY SIZE 1:100 A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BUS LANE
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD LEGEND PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING
EXISTING GROUND LEVELS 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 19 WP DRG TYPE 0353 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:52:26 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0354.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66 13550
S SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1 - LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION RL = 57.53m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 LOT 70
LOT 71 1850
1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE EXISTING PROPERTY 13650 LOT 72 BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT DESIGNATION BOUNDARY AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
LOT 73 RL = 57.75m 4.2m
SHLD 1900
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH S
-
SHLD 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1780, LOT 67/DP 489308) PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SHLD AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS M. FAN BUS LANE NORTHERN BUSWAY 1:100 SIZE A1 BUS LANE EXISTING GROUND LEVELS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD
EXISTING DESIGNATION
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 BOUNDARY DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 20 WP DRG TYPE 0354 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:53:03 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0355.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
T
-
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 RL = 55.88m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE
LOT 73 6.3m
RL = 56.83m 1900 SHLD
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH
T - 1950 APPROVED SHLD G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1800, LOT 68/DP 489308) BARRIER AS SHOWN PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN SHLD BUS LANE 1:100 SIZE A1 NORTHERN BUSWAY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION EXISTING GROUND LEVELS
PRELIMINARY J. HIND BUS LANE J. HIND APPROVED . SHLD
GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED EXISTING DESIGNATION LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17
DATE BOUNDARY DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 21 WP DRG TYPE 0355 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:53:41 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0356.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 RL = 54.78m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 13/04/17 DATE
U
LOT 69 - 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70
EXISTING PROPERTY
BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED LOT 71
DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 1850 13650 LOT 72 1.8m HIGH CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 7.8m
LOT 73
RL = 55.92m 1900 SHLD
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH
U - 1950 SHLD APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1820, LOT 69/DP 489308) BARRIER EXISTING GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN SHLD M. FAN BUS LANE GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED 1:100 NORTHERN BUSWAY SIZE A1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BUS LANE
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED .
EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY SHLD
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 22 WP DRG TYPE 0356 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:54:18 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0357.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A RL = 54.84m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
V - LOT 70
EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND PRPOSED
LOT 71
DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 1850 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
8.7m LOT 73
1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 1900 RL = 55.00m
SHLD 13700 SECTION
SHARED
PATH 1950 V - APPROVED G. MOORE SHLD DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1840, LOT 70/DP 489308) EXISTING GROUND LEVELS AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION DRAWN M. FAN SHLD BUS LANE SIZE A1 PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS 1:100 NORTHERN BUSWAY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND BUS LANE APPROVED .
EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY LEGEND PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING
SHLD 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 23 WP DRG TYPE 0357 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:54:56 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0358.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67 RL = 54.18m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS
ISSUED FOR INFORMATION EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED DESIGNATION BOUNDARY LOT 70
W
LOT 71 - 1850 13650 LOT 72 9.2m CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE LOT 73
RL = 54.08m SHLD 1900
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH
W
- SHLD 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1860, LOT 71/DP 489308) EXISTING GROUND LEVELS PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION AS SHOWN SCALE SHLD M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS 1:100 NORTHERN BUSWAY SIZE A1 BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED .
EXISTING DESIGNATION
BOUNDARY SHLD
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 24 WP DRG TYPE 0358 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:55:33 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0359.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66
13550 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68 RL = 53.20m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 13600 REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION
LOT 70 EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED
LOT 71 DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 1850
X
- 13650 LOT 72 CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY)
9.2m LOT 73 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE 1900
RL = 53.37m SHLD 13700 SECTION
SHARED
PATH 1950 X APPROVED - G. MOORE SHLD DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1875, LOT 72/DP 489308) AS SHOWN SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION M. FAN SHLD PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS SIZE BUS LANE A1 1:100 NORTHERN BUSWAY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND APPROVED BUS LANE . LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY
ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 SHLD
DATE EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. EXISTING GROUND LEVELS NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 25 WP DRG TYPE 0359 NUMBER REV A
Plot Date: 19/4/2017 10:56:11 AM Office: Auckland Filename: C:\PW_WORK\JOAN.LOZANO\ANZ_PROD\D0315096\250310-5DOC-1PRP-DRG-0360.DWG 1500 1
SCALE 1:100
RW 13300
0 RW
LOT 22 2
COLLISTON RISE RW
EX 825Ø 1550
4m RW 13350 RATHMULLEN PLACE
10 RW
SCALE 1:1000 LOT 56 LOT EX 825Ø
0
RW
LOT 57 LOT
MSE BLOCK WALL (FILL) WALL BLOCK MSE 1600
20
MAX H = 11.4m = H MAX
RW
LOT 58 LOT
13400
RW 3-1 RW RW
40m LOT 59 LOT
CLIENT
RW
LOT 60 LOT 1650
RW 13450
LOT 61
RW
LOT 62 RW
RW 1700
LOT 63 PLAN 13500 1:1000
RW
LOT 64
LOT 65 1750
LOT 66 13550
RL = 51.88m 70 SPENCER RD STAGE 3 SH1 NORTHERN MOTORWAY NORTHERN SH1
LOT 67
REV LOT 68
A 1800 13/04/17 DATE
LOT 69 EXISTING PROPERTY 13600 BOUNDARY AND PROPOSED REVISION DETAILS ISSUED FOR INFORMATION DESIGNATION BOUNDARY
LOT 70
LOT 71 1850
9.7m 13650 LOT 72 1.8m HIGH SECURITY FENCE 1.4m HIGH FENCE CONTAINS 2016 AERIAL IMAGERY SOURCED FROM NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY UNDER CREATIVE COMMONS 3.0 NEW ZEALAND (BY) Y
-
LOT 73 RL = 52.62m
SHLD 1900
SECTION 13700 SHARED PATH Y -
SHLD 1950 APPROVED G. MOORE DEFLECTION SWALE BARRIER 70 SPENCER ROAD (CH 1890, LOT 73/DP 489308) PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION AS SHOWN SHLD SCALE M. FRANCIS DESIGNED CHECKED J. LOZANO DRAWN M. FAN BUS LANE 1:100 NORTHERN BUSWAY PROPOSED GROUND LEVELS SIZE A1 BUS LANE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PRELIMINARY J. HIND J. HIND EXISTING GROUND LEVELS APPROVED .
EXISTING DESIGNATION SHLD BOUNDARY
LEGEND
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED BUSWAY PROPOSED SHARED USE PATH DESIGNATION BOUNDARY EXISTING DESIGNATION BOUNDARY ALTERATION TO EXISTING 19/04/17 DATE DRAWING No. TITLE PROJECT 250310 PROJECT No. NORTHERN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS RW 5DOC STAGE PLAN AND TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED CULVERT EXISTING CULVERT TO BE ABANDONED EXISTING CULVERT TO BE RETAINED FILL SLOPE CUT SLOPE 70 SPENCER ROAD 1PRP SHEET 26 WP DRG TYPE 0360 NUMBER REV A
In partnership with:
Aurecon New Zealand Limited Level 4, 139 Carlton Gore Road Newmarket Auckland 1023 PO Box 9762 Newmarket Auckland 1149 New Zealand
T +64 9 520 6019 F +64 9 524 7815 W aurecongroup.com
61
Annexure C: Plans, Cross Sections and 3D Digital Model of SH18
6270488
Northern Corridor Improvements
Plans,Draft Cross Urban Sections Design , LandscapePhotographs Framework and 3D Model Residential Properties Adjacent to SH18 Project No: 250310 Document Ref: NCI-3PRE-1PLA-RPT-0104Project No: 250310 Revision:Revision: 1 1 Date: 20 April 2017 12 December 2016
Annexure C to Shannon Bray’s Evidence MEADOWOOD COMMUNITY CABELLO PLACE HOUSE 17 19
21 23 25 27 29 31 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 1
EXISTING SH18 UPPER HARBOUR
HIGHWAY
JOIN LINE SHEET 2 SHEET LINE JOIN
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW RW 5 0 10 20m
RW SCALE 1:500
Page 1 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray BARBADOS DRIVEBARBADOS DRIVE
7A 3A 5A 9 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 11 27 29 5B 7B 31 33 41A 1 3B 35 37 39 43 41B
EXISTING SH18 UPPER HARBOUR
HIGHWAY RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW RW
JOIN LINE SHEET 3
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
JOIN LINE SHEET 1 SHEET LINE JOIN RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW RW
RW
RW RW
RW RW RW
RW RW RW
RW RW
RW
RW RW
RW RW
RW RW
5 0 10 20m RW SCALE 1:500
Page 2 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray BARBADOS DRIVE
47 1 43 45 41B 49
51 ROOK RESERVE RW 57 WREN PLACE
59
RW
RW 9
RW
RW 11 RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW 13
RW
RW 14
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW RW RW
RW RW RW
RW RW RW
SH18 UPPER HARBOUR HIGHWAY
RW
RW RW RW
RW RW
RW
RW RW RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
JOIN LINE SHEET 2 SHEET LINE JOIN RW
5 0 10 20m
SCALE 1:500
Page 3 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS Auckland Council Map ´ A B C
F E D
0 50 100 150 DISCLAIMER: This map/plan is illustrative only and all information should be Meters independently verified on site before taking any action. Copyright PageA 4uc k|l aNorthernnd Council. L aCorridornd Parcel Bou nImprovementsdary information fro mProject LINZ | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray Scale @ A3 (Crown Copyright Reserved). Whilst due care has been taken, Auckland Council gives no warranty as to the accuracy and plan = 1:5,000 completeness of any information on this map/plan and accepts no liability for any error, omission or use of the information. Date Printed: Height datum: Auckland 1946. 18/04/2017 PHOTOGRAPH A - LOOKING TOWARDS CABELLO PLACE
21 25
PHOTOGRAPH B - LOOKING TOWARDS CABELLO PLACE
21 23 25 31 33
Page 5 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray PHOTOGRAPH C - LOOKING TOWARDS CABELLO PLACE
31 30
PHOTOGRAPH D - LOOKING TOWARDS BARBADOS DRIVE
31 41B
Page 6 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray PHOTOGRAPH E - LOOKING TOWARDS BARBADOS DRIVE AND WREN PLACE
57 59 9
PHOTOGRAPH F - LOOKING TOWARDS WREN PLACE
13 14
Page 7 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray SCREENSHOT OF 3D MODEL OF PAUL MATTHEWS OVERBRIDGE
PROPOSED MOTORWAY
BOUNDARY FENCE EXISTING TREES (TRUNKS ONLY) PROPOSED EARTHWORKS
PROPOSED PAUL MATTHEWS BRIDGE
EXISTING DWELLINGS
EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
MODEL DEVELOPED USING AVAILABLE SURVEY FOR GROUND HEIGHT, LIDAR FOR TREE AND EXISTING DWELLING HEIGHTS, AND GA DRAWINGS FOR PROPOSED MOTORWAY NOT TO SCALE
Page 8 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray 3D MODEL SECTION CUT THROUGH 57 BARBADOS DRIVE
59 57
57 BARBADOS DRIVE EXISTING TREES PAUL MATTHEWS ROAD BRIDGE
57
NEW CUT SLOPE / RETAINING WALL LOWERED SH18
NOT TO SCALE
Page 9 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray 3D MODEL SECTION CUT THROUGH 55 BARBADOS DRIVE
59 57 55
55 BARBADOS DRIVE EXISTING TREES PAUL MATTHEWS ROAD BRIDGE
55
NEW CUT SLOPE / RETAINING WALL LOWERED SH18
NOT TO SCALE
Page 10 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray 3D MODEL SECTION CUT THROUGH 49 BARBADOS DRIVE
59 57 55 49
49 BARBADOS DRIVE EXISTING TREES PAUL MATTHEWS ROAD BRIDGE
49
NEW CUT SLOPE / RETAINING WALL LOWERED SH18
NOT TO SCALE
Page 11 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray 3D MODEL SECTION CUT THROUGH 45 BARBADOS DRIVE
59 57 55 49 45
47 BARBADOS DRIVE EXISTING TREES PAUL MATTHEWS ROAD BRIDGE
45
NEW CUT SLOPE / RETAINING WALL LOWERED SH18
NOT TO SCALE
Page 12 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray 3D MODEL SECTION CUT THROUGH 43 BARBADOS DRIVE
59 57 55 49 45
43
47 BARBADOS DRIVE EXISTING TREES PAUL MATTHEWS ROAD BRIDGE
43
NEW CUT SLOPE / RETAINING WALL LOWERED SH18
NOT TO SCALE
Page 13 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray 3D MODEL SECTION CUT THROUGH 41B BARBADOS DRIVE
59 57 55 49 45 43 41B
47 BARBADOS DRIVE EXISTING TREES PAUL MATTHEWS ROAD BRIDGE
41B
ROAD MEETS EXISTING GRADE
NEW CUT SLOPE / RETAINING WALL LOWERED SH18
NOT TO SCALE
Page 14 | Northern Corridor Improvements Project | Annexure C to Evidence of Shannon Bray
In partnership with:
Aurecon New Zealand Limited Level 4, 139 Carlton Gore Road Newmarket Auckland 1023 PO Box 9762 Newmarket Auckland 1149 New Zealand
T +64 9 520 6019 F +64 9 524 7815 NOT TO SCALE W aurecongroup.com