Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes Updated Request for Plan Change Prepared for Perry Group Limited

21 August 2019

Document Quality Assurance

Bibliographic reference for citation: Bloxam Burnett & Olliver 2019. Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes: Report prepared by Bloxam Burnett & Olliver for Perry Group Limited.

Prepared by: John Olliver and Kathryn Drew Bloxam Burnett & Olliver

Reviewed by: John Olliver Bloxam Burnett & Olliver

Status: Final Revision / version: 3 Issue date: 21 August 2019

Template revision: 20170704 0000

Cover photograph: © Boffa Miskell Limited, 2017

CONTENTS

Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction 1

Background 1 Description of Proposal 3 Purpose of the Plan Change 7 Summary of Proposed Changes to the Operative Hamilton City District Plan 8 Site Description 9 Site History 11 Description of Locality 12

2.0 Section 32 Evaluation 13

Evaluation of Issues 13 Alternatives Considered 15 Evaluation of Benefits and Costs 17 Reasons for Option Chosen 28 Advice from Iwi Authority 29

3.0 Proposed Amendments to the Operative District Plan 30

Background to Existing Zoning 30 Existing Consent Approvals 31 Master Plan 33 Proposed Provisions 35 Other Consents and Authorisations 36 Proposed Ownership Structure 37

4.0 Statutory and Strategic Framework 41

Legal Framework for Plan Change Request 41 Part 2 of Schedule One RMA 42 Section 31 RMA 43 Section 32 RMA 43 Sections 74 and 75 RMA 45 Part 2 RMA 45 National Policy Statements 46 Regional and Strategic Planning Assessment 52

5.0 Assessment of Environmental Effects 67

Existing Environment and Permitted Baseline 67 Infrastructure Effects 68 Transportation effects 71 Landscape and Visual Effects 74 Economic Effects 76 Noise Effects 79 Geotechnical Effects 79 Ecological Effects 80 Archaeological Effects 81 Contamination Effects 82 Cultural Effects 82 Reverse Sensitivity Effects 86 Biosecurity Effects 89 Positive Effects 90 Summary of Environmental Effects 90

6.0 Consultation 92

Hamilton City Council 92 Waikato District Council 92 Waikato Regional Council 93 New Zealand Transport Agency 93 Future Proof Partners 93 Tangata Whenua 94 Nearby Landowners and Residents 94 Fonterra 95 Affco 95 First Gas 96

7.0 Statutory Assessment 97

Overview 97 Council Functions and District Plan 97 Section 32 and Part 2 Assessment 97 National Policy Assessment 100 Regional Policy Assessment 101 Waikato Tainui Environmental Plan Assessment 118

8.0 Conclusion 120

Appendices - Volume 1

Schedule One: Amendments to Operative Hamilton City District Plan

Appendix 1: Urban Design Figures prepared by Boffa Miskell

Appendix 2: Urban Design Statement prepared by Boffa Miskell

Appendix 3: Subcatchment Integrated Catchment Management Plan prepared by Bloxam Burnett & Olliver and including the Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Stormwater Solutions/CKL

Appendix 4: Integrated Transportation Assessment prepared by Stantec

Appendix 5: Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment prepared by Boffa Miskell

Appendix 6: Assessment of Economic Effects prepared by RCG Ltd

Appendix 7: Acoustic Report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics

Appendix 8: Geotechnical Summary Report prepared by CMW Geosciences

Appendix 9: Assessment of Ecological Effects prepared by Kessels Ecology

Appendix 10: Archaeological Assessment prepared by Dr Caroline Phillips

Appendix 11: Environmental Site Investigation prepared by Coffey Services (NZ) Ltd

Appendix 12: Certificates of Title

Appendix 13: Copies of existing Resource Consents

Appendix 14: Consultation Notes

Appendix 15: Report on Tangata Whenua Consultation prepared by Boffa Miskell and Cultural Impact Assessment

Appendix 16: Lighting and Glare Assessment prepared by LDP Ltd

Appendix 17: Updated Odour Assessment prepared by Pattle Delamore Partners

Appendix 18: Water Quality Technical Review by NIWA

Appendix 19: Industrial Development Viability Assessment prepared by Essentia Consulting Group Ltd

Appendix 20: Economic assessment prepared by Market Economics

Appendix 21: Te Awa Lakes; Response to BERL Report prepared by Castalia Strategic Advisors

Appendix 22: Lake Water Quality Assessment and Design Approach prepared by River Lake Ltd

Appendix 23: Alligator Weed Management Report prepared by Better Biosecurity Ltd

Appendix 24: Update to Stormwater Infrastructure Assessment prepared by Aurecon

iii

Tables

Table 1: Certificate of Title Details ...... 10

Table 2: Evaluation of Benefits and Costs ...... 18

Table 3: Evaluation of Alternative Rules, Benefits and Costs ...... 23

Table 4: Schedule of Existing Resource Consents ...... 31

Table 5: Land Development Capacity Requirements ...... 47

Table 6: HCHA Targets ...... 49

Table 7: Industrial Land Allocations from the RPS ...... 53

Table 8: Population Growth Allocations in Hamilton City ...... 102

Table 9: Criteria for alternative land release at Te Rapa North ...... 105

Te Awa Lakes – Executive Summary

Perry Group Ltd (“Perrys”) own large landholdings strategically located at the northern gateway into Hamilton. The land has previously been used for sand quarrying activities, but those activities are now effectively disestablished.

Perry’s request a private plan change to enable their Vision and development of the site. The landholding is currently zoned partly for industrial uses and is partly Deferred Industrial within the (Operative) Hamilton City Council District Plan (“ODP”). This landholding is herein referred to as Te Awa Lakes and is approximately 62 hectares, bounded by the Waikato Expressway to the west and north, the Waikato River to the east, and Hutchinson Road to the south.

The plan change has multiple purposes. The overriding purpose is to rezone the land to enable the range of activities associated with establishing a tourism and recreational destination for the region, supported by new residential and business uses. There are also a range of other purposes that underpin the plan change as follows:

To establish a new tourist and recreational attraction (an adventure park) for the city and region that utilises a strategic site with all the right attributes for such an attraction, adjacent to the Waikato Expressway and the Waikato River. To implement an economically feasible set of alternative uses for a site that has been found to have significant geotechnical and physical constraints making its previously earmarked industrial use unviable for the foreseeable future. To enhance employment opportunities through new businesses created within and around the new development To positively enhance the industrial and environmental constraints of the area through synergistic improvements and growing urbanisation. To make a contribution to remedying the short to medium term shortfall in housing supply in Hamilton. To efficiently utilise the applicant’s existing investment in infrastructure for the site. To establish a development that is compatible with and enhances the Waikato River frontage of the site, both visually and through improved public access that is more compatible than the previous industrial use and zoning. To be a catalyst for the better utilisation of the Waikato River itself. To provide services that complement and support the existing business, education and residential community of Horotiu and to provide further housing choice in a location close to major industrial employment. The existing Industrial/Deferred Industrial zoning does not provide for the above mix of activities and in addition:

• The zoning does not (and realistically could not) anticipate the opportunity to establish a regionally significant tourist attraction, including an adventure park that involves innovative reuse and repurposing of the worked out sand quarry.

• The widely variable uncontrolled fill across about half of the site is not as well suited to large industrial buildings that are susceptible to more differential settlement than small, lightweight residential building footprints on raft foundations.

• Hamilton City Council entered into a Housing Accord with the Government in December 2016, recognising that there is a shortfall of housing supply to meet demand in Hamilton. Housing supply targets have been established for the next 3 years. This has placed greater weight on the importance of serviced residential land, such as Te Awa Lakes.

• Concurrently, as a result of Future Proof initiatives over recent years, there is now ample industrial land available, with some risk of oversupply. This is confirmed by 2017 Business Land Capacity studies that there is surplus capacity.

The private plan change seeks that more appropriate zoning, overlays, objectives, policies and rules be included in the ODP over this landholding to enable the alternative activities to occur.

The process for this private plan change has tried to be as proactive as possible. We have engaged early with Hamilton City and other regulatory bodies to ensure we gain as much coordination and collaboration as possible.

The proposal has been designed to adopt as many of the existing objectives, policies, and rules (including zones) of the ODP as possible, in accordance with Principle 3.2 of that Plan. That principle envisages new Structure Plans and includes an intent for them to integrate seamlessly into the ODP by using ODP mechanisms including existing zones, overlays, design guides, defined terms, formatting and style.

As a result of following this approach, the only new objectives and policies proposed are:

• Three site specific objectives and three related policies for inclusion in Chapter 3 - Structure Plans.

• One objective and four related policies in Chapter 4 – Residential Zone to provide for a specific Medium Density Residential Zone for the site to enable approximately 864 dwellings (+ or - 10%) on the site.

The proposed wording for the new objectives are as follows:

Chapter 3 - Structure Plans (as part of a new subsection entitled Te Awa Lakes):

“3.8.1.1 Enable development of a tourist and recreational attraction in a regionally strategic location”

“3.8.1.2 Establish a high quality medium density urban residential environment”

“3.8.1.3 Provide additional serviced residential land capacity in a timely manner”

Chapter 4 - Residential Zone

“4.2.13 The Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential zone enables a comprehensively designed residential development integrated with the adjacent adventure park tourist and recreation attraction and the Waikato River, all contributing to an attractive gateway to the city.”

These objectives are a subset of the plan change as a whole.

The other changes proposed to the ODP are summarised as follows:

Amended site zoning (and associated Planning Maps – 1A and 1B, 2A and 2B) from Te Rapa North Industrial, to: o Te Awa Lakes Major Facilities Zone inclusive of the Visitor Accommodation overlay; o Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Zone inclusive of the River Interface overlay; and o Te Awa Lakes Business 6 Zone Chapter 3 – Structure Plans - Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan area inclusive of description, objectives, policies, rules and structure plan components.

Chapter 4 – Residential Zones – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Zone inclusive of a new objective and policy, requirements for Land Development Plans (“LDPs”) to be prepared to facilitate development intent and new rules for bulk, location and density yield. Chapter 6 – Business 1 to 7 Zones – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Business Zone (Business Zone 6 – Neighbourhood Centre) in the rule framework. Chapter 12 – Te Rapa North Industrial Zone – Removal of any reference to Stage 1B and associated consequential changes. Chapter 17 – Major Facilities Zone – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Aquatic Adventure Park inclusive of specific provisions for its development. Chapter 23 – Subdivision – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Zone inclusive of a new subdivision standard for the River Interface Overlay and removal of references to Stage 1B of the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. Chapter 25.8 – Noise – Addition of noise requirements for Te Awa Lakes and removal of reference to Stage 1B of the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. Chapter 25.10 – Signs – Additional site specific sign rules Chapter 2 – Section 1.2 – Information Requirements – Additional of information requirements for the Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Zone. Volume 2 – Section 1.3.2 – Controlled Activities – Matters of Control - Removal of reference to Stage 1B Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. Appendix 2 – Structure Plans – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan in the locality guide and inclusion of the various Te Awa Lakes plans. The plan change as a whole is assessed against the national and regional policy documents, and Part 2 of the RMA, including its purpose and principles. That assessment concludes that it is consistent with Part 2 and with those other higher order instruments.

The plan change is supported by a number of technical reports that assess the actual and potential effects of the plan change and where appropriate recommend mitigation measures.

Those reports conclude that adverse environmental effects of the plan change are minor to moderate. They include moderate traffic effects on Te Rapa Road. However, those effects will be mitigated through an already planned upgrade of the Te Rapa Rad/McKee Street intersection, given predicted traffic growth on Te Rapa Road would have required an upgrade regardless of this plan change. A range of other transport infrastructure improvements are also recommended.

The reallocation of the land from industrial to residential, recreational and commercial has also not been found to give rise to any adverse economic effects due to the ample supply of industrial land and undersupply of already serviced residential land.

There are some potential reverse sensitivity effects although these have been dealt with through design and planning rules within the zone provisions. Reverse sensitivity effects from traffic noise on the Waikato Expressway are able to be mitigated so they are no more than minor through a combination of subdivision design, building setbacks and acoustic treatment of dwellings.

vii

Wider issues of reverse sensitivity in relation to nearby industrial land are more difficult to define because they can generally only be based on speculation. There is no evidence of current resident complaints about major industries in the area, such as Fonterra and Affco, who appear to be managing their activities well in relation to their neighbours. Some of those neighbours are closer to the activities than Te Awa Lakes will be.

Potential future reverse sensitivity effects could arise if new development occurred in the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone or if existing activities expanded. However, given the overall industrial node is some 245 ha, and the Te Awa Lakes site is largely separated from other zoned land by the Expressway and River, there are good options for managing any reverse sensitivity effects through land use buffers or setbacks.

As the majority of the land has a deferred zoning a plan change process would be needed before it can be developed for industrial purposes, and that process will need to address interfaces with nearby sensitive land uses. In addition, the Te Awa Lakes development is designed with the business area to the south, on Hutchinson Road, which is the closest position to a neighbouring Te Rapa North deferred industrial zone. Specific reports on odour, and lighting and glare were undertaken and concluded little or no potential for impact on the Te Awa Lakes site from current industrial operations. Overall potential reverse sensitivity effects should not outweigh other effects.

The overall planning assessment concludes that:

The plan change is designed to promote and enable a new integrated mixed use residential area with a landmark tourist/recreational attraction for the Hamilton and wider community. The current Industrial zoning fails to address the practical constraints on industrial development from the previous sand quarrying of the site and provides limited options to realise the opportunities to establish the land as an adventure park and tourist/recreational destination. The Plan change also provides the opportunity for a comprehensively designed and serviced greenfield site to help meet the city’s short term residential housing needs and as such supports the Hamilton Housing Accord. The plan change fits the existing strategic and policy framework of the ODP. As a result it does not lead to wide-ranging changes or any inconsistencies within the ODP. The proposed plan change provisions are intended to integrate into the ODP easily. The plan change has been assessed against the RPS ‘alternative land release’ criteria and the higher order planning instruments, including other aspects of the RPS, the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River, the Waikato – Tainui Environmental Plan and the National Policy Statements for Urban Development Capacity and Freshwater Management, and has been found to be consistent with these national and regional documents. The NPS – Urban Development Capacity is particularly significant as it post-dates the RPS and the ODP and places greater weight than those documents on the delivery of serviced land for urban development. The priority given to housing developing over industrial development in this plan change is supported by the Hamilton Housing Accord 2016. Having evaluated the alternatives in accordance with section 32 of the RMA this plan change is considered the most appropriate planning response, consistent with the higher order policy documents and meets the relevant statutory criteria.

viii

1.0 Introduction

Background

Perry’s started life in 1954 by Brian Perry with one man and an excavator. Since that time, Simon Perry has continued that business and has diversified into one of the most successful privately- owned enterprises in the Waikato involved primarily in agricultural, manufacturing, importing and distribution, food and export, natural resources, and the property industry sectors.

This commercial success has enabled Perry’s to support the community and in 1976 a Charitable Trust was established with a personal donation of $100,000 from Brian Perry and his wife Peggy. Forty years later, the Trust continues to develop strong partnerships with like-minded organisations to deliver on its vision of ‘Building Stronger Communities.’ These philanthropic values endure through organisations and projects including but not limited to:

Te Awa River Ride Trust: Delivering a shared cycle/walkway along the banks of the Waikato River from Ngaruawahia to Hora Hora with the inclusion of Perry Bridge to the north of the Te Awa Lakes site. Perry Outdoor Education Trust which equips low decile secondary schools to facilitate the delivery of outdoor education experiences and has seen over 2,300 students taken on camp and ‘Growing good citizens’ since 2003. A strong supporter of the arts in general, and of public art in particular with involvement in the Riff Raff sculpture in Hamilton’s city centre and Passing Red near the Waikato Stadium, making a real contribution to Hamilton’s creative profile. Perry’s own a large landholding in the north of Hamilton City that is straddled by the Waikato Expressway – Ngaruawahia Section (“Expressway”). This land has historically been used for quarrying activities which are in the process of being disestablished.

Perry’s request a private plan change to enable the development of that portion of the landholding that is within Hamilton City Council’s (“HCC”) jurisdiction. This landholding is currently partly zoned for industrial uses within the (Operative) Hamilton City Council District Plan (“ODP”) with the balance being a deferred zone. This landholding is herein referred to as Te Awa Lakes and is approximately 62 hectares, bounded by the Expressway to the west and north, the Waikato River to the east, and Hutchinson Road to the south.

Perry’s seek to establish a tourism and recreational destination for the region, supported by new residential and business land. These land uses will be sensitive to the Waikato River and the planned internal water bodies. The private plan change reflects these outcomes seeking that more appropriate zoning, overlays, objectives, policies and rules be included in the ODP to enable this to occur.

This private plan change report describes the nature of the plan change in detail, inclusive of the section 32 evaluation; an assessment of the effects of the plan change; an assessment of the relevant national and regional statutory provisions and an amended set of ODP provisions.

In terms of the ODP provisions the intent has been to amend the ODP in a manner that adopts as many of the existing objectives, policies and rules (including zones) of the ODP as possible. As a result, only four new objectives and their associated policies are proposed.

1 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

This plan change (‘PPC2’) was lodged with HCC on 28 July 2017. It was accepted by HCC under clause 23 of the First Schedule to the RMA on 21 September 2017. On 1 November 2017 it was publicly notified. Sixty-two submissions were received. Forty-eight were in support, four were neutral and ten were in opposition. The submissions were summarised and notified for further submissions. Five further submissions were received. On 18 April 2018 Perry’s requested that the processing of the plan change be suspended. The reason was that they had decided to make an application to HCC for a Special Housing Area (‘SHA’) under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act (‘HASHAA’). The SHA application coincided with the residential component of PPC2 and was for an area of 51ha. The SHA application was made in accordance with the HCC Special Housing Areas Policy 2017. It relied on and included the information contained in PPC2. Given that the Te Awa Lakes SHA was on land earmarked for industrial use the Council also carried out a consultative process and called for feedback from interested parties on the two SHA area options being considered; Area A and Area B. There were 36 responses to the request for feedback on Area A. This included 28 supportive responses, 7 opposed responses and 1 neutral response. For Area B there were 34 responses; 25 supportive, 7 opposed and 2 neutral.

The Council considered the SHA application and the feedback at its meetings on 28 June 2018 and resolved to approve the SHA application and to recommend it to the Minister of Housing and Urban development for gazettal.

On 28 February 2019 the Minister of Housing and Urban Development advised the Council that the SHA had been declined and recommended to the Council that Te Awa Lakes be advanced through the private plan change process. On 29 April 2019 Perry’s reactivated the plan change. On 27 May 2019 HCC wrote to Perry’s requesting that they provide supplementary information to update the plan change, given the time that had elapsed.

Perry’s agreed to provide the supplementary information. The SHA process involved further, more detailed technical investigation and preliminary work on resource consents for the relevant area, so there is a substantial amount of additional information to support the plan change that is now available. In addition, there have been changes to the planning policy framework and some of the factual context since July 2017.

This updated AEE dated 21 August 2019 includes the supplementary information requested by HCC, together with other updated information by Perry’s. The additional text is identified in this AEE by being shaded grey.

The amendments to the ODP provisions included in Schedule One to the AEE have also been updated to satisfy in part the submissions that have been lodged. The updates and the relevant submission points they relate to are identified in the text. The details of the updated amendments are the subject of ongoing discussion with submitters and HCC.

The ODP Structure Plan Maps (Appendix 2 of the ODP) contained in Schedule One have not yet been updated. It is proposed to update them by;

• replacing Figure 2-19 Framework Plan with Figure 20 Framework Plan in the Urban Design Figures at Appendix 1 to this AEE

• replacing Figure 2-21 Land Development Plan Areas with Figure 21 Land Development Plan Areas in the Urban design Figures at Appendix 1 to this AEE.

2 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The private plan change is supported by a number of technical reports by sub-consultants including: Bloxam Burnett & Olliver (planning, civil engineers) Aurecon (civil engineers) Boffa Miskell (master-planners, urban designers and landscape architects, cultural advisors) Traffic Design Group (now Stantec) (traffic engineers) CMW Geosciences (geotechnical engineers) Marshall Day Acoustics (acoustic engineers) Coffey Services (environmental site investigation) Kessels Ecology (ecology) Dr Caroline Phillips (archaeology) RCG and Market Economics (economics) CKL and Aurecon (stormwater management) NIWA and River Lake Ltd (water quality) LDP Ltd (Lighting and Glare) Pattle Delamore Partners Ltd (Air Quality) Essentia Consulting Group Ltd (industrial viability) Better Biosecurity Ltd (biosecurity)

Those technical reports are contained in the various appendices enclosed in this report.

Input into the private plan change has also included contributions from:

▪ Bilimoria Consulting (planning peer review)

▪ McCaw Lewis

▪ Kate Barry-Piceno Barrister and Derek Nolan QC (RMA Law)

▪ Horwarths HTL (Tourism and Hotels)

▪ Ngan Consulting (Tourism)

Description of Proposal

Te Awa Lakes will create a tourism and recreational destination for the region, integrated with a new way of living through a comprehensively master planned, mixed-use development. The site’s location next to the Expressway and at the northern most edge of Hamilton City gives it the unique status of being the primary northern gateway to the City, creating an opportunity to promote a positive image of the region. This location is enhanced by over 1km of Waikato River edge which borders the development, providing opportunities for unique river experiences.

3 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Development of the site has been underway since 2013 with the establishment of a service centre and a community bike skills park.

The proposed development is characterised by a number of different land uses in defined precincts and overlays, as described below. The location of each of these precincts is shown on the Land Use Plan in Figure 1. This land use plan breaks down land uses based on the masterplanning undertaken, and forms an input to the zoning plans and structure plan that form the plan change. The zoning and structure plan do not use the term precincts, as they are necessarily more general to provide sufficient flexibility for development. A larger version of this plan is contained in Appendix 1 – Figure 6.

Figure 1: Land Use Plan

Adventure Park Precinct

The anchor for the development is a planned leisure and recreational space on the western side of the site, adjacent to the Expressway interchange. This adventure park will consist of approximately 5-10 activities including a mix of outdoor and indoor recreation with a core of water based activities. The range of activities is not yet finalised but they are likely to include:

Cable tow water skiing/wakeboarding

4 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Aqua golf/mini golf Climbing frames Electric go karting Ropes course and zip lines ‘Aqua Park’ amusements ‘Slip and fly’ water slides

The attractions will be aimed to cater for a wide range of activity and skill levels. The adventure park will include the typical supporting activities of merchandising, food and beverage and the like. It will be a fun and exciting destination for both locals and visitors to the Waikato.

Te Awa Lakes also has the capacity to support wider tourism objectives by being a gateway that showcases the Waikato with ‘tastes of the region’ through offerings of agricultural, adventure or cultural experiences or ‘tasters’ of other established tourism products around the region. These taster attractions may be included in the adventure park itself or in the adjacent mixed-use area/tourism precinct.

The land area allocated to the adventure park is 10.9ha of which 7.6ha is allocated to the amusement and recreational activities and the balance is allocated to associated accommodation, described below.

The adventure park concept needs a large site with a mix of topography. The location within the Te Awa Lakes is driven by a number of site-specific factors, being:

High level of accessibility adjacent to the Waikato Expressway interchange; High level of visibility from the Expressway and Te Rapa Road ensuring that it can be easily navigated to; Existence of artificial water bodies on the site that are remnants of the previous quarry use able to be repurposed for recreational and leisure use; The high-pressure gas pipeline operated by First Gas traverses through this part of the site, creating restrictions on building near it, but it is compatible with the open space character of the adventure park; and Proximity to the existing service centre and proposed additional commercial/tourist development adjacent to Hutchinson Road which will operate in conjunction with it.

For comparison purposes the Rainbows End amusement park in Auckland is 12ha in area but includes approximately 20 activities. It is intended that the adventure park will not be as intensively built up and will have a more open space, green character than the more commercial amusement parks such as Rainbows End.

The number of visitors to the adventure park is difficult to predict at this stage. Perry’s are in discussions with various operators of attractions. However, for the purpose of analysis in this report, Rainbows End is taken as a benchmark. Rainbows End has grown its visitor numbers from around 260,000 visitors annually in 2010 to 400,000 visitors annually in 2016, with 270 staff (60 full time). Rainbows End has 20 separate attractions. Based on only 5-10 activities in the adventure park, the estimated number of annual visitors is 200,000; about 550 per day on average. Part time staff numbers would be highest in peak periods so the number of staff is predicted at 52. These numbers

5 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

generally correlate with the predictions of traffic numbers included in the Updated Integrated Transportation Assessment (“ITA”) by Stantec in Appendix 4.1

Visitor Accommodation Overlay

To support the regional need for visitor accommodation, as identified in the Economic Assessment by RCG at Appendix 6 to this report, Te Awa Lakes will provide an ‘accommodation hub’ for visitors to the region in a location which will be a destination in itself. The visitor accommodation will form part of the adventure park land holding, so that it can be operated as a ‘package’ with adventure park activities; is easily accessible to those activities and benefits from the amenity provided by the adventure park. It will effectively wrap around the northern and eastern fringes of the adventure park. The accommodation is likely to be low rise ‘resort style’ as a result. The location also acts as a ‘buffer’ or transition between the action-oriented activities of the adventure park with their associated noise and more commercial appearance and the residential development that is proposed to the north and east. Approximately 400 short stay accommodation units are proposed.

Mixed Use Precinct

The existing service centre on the corner of Hutchinson Road and Te Rapa Road comprises a BP service station including a fast food outlet and a group of five tenancies currently including a wake boat and equipment supplier and a café. The proposal is to build on this range of services by extending ‘mixed use’ development along much of the sites frontage to Hutchinson Road, incorporating sufficient commercial activities to provide local convenience services to the future residential population and visitors to Te Awa Lakes. As per the recommendations of the Assessment of Economic Effects by RCG at Appendix 6 to this report, the total retail GFA of this mixed use precinct is proposed to be capped at 2,500m².2

This will take the form of small neighbourhood shops, restaurants, cafes, licenced premises, small offices (e.g. real estate agents), banks, doctors rooms plus some light or service industries such as boat, jet ski or cycle repairs. As a mixed-use precinct, there would be opportunities for upper floor residential apartments to promote ‘live-work’ opportunities, with a potential for approximately 100 dwelling units of that type.

The mixed-use area will be 5.8ha (including the existing service centre and the tourism precinct). Its location adjacent to Hutchinson Road builds on and integrates with the existing service centre. It also acts as a land use ‘buffer’ between the Te Awa Lakes residential component and the land to the south of Hutchinson Road which is zoned ‘deferred Te Rapa North Industrial’ and the Fonterra Dairy processing site further south.

This area would also accommodate any tourist activities not directly associated with the adventure park, such as a cultural centre and tourist information centre. This area is shown as the tourism precinct on the Land Use Plan (Appendix 1 – Figure 6). The proximity to the river positions the tourism and cultural facilities as a gateway to Hamilton by both land and water from the north.

Residential Area

The balance of the site will be developed for a variety of standalone, terraced and apartment living, being a mix of both medium and general density residential, to deliver a range of dwelling types. The living environment has been master planned to provide an environment closely integrated with the water; being both the Waikato River and internal lakes. It will also be linked to an active lifestyle

1 ITA, Stantec, in Appendix 4, p20 2 Assessment of Economic Effects, RCG, in Appendix 6, p46

6 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

through the recreational and leisure activities available on the river, lakes and adjacent tourist activities.

The lakes within the residential area are 5.8ha in area and involve reconfiguring artificial remnant water bodies from the previous quarrying activities. The main linear lake extends from the north through the residential area to connect with the southern wetland. All lakes will be suitable for informal recreation such as kayaking, paddle boarding and swimming.

Parts of these water bodies will be converted to wetlands to treat stormwater runoff from the development. It is likely that the higher density residential development will be clustered around the lakes and other higher amenity areas such as the mixed use precinct. However, the exception will be the River Interface overlay (refer to the Framework Plan – Figure 20 in Appendix 1 for location of the River Interface Overlay) where a much lower density of development will take place with minimum lot sizes of 1,000m². A typical depth of 40m is also proposed to encourage homes to be setback further from the river.

An esplanade reserve of at least 20m width will be created along the over 1km of river frontage, incorporating the existing Te Awa River Ride path which is currently protected by an easement over the land.

The lower density approach to development adjacent to the Waikato River recognises the sensitivity of the river edge to development in terms of landscape and visual effects as described in section 5 of this report.

The residential component of Te Awa Lakes is 39.7ha, excluding the lakes. It is designed to deliver 892 (+ or – 10%) dwelling units in a mix of single dwellings, duplexes, apartments and terrace houses, inclusive of the River Interface Overlay.

The Te Awa Lakes SHA proposed a 10% component for affordable houses. Although the SHA was declined by the Minister of Housing, consistent with the SHA this plan change is proposed to include a proportion of affordable homes. A new policy has been included but the details of the associated rules are still being developed.

Purpose of the Plan Change

The plan change has multiple purposes. The overriding purpose is to rezone the land to enable the range of activities in a development as described in section 1.2 that will transform the northern gateway to the City. However, there are a range of other purposes that underpin it as follows:

To establish a new tourist and recreational attraction for the city and region that utilises a strategic site with all the right attributes for such an attraction, connected by both the Expressway and the Waikato River and in single ownership. To implement a more appropriate economic set of alternative uses for a site that has been found to have significant geotechnical and physical constraints. To make a contribution to remedying the short to medium term shortfall in housing supply in Hamilton. To efficiently utilise Perry’s existing investment in infrastructure for the site. To establish a development that is compatible with and enhances the Waikato River frontage of the site, both visually and through improved public access that is more compatible than the previous industrial use and zoning.

7 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

To provide services and amenities that complement and support the existing residential community of Horotiu and to provide further housing choice in a location close to employment land.

Summary of Proposed Changes to the Operative Hamilton City District Plan

The above proposal and purpose require a number of changes to the ODP. Those changes are set out as track changes in Schedule One: Amendments to the Operative Hamilton City District Plan at the end of this report.

In summary, the changes include:

Amended site zoning (and associated Planning Maps – 1A and 1B, 2A and 2B) from Te Rapa North Industrial (Stage 1B) and Deferred Industrial to the following and as shown in Figure 2. o Te Awa Lakes Major Facilities Zone inclusive of the Visitor Accommodation overlay which is shown on Features Map 1B in Schedule One; o Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Zone inclusive of the Riverside Interface overlay which is shown on the Features Map 1B in Schedule One; and o Te Awa Lakes Business 6 Zone o Road Corridor Zone – underlying the Waikato Expressway designation and local roads that have recently been built Chapter 3 – Structure Plans - Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan area inclusive of description, objectives, policies, rules and structure plan components. Chapter 4 – Residential Zones – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Zone inclusive of a new objective and policy, requirements for Land Development Plans (“LDPs”) to be prepared to facilitate development and new rules for bulk, location and density yield. Chapter 6 – Business 1 to 7 Zones – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Business 6 Zone (Business Zone 6 – Neighbourhood Centre) in the rule framework. Chapter 12 – Te Rapa North Industrial Zone – Removal of any reference to Stage 1B and associated consequential changes. Chapter 17 – Major Facilities Zone – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Adventure Park inclusive of specific provisions for its development. Chapter 23 – Subdivision – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Zone inclusive of a new subdivision standard for the River Interface Overlay and removal of references to Stage 1B of the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. Chapter 25.8 – Noise – Addition of noise requirements for Te Awa Lakes and removal of reference to Stage 1B of the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. Chapter 25.10 – Signs—Additional site specific sign rules. Appendix 2 – Section 1.2 – Information Requirements – Additional information requirements for the Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Zone.

8 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Volume 2 – Section 1.3.2 – Controlled Activities – Matters of Control - Removal of reference to Stage 1B Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. Appendix 2 – Structure Plans – Addition of the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan in the locality guide and inclusion of the various Te Awa Lakes plans.

Figure 2: Zoning Plan

Site Description

The site is a 62ha tract of land located at the northern most extent of the Hamilton City boundary. It is 7km south of Ngaruawahia and 10km north of the Hamilton City centre.

It is a roughly triangular site bounded by the Ngaruawahia section of the Waikato Expressway and the Horotiu interchange to the west, the Waikato River to the east and Hutchinson Road to the south. See Figure 3 for the physical extent of the site. The land is also located directly south-east of the Horotiu settlement.

The site is a singularly owned landholding comprising of five certificates of title. Ownership is by Horotiu Farms Ltd who are a subsidiary company of Perry’s. The certificate of title details are set out in Table 1 on the following page. Recent copies of these titles are contained in Appendix 12.

9 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Figure 3: Site Locality Plan Table 1: Certificate of Title Details

Legal Description CT Interest Land Area Reference Lot 1 DP 495464 726961 ▪ Compensation certificates 1.8868ha ▪ Land covenant ▪ Encumbrance to BP NZ Oil Ltd ▪ Consent notice ▪ Easements for gas and right of ways Lot 101 DP 495464 726960 ▪ Compensation certificates 17.2759 ▪ Land covenant ▪ Easements for right of way and draining water Lot 8 DP 495464 726959 ▪ Compensation certificate 0.9272ha ▪ Land covenant ▪ Consent notice Allotment 106 Parish of Horotiu and 749406 ▪ Gazette Notice for SH1 being limited 39.1708ha Section 2 SO Plan 486608 (Limited as to access road. Parcels) ▪ Subject to a pipeline right (in gross) in favour of Natural Gas Corporation ▪ Compensation certificates ▪ Land covenant ▪ Easement for right of way.

10 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Pt Allotment 105 Horotiu Parish SA30C/689 ▪ Gazette Notice for SH1 being limited 18.0585ha access road ▪ Subject to a pipeline right (in gross) in favour of Natural Gas Corporation ▪ Compensation certificates ▪ Easement for right of way

Although the Expressway has been built, it has not been surveyed and as such the boundary between the Expressway and the site has not been fully defined. Therefore, some of the above certificates of title extend beyond the site of this plan change request. The land for the Hutchinson Road roundabout and a portion of Te Rapa Road has however been surveyed, acquired and legalised. This is demonstrated in that the service centre title (Lot 1 DP 495464) was issued in December 2016.

Perry’s have been working with the New Zealand Transport Agency (“NZTA”) to define the remainder of the boundary of the Expressway and it is expected that it will follow the bottom of the batter slope for the Expressway. Based on this assumption the planning and design of Te Awa Lakes has proceeded, with the legalisation of the Expressway boundary to be confirmed shortly. Any minor change in boundary location as a result of that legalisation will not be enough to affect any of the design assumptions or any other aspects of this plan change. Once the Expressway is removed from the certificates of title the site will be approximately 62ha in size.

Part of the site is subject to a Natural Gas Corporation (now First Gas) high pressure pipeline that traverses it in a generally north-south direction. The pipeline is a 150mm nominal diameter steel pipeline contained within an existing 12m wide easement. The location of the easement is shown on the plans contained in Appendix 1.

Site History

Historic aerial photographs show that from 1941 to the early 1990’s the site was in pastoral use, but by 1993 it had largely been converted to horticultural (asparagus and orcharding) use. Around 1995 the sand quarry was established and from that time the site was actively quarried, including sand extraction, processing and cleanfill acceptance3.

The remaining sand resource has been left and the quarry is in the process of being disestablished. Currently the site is solely being used largely as a stockpiling and sand drying site, by Perry’s, as active extraction has ceased. All sand processing related activities ceased in 2017, leaving remediation for the future land uses as the primary activity.

The entrance to the quarry is from Hutchinson Road. Physical infrastructure on-site associated with the sand quarry includes two site offices and a storage shed. Three large ponds and three small ponds are also located on the site. The central portion of the site is unquarried and accommodates the sand stockpiling and handling area.

The site has been subject to numerous resource consents from the Waikato District Council (“WDC”), HCC and the Waikato Regional Council (“WRC”) that have provided for the quarrying activities and some of the development that is already accommodated on the site, including an Indicative

3 Environmental Site Investigation by Coffey Services Ltd, at Appendix 11, p5

11 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Development Plan (“IDP”) approval that enabled the service centre to establish. Table 4 provides a summary of these consents.

The service centre activities encompass the Te Rapa Road/Hutchinson Road corner of the site and are generally contained within Lot 1 DP 495464. The service centre has two existing connections to the roading network, one being a slip lane off Te Rapa Road for south bound vehicles and the second being a two-way entrance onto Hutchinson Road approximately 150m east of the Hutchinson Road/Te Rapa Road roundabout. Uses within the service centre include the BP service station and Subway tenancy, a coffee shop and some other retail units.

Description of Locality

The locality has mixed characteristics and is exhibiting significant change as would be expected in one of New Zealand’s fastest growing cities. The two largest landscape features being the Waikato River and Waikato Expressway.

The land directly adjacent to the site to the south is predominantly semi-rural and lifestyle block uses, and includes a pet boarding kennel. At the eastern end of Hutchinson Road, adjacent to the river is the ‘Hinterland Adventures’ paint ball activity. To the south, adjoining Te Rapa Road is a Sikh Temple. Land to the south west, across Te Rapa Road and the Expressway is largely in rural pastoral use.

Immediately to the north west, in Waikato District, is the Horotiu locality. This area has a long well- established history of residential and rural-residential occupation, focused around the Horotiu Primary School on Horotiu Bridge Road and supported by Horotiu Village which comprises approximately 112 houses adjacent to the Affco meat processing plant and several rural residential properties on Law Crescent. The Perry’s land to the west of the Expressway is zoned Country Living in the Operative District Plan as a result of Waikato District Plan Change 17, which removed the industrial zoning across that land. In the Proposed Waikato District Plan the land is zoned Residential.

To the east, across the Waikato River, are approximately 25 country living (rural residential) properties. They are on sites of about 5,000m2 each and are accessed from River Road.

To the west of Te Rapa Road and south of Horotiu Road lies the Horotiu Industrial Park (part of which is also known as Northgate Business Park), and other industrial zoned land. This land contains several industrial operations such as RX Plastics, Horotiu Masonry Plant and Waikato Milking Systems. Northgate Business Park has been under development for the last three years. In 2016 Ports of Auckland acquired 33ha of the Northgate Business Park on the south-western side of the North Island Main Trunk railway to establish an inland freight hub, in a series of stages over some 10 years.

The Horotiu Section of the Waikato River Trail (Te Awa River Ride) runs along the Waikato River boundary of the site with connections from the trail being provided to the service centre along Hutchinson Road.

To the south, approximately 420m from the Hutchinson Road boundary of the site is Fonterra’s Te Rapa Dairy Factory processing plant. It is contained within a 40ha site adjacent to the Waikato River and includes the manufacturing plant, cool stores and dry stores, transport depot and other ancillary activities and buildings.

12 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

2.0 Section 32 Evaluation

Evaluation of Issues

As set out in section 4.4 below, section 32 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”) is a key component of the policy development process for all district plan matters, including private plan changes. It requires a robust analysis of policy options, including consideration of costs and benefits, before settling on the preferred option. This report records the section 32 evaluation that has been carried out to date, but it recognizes that it is an iterative process that will continue through the plan change lodgement, submission and hearing process. It has been updated in August 2019 to take into account new information that has become available since 2017.

The first step of the evaluation is to identify the issues that the plan change is intended to address. That is, the reason why the existing zoning of the site is not appropriate. Section 1.3 above has outlined the purpose of the plan change, which is to enable a development that addresses the problems of the existing zoning. Those problems are:

• The Te Rapa North Industrial Zone does not provide for the establishment of a tourist activity such as an adventure park. The opportunity to establish the adventure park has been identified by Perry’s and the concept has been developed in conjunction with specialist tourist advisers and interest groups, including Hamilton and Waikato Tourism, the Regional Tourism Organisation. The benefits of the park are described in the Assessment of Economic Effects by RCG at Appendix 6 to this report. The site requirements for such a park can be satisfied on this site. It is unlikely that any other sites within or adjacent to Hamilton City could satisfy these requirements as well as this one. The adventure park is a non-complying activity under the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone provisions. • The second key issue is the physical suitability of the site for development. As a former sand quarry, it has been left with significant constraints for industrial development. These include large remnant water bodies that need to be drained and filled at significant cost, or accommodated in any development. The larger northern ponds have been used as settlement ponds for the sand processing wastewater and as a result have significant sediment accumulation on their floor4. They currently occupy approximately 135,000 square metres of the site. They are very difficult to integrate into any industrial development of the site as they impact on economic and efficient lot and road layouts. In addition, they require significant effort and cost to manage water quality and amenity, which is a cost that is of no benefit to industrial users. • In addition, the widely variable uncontrolled fill found across the site up to a depth of approximately 9m creates further site suitability difficulties. Small lightweight residential building footprints on raft foundations are better suited to situations where uncontrolled fill remains on site, than large industrial buildings that are more susceptible to differential settlement.5 • An assessment of viability of industrial use of the site has been prepared by Essentia Consulting Group Ltd and is included as Appendix 19. The purpose of the report was to determine whether the development of the land for industrial purposes is commercially viable given the

4 GMW Geosciences Geotechnical Summary Report in Appendix 8, p5 5 CMW Geosciences Geotechnical Summary Report in Appendix 8, p12

13 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

history of mining operations on the site which has resulted in the current state of the land being highly variable. Generally, the approach was to assess what was required to restore the site to a suitable bearing capacity for industrial building development and use, subject to the geotechnical and engineering constraints arising from the nature of landform and soils on the site. The costs of remediation of the soils were factored in. Revenues were based on the current market sales evidence for similar sized land parcels with good bearing capacity. • The result of the analysis demonstrated that undertaking a land development for industrial purposes would result in a substantial loss in the order of negative $36m. Sensitivity analysis on key cost and revenue inputs concluded that under any reasonable adjustment to assumptions the process would not deliver a positive return, let alone a return at a level reflecting the commercial risk and return requirements for a project of this nature. • The outcomes were further tested by separately itemising the cost of remediation back to a rural land use as originally required by the quarry consent, on the basis that would be a remediation cost required to comply with the quarry consent and absorbed by Perry’s quarry business. This is a theoretical exercise because once the site was given an urban zoning in 2014 it would not have been returned to rural use. However, the theoretical exercise showed that excluding the rural remediation costs did not change the outcome and that there was no realistic prospect of industrial development for the foreseeable future. • When Perry’s began sand mining of the property in 1995 there was no realistic prospect of future industrial use of the site. It was in a rural area in Waikato District. Therefore, the quarry consents required rehabilitation of the site back to rural use. Prospects for urban and industrial use first emerged around 2004 and were only confirmed in 2012. The site was only transferred into Hamilton City in 2011. Perry’s initially considered both industrial and large lot residential options before deciding to pursue industrial development, including consenting an Indicative Development Plan (“IDP”) in 2014, and development of the service centre land. Its experience was that developing the whole site in this manner is likely to be unviable for an industrial land use because of the loading requirements that those buildings require. This has subsequently been confirmed by the report included in Appendix 19. The service centre has been developed on a part of the site relatively undisturbed by quarrying and was subject to extensive earthworks to develop. • The final problem with the existing zoning is that Hamilton is currently experiencing significant residential growth and has fallen short of meeting demand for the supply of housing for each year from 2008 to 2016. The shortfall of housing supply is estimated at approximately 2,000 houses6. At the same time, there is ample supply of industrial land through new developments such as Ruakura, with a risk of oversupply7. • In December 2016 Hamilton City Council entered into a Housing Accord with the Government under the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act 2013. The Accord sets targets of 1,300 new dwellings for 2017 rising to 1,400 in 2018 and 1,500 in 2019. As set out in that Accord a key challenge is the financial hurdles to fund lead infrastructure to open up growth areas. This places priority on sites that can be developed for housing quickly where lead infrastructure is in place, rather than industrial development. Because the lead infrastructure has already been delivered by Perry’s on this site, it provides the greatest opportunity to meet these housing needs.

6 Assessment of Economic Effects, RCG, in Appendix 6, p22 7 Ibid, p13

14 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• HCC adopted its Special Housing Area (SHA) Policy in 2017. The policy has two purposes; enabling an increase in overall housing supply, and facilitating increased affordability of residential opportunities. In doing so the policy establishes selection criteria for the scheduling of SHA. One of those key criteria is that the proposal must be able to demonstrate that it does not undermine Council’s existing or planned infrastructure and as such the land can be developed immediately. The technical reporting that supports this plan change demonstrates this through recent infrastructure modelling of the City’s network capacity, and economic analysis of industrial land supply.

Alternatives Considered

This plan change is an ‘amending proposal’ under section 32(3). That is, it proposes to amend the existing ODP rather than be a new plan. For an amending proposal, the evaluation of objectives is limited to:

• Any new objectives that are part of the proposal; and Any objectives of the ODP that are relevant to the new objectives that are proposed.

This proposal has been designed to adopt as many of the existing objectives, policies and rules (including zones) of the ODP as possible in accordance with Principle 3.2 of that Plan, which envisages new Structure Plans and includes an intent for them to integrate seamlessly into the ODP by using ODP mechanisms including existing zones, overlays, design guides, defined terms, formatting and style. As a result of following this approach the only new objectives and policies proposed are:

• Three site specific objectives and related policies for inclusion in Chapter 3 - Structure Plans. One additional objective and four related policies in Chapter 4 – Residential Zone to provide a basis for a specific Medium Density Residential Zone within the site and thereby enable the supply of approximately 892 dwellings (+ or -10%) within the residential portion of the site.

No other objectives or policies are to be amended, therefore limiting the evaluation under section 32 principally to assessing the new objectives and assessing the extent to which the methods achieve existing relevant objectives.

Existing Objectives

There are a wide range of existing objectives in the ODP. The majority are activity-specific or issue- specific and therefore are not particularly relevant to a site-specific plan change to urbanise land such as this one. However, firstly the Strategic Framework includes a number of ‘high level’ objectives that are relevant to a significant land use change such as this. Secondly as a new structure plan is proposed to be inserted into the ODP the objectives of Chapter 3, Structure Plans, are also relevant.

In terms of section 32, the requirement is to examine the most appropriate way of achieving these existing objectives. The relevant objectives are Objectives 2.2.1 to 2.2.13 in the Strategic Framework and Objectives 3.3.1 to 3.3.7 in the Structure Plans chapter.

The Strategic Framework objectives cover issues of sustainability, urban design, contributions to the wellbeing and prosperity of the community, delivery of a range of housing types, the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River and integration of land use and infrastructure. These are all matters

15 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

that are addressed in the following Table 2 under the headings of environmental, economic, social and cultural costs and benefits.

New Objectives

Section 32(1) requires that any new objectives be evaluated to assess the extent to which they are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA.

The new objectives included in Schedule One of this report include the following additional objectives in Chapter 3 - Structure Plans, as part of a new subsection entitled Te Awa Lakes;

“3.8.1.1 Enable development of a tourist and recreational attraction in a regionally strategic location”

“3.8.1.2 Establish a high quality medium density urban residential environment”

“3.8.1.3 Provide additional serviced residential land capacity in a timely manner”

The following additional objective is to be included in Chapter 4 - Residential Zone”

These objectives are a subset of the plan change as a whole. The plan change as a whole is assessed against the national and regional policy documents, and Part 2 of the RMA, including its purpose, in section 7 of this report. That assessment concludes that it is consistent with Part 2 and with those instruments.

As these additional objectives are a necessary part of incorporating the plan change into the current structure of the ODP they are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the RMA by:

• Enabling establishment of a tourist attraction in the form of an adventure park that will bring economic benefits to Hamilton and the wider region. • Enabling people to provide for their social and economic wellbeing by providing a range of housing choices which contributes to increased housing supply so as to assist in meeting Hamilton’s historic and current housing shortfall, and also contributing to improved housing affordability. • Enabling cultural wellbeing by a more sensitive treatment of the Waikato River edge, through low density residential development and enhanced public access, in keeping with the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River. • Using the physical resource of the land and associated existing infrastructure efficiently to meet the foreseeable needs of future generations for housing. • Safeguarding the life supporting capacity of water and ecosystems by implementing a higher standard of treatment of stormwater than would be the case for an alternative industrial development, thereby improving the quality of the stormwater discharge from the site, which is also consistent with the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River. • Mitigating the potential for significant reverse sensitivity effects that could arise because of the proximity of the development to the Expressway and existing and possible future industrial activities in the locality. Avoiding, remedying and mitigating the adverse effects on the environment, which are limited to visual effects on some neighbours, and some moderate traffic effects. These effects and the

16 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

appropriate mitigation are addressed in section 5 of this report and the supporting technical reports.

Having come to the conclusion that the Te Rapa North Industrial zoning is no longer appropriate, several options were considered to address the issue, as follows. For completeness, the do-nothing option was also considered.

• Do nothing. • Lodge non-complying activity resource consents. • Wait for the next Hamilton City District Plan review and make submissions to seek the rezoning. Rezone the land by private plan change.

In accordance with section 32(1)(c) this evaluation is to a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of effects anticipated by the plan change. The level of detail is therefore informed by the assessment of effects contained in section 5 of this report.

Those effects are in turn informed by the existing environment. They establish a baseline against which to assess effects. As set out in section 5 of this report the baseline is set by the likely future environment based on the approved and partly implemented resource consents for 30ha of industrial development. Measured against this baseline the effects are moderate or minor.

Similarly, the significance of the effects refers to the importance of those effects in the context of the planning framework. The most significant effect that could arise would be a potential inconsistency with the industrial land allocations for Te Rapa North contained in the Waikato Regional Policy Statement (“RPS”) as that could have the effect of creating a shortfall of industrial land with consequent adverse economic effects. A secondary effect could be a reverse sensitivity effect that unreasonably constrained existing or future industrial development in the Te Rapa North or Horotiu Strategic Industrial Nodes.

However as shown by the analysis in section 7.5 and supported by the economic assessment by RCG contained in Appendix 6, the further assessment by Market Economics contained in Appendix 20 and the report by Castalia in Appendix 21, the alternative land release envisaged by this plan change has minor effects and satisfies the alternative land release criteria contained in Method 6.14.3 of the RPS. Therefore, this issue is not significant. Similarly, the analysis in section 5 demonstrates that any potential reverse sensitivity effects can be managed and therefore are not significant.

Evaluation of Benefits and Costs

Table 2, on the following pages, evaluates the four principal alternatives under section 32.

17 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Table 2: Evaluation of Benefits and Costs

Alternative Costs Benefits

a) Do nothing, i.e. retain Environmental Environmental Te Rapa North ▪ Adverse visual and landscape effects of industrial ▪ No need to address potential reverse sensitivity Industrial Zoning (the development on Waikato River edge. effects of nearby industry or the Waikato Expressway. status quo) ▪ Adverse visual and landscape effects of industrial Economic development from key viewpoints at the gateway to ▪ Some consenting and design costs for industrial Hamilton, particularly the Waikato Expressway. development have already been incurred so are sunk ▪ Adverse visual and landscape effects of industrial costs. development as viewed from the Country Living zone across ▪ Additional consenting costs for industrial development the Waikato River. should be moderate. ▪ Limited opportunity for public access to Waikato River. ▪ Any future employment if the site is ever developed is ▪ Likelihood of lower standard of stormwater management unlikely to be new employment as there are other and treatment than for the TAL development and limited options for new industrial development within opportunity for any ecological enhancement or restoration. Hamilton. Economic Social ▪ Site constraints make industrial development unviable for ▪ As above there may be future opportunities for the foreseeable future. As a result the site is likely to lie industrial employment. fallow which is a lost opportunity cost of being unable to use Cultural the site for its zoned purpose. ▪ There are no identifiable cultural benefits. ▪ The existing water bodies will lead to inefficient subdivision design and higher per unit development costs. The ongoing costs of maintaining the quality and appearance of the water bodies will not be recovered through the development. ▪ There is ample industrial land supply so there is no economic incentive to develop. ▪ The Adventure Park will not be developed as there are no readily available alternative sites, therefore its economic employment benefits will not be realised which is a lost opportunity cost. ▪ The agglomeration benefits of a tourism hub will be lost if the Adventure Park does not proceed.

18 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

Social ▪ There are no identifiable social costs. Cultural ▪ The industrial interface with the Waikato River is less sensitive to the cultural importance of the river and its margins, and therefore not as consistent with the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River as other alternatives. ▪ Opportunities to improve water quality through the comprehensive stormwater treatment train approach and lake water quality improvements will be lost. b) Lodge Non-Complying Environmental Environmental Activity Consents for ▪ There are no identifiable environmental costs. ▪ These are the same environmental benefits as residential, adventure outlined below for Alternative (d), if a Non-Complying park and commercial Activity consent was granted. activities Economic Economic ▪ The risk of a Non-Complying Activity being declined are high ▪ These are the same economic benefits as outlined making it unlikely to be attractive as an investment below for Alternative (d). proposition. Therefore, the cost of the application process Social may not be recoverable. ▪ These are the same social benefits as outlined below ▪ Because a Non-Complying Activity requires a higher level of for Alternative (d). design than a plan change there are additional upfront Cultural design and consenting costs compared to other options. ▪ These are the same cultural benefits as outlined below ▪ As a Non-Complying Activity consent is restricted by a for Alternative (d). specific design and a consent lapse period it is highly likely that design rework and subsequent consent changes will be needed, adding compliance costs. It is also unrealistic to undertake design to a sufficient level of certainty for all of the elements proposed at this early stage. Social ▪ There are no identifiable social costs. Cultural ▪ There are no identifiable cultural costs.

19 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits c) Pursue rezoning Environmental Environmental through District Plan ▪ The same environmental costs as for Alternative (d) apply. ▪ The same environmental benefits as for Alternative (d) Review Economic apply, but they are delayed. ▪ The next District Plan review is likely to be approximately 10 Economic years away. Therefore, this alternative carries additional ▪ The same economic benefits as for Alternative (d) holding costs and lost opportunity costs of being unable to apply, but they are delayed. develop the land for at least 10 years. Social Social ▪ The same social benefits as for Alternative (d) apply ▪ The same social costs as for Alternative (d) apply. but they are delayed. Cultural Cultural ▪ The same cultural costs as for Alternative (d) apply. ▪ The same cultural benefits as for Alternative (d) apply, but they are delayed. d) Rezone through Environmental Environmental private plan change ▪ Adverse reverse sensitivity effects, particularly in relation to ▪ Visual and landscape benefits for key views at (PPC2) noise, need to be addressed. The potential noise sources Hamilton’s gateway. are the Waikato Expressway and nearby industrial uses. As ▪ Visual and landscape benefits of treatment of the set out in the Acoustic Assessment in Appendix 7, the interface with the Waikato River, with low density potential industrial noise effects can be adequately residential at the interface. addressed through design of the development by having less ▪ Improved water quality in the water bodies on the site sensitive activities adjacent to Hutchinson Road and on the and their sustainable ongoing management is justified fringe of the adventure park. For houses near the by the residential amenity and value they provide. A Expressway an approach of requiring acoustic treatment for higher standard of treatment of stormwater with houses within 100m of the Expressway is proposed, which is lower contamination risk is likely than for industrial, consistent with standards elsewhere in the ODP. Separation leading to improved water quality in the discharge to distances from existing industrial activities are sufficient to the Waikato River. avoid reverse sensitivity effects. ▪ Enhancement of public access to the Waikato River. ▪ Adverse reverse sensitivity effects related to odour and ▪ Contribution to CPTED (Crime Prevention Through visual effects from the Te Rapa Dairy Processing plant. Environmental Design) achievement along the river These can be addressed through setbacks from Hutchinson trail by additional informal surveillance. Rd and design of dwellings to minimise outlook towards the ▪ Enhancement of the natural character of the Waikato Dairy Processing Plant. River margin.

20 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

Economic ▪ Visual and landscape benefits for the viewing audience ▪ There are significant application and compliance costs across the river to the east. associated with a private plan change that do not arise with ▪ Improvements to the quality and connectivity of the the do nothing alternative or with the District Plan review Waikato Rive Ride path between Te Awa Lakes and alternative. However, they are still lower and have lower Pukete. risks than the Non-complying activity alternative. Economic Social ▪ The regional economic benefit of a tourist attraction, ▪ There are no identifiable social costs. the adventure park, are enabled. The Economic Cultural Assessment by RCG included in Appendix 6 estimates ▪ There are no identifiable cultural costs. that there will be an extra $3.7M p.a. of tourist spending. ▪ The Adventure Park is strategically important as there are no readily available alternative sites. ▪ The benefits of a residential development that is economically viable because the geotechnical constraints are able to be managed. ▪ The benefits of increasing the supply and choice of housing to meet short term shortfalls in capacity, particularly in the southern Waikato District therefore contributing to a more competitive housing market in the city which may improve affordability. ▪ The benefits of efficient use of investment in existing water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure. ▪ The employment benefits created by tourist-related jobs associated with the adventure park and associated tourism activities. This will be new employment as there are currently no attractions of this type in Hamilton. ▪ Economic benefits of development are realised much earlier compared to the do nothing (status quo) option

21 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

Social ▪ The social benefits of improved public access to the Waikato River. ▪ The social benefits of a critical mass of people to maintain and support local services such as the Horotiu School and local shops. Cultural ▪ Cultural benefits of more sensitive development at the interface with the Waikato River and improved access to the river. ▪ Improved water quality for discharge to the Waikato River.

The above Table 2 compares the do nothing (status quo) option of industrial zoning against three alternative planning processes for development of Te Awa Lakes. The evaluation shows that overall the Te Awa Lakes development is superior to the status quo because:

• Development occurs earlier.

• It has significant environmental advantages.

• It is a higher value mixed use development than the alternative of a fallow site for the foreseeable future.

• It has significantly higher certainty of development.

• The private plan change alternative is favoured over the other process alternatives as it is lower cost, lower risk and more efficient.

A more finely grained assessment of the key alternative provisions has then been undertaken in the following table (Table 3) under section 32.

22 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Table 3: Evaluation of Alternative Rules, Benefits and Costs

Alternative Costs Benefits

a) Land Development Plan ▪ Consent and compliance costs will be significant as ▪ Recent experience with consenting under the Ruakura (“LDP”) as Restricted multiple LDP consents are expected to be needed. Variation to the ODP demonstrated that the LDP Discretionary Activity for provisions provided outcomes with reasonable flexibility Medium Density Residential and certainty. Areas – (Preferred Rule) ▪ The LDP process means that design can proceed progressively. Detail is focused on infrastructure planning and design of duplexes and apartments where more detail is needed to deliver on the vision of the development. ▪ The LDP rules are legally robust having been the subject of legal review in the course of the Ruakura Variation and Plan Change 1. b) Comprehensive Development ▪ Consent and compliance costs will be significant as ▪ The CDP rule would be consistent with existing rules in Plan (CDP) as Discretionary multiple CDP consents will be needed. the ODP applying to development in Medium Density Activity for Medium Density ▪ There will be greater uncertainty over CDP outcomes Residential zones in Rototuna and Rotokauri, meaning Residential Zone Areas (Not compared to the LDP rule, as the Council’s discretion in ease of administration. Preferred Rule) relation to the consents is not restricted. ▪ The current CDP rules are legally questionable given recent Environment Court decisions, and may be amended by HCC in the future. c) Inclusion of a Te Awa Lakes ▪ Because the structure plan assumptions and layout are ▪ The structure plan provides a higher level of certainty Structure Plan in the ODP based on preliminary design and feasibility over outcomes as all subsequent resource consents are (Preferred rule). assessments there is a risk that later design departs to be consistent with the structure plan. from the structure plan, leading to additional ▪ Sufficient flexibility to take into account the outcomes of compliance costs. more detailed design is accommodated by rules ▪ Consideration was given to whether a wider structure categorising departures from the structure plan as planning exercise was necessary to integrate Te Awa restricted discretionary activities meaning that there is Lakes into future development of the wider Te Rapa an appropriate assessment and approval process to North Strategic Industrial Node. However it is a self manage risks. contained site bounded by the Expressway/Te Rapa Rd

23 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

on one side and the Waikato River on another, and ▪ The structure plan ensures that key infrastructure only on the southern (Hutchinson Road) boundary provision such as roading layout is put in place to provide adjoins future industrial land. It is only at the southern certainty for infrastructure providers regardless of boundary that there is some uncertainty over future multiple subsequent resource consent processes. development but this is mitigated by Perry’s ownership ▪ The structure plan approach is similar to the structure of over half of the adjoining land between Hutchinson plans for growth areas in the ODP. Although this Rd and the Fonterra Dairy Processing site. It also sits structure plan area is much smaller than others it has on the north-eastern extremity of the industrial node similarities in terms of infrastructure provision and and involves only 25ha of rezoning in the context of the management of environmental effects. It will allow it to 245ha node. It is already serviced for water, fit seamlessly into the District Plan. wastewater and stormwater so does not raise significant issues of provision of lead infrastructure or coordination of infrastructure with other developers. For these reasons it is considered suitable for a separate structure plan area. A wider structure planning exercise would lead to significant delays in being able to realise the benefits of development described in this report. d) Inclusion of dwelling yield ▪ As the dwelling yields are based on concept design only ▪ The dwelling yields form the basis of some of the numbers in the LDP areas there is a risk that they turn out to be inaccurate once assessments of effects, notably for traffic generation and (Preferred Rule). further design is undertaken and are not achieved or infrastructure capacity. Hence, they are needed for conversely are too conservative. adequate certainty. ▪ Sufficient flexibility is built into the LDP rules by requiring at least one LDP area to be the subject of an LDP consent. However, parts of other areas can be included meaning that the boundaries of areas and yields are not fixed and provide sufficient flexibility to achieve better design outcomes. e) Inclusion of a visitor ▪ The perception that visitor accommodation here could ▪ There is an economic benefit of $3.2M per year in extra accommodation overlay in divert investment in visitor accommodation spending for additional visitor nights associated with this the Major Facilities Zone (particularly hotels) away from the city centre. accommodation. (Preferred Rule).

24 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

▪ The type of visitor accommodation attracted to Te Awa Lakes is likely to be resort-style, low rise, high amenity which is different to the more intensive hotel style accommodation more suited to the city centre. f) Adoption of the Major ▪ There will be ongoing consenting costs associated with ▪ The Major Facilities Zone applies to a wide range of Facilities Zone to subsequent Concept Development Consents (‘CDCs’) as recreational and community facilities across the city, accommodate the Adventure required by the Major Facilities Zone. each with their own set of site specific rules. This allows Park (Preferred Rule). the zone to be readily adapted to the Adventure Park, remaining consistent with the overall Major Facilities objectives and policies. This limits the cost of developing and administering a new zone. The principal alternative considered was the Destination Open Space Zone, but that is principally designed for, and applies to, publicly owned reserves, whereas this is a private commercial facility. g) Inclusion of a rule requiring ▪ The additional building costs are likely to be around ▪ The proposed rule will achieve an acceptable level of acoustic treatment of houses $10-$15,000 per unit as discussed in the Acoustic amenity for future dwellings near the Expressway, within 100m of the Report by Marshall Day in Appendix 7. The number of adopting the same standard as for other sections of the Expressway (Preferred Rule) houses requiring treatment will be limited by the 100m Expressway that are adjacent to residential zones in wide effects area. Hamilton. ▪ Consistency with the acoustic treatment rules elsewhere in the ODP will assist with effective administration of the rule and limited compliance costs. ▪ The rule is in response to a specific predicted adverse effect due to traffic noise on the Expressway and is an efficient response to that issue. h) Inclusion of a rule requiring ▪ The additional cost of treating all 1,000 houses will be ▪ There would be some consistency with land to the west acoustic treatment of all excessive. of the Expressway in Waikato District where the houses in Te Awa Lakes (Not ▪ The rule is likely to be difficult to administer and apply Residential and Country Living zones include rules Preferred Rule) consistently because it would not be based on a requiring acoustic treatment of all houses. The rule was specific identifiable adverse effect. introduced through Plan Change 17 to the Waikato District Plan.

25 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

▪ There would be no measurable benefit of the rule as there is no identifiable noise source that requires mitigation across the whole site. Industrial development is far enough away to not require mitigation. i) Inclusion of a River Interface ▪ There is an economic cost to the development by not ▪ The lower density of development adjacent to the River Overlay in the Medium maximising the density and therefore the yield, of land will reduce the visual and landscape effects of Density Residential Zone adjacent to the river. development on the river and the Te Awa River walkway, (Preferred Rule) and reflect the high values of the river and its corridor. j) Inclusion of a 2,500m2 GFA ▪ The cap may artificially restrict retail development that ▪ The GFA cap is consistent with the estimated floorspace cap on retail floorspace in could otherwise deliver economic and social benefits to demand for a neighbourhood centre to service residents Business 6 zone (Preferred the community, meaning people have to travel further and visitors, thereby ensuring that the centre does not Rule). to meet their needs. have retail distributional effects on other centres in Hamilton. ▪ There is sufficient flexibility built into the rule that if demand exceeds the cap a discretionary application may be made, that would include a Centre Assessment Report to ensure the effects are acceptable. k) Inclusion of specific set of ▪ The information requirements are detailed so will incur ▪ The only other LDP information requirements are those information requirements for costs in satisfying them. included for the Ruakura Structure Plan area. That area Land Development Plans in involves significantly different planning and development Te Awa Lakes Medium issues of lead infrastructure and development Density Residential Zone sequencing that do not apply to Te Awa Lakes, so it (Preferred Rule) would be inappropriate to adopt them. ▪ There are several specific recommendations for ecological, water quality and traffic mitigation measures that are specific to Te Awa Lakes and therefore need to be included in a specific information requirement. l) Inclusion of specific sign rules ▪ There are no identifiable costs. ▪ There are some specific identification sign requirements in Te Awa Lakes Major for an Adventure Park that the general sign rules do not Facilities Zone (Preferred accommodate. Having activity-specific sign rules avoids Rule)

26 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Alternative Costs Benefits

the costs and delays associated with obtaining additional consents for signs. m) Include rules requiring at least ▪ There will be additional costs of multiple individual ▪ Without this rule there would be a ‘loophole’ for small restricted discretionary consent applications and ITA’s if development is scale commercial development which could take place consent for development in piecemeal. incrementally without assessing overall traffic effects. the Te Awa Lakes Business 6 ▪ This rule will allow comprehensive approach to Zone (Preferred rule) transportation mitigation measures that are not site specific, such as travel demand management. n) Inclusion of a rule requiring all ▪ There are some lost opportunity costs by not being ▪ The setback from the potential odour source of the dwellings to be set back at able to develop upper storey apartments in all of the Fonterra Dairy processing plant reduces the risk of least 25m from Hutchinson Rd Business zone. adverse effects and matches the recommended buffer (Preferred rule) distance by PDP Ltd in Appendix 17. o) Inclusion of rules requiring ▪ The costs of alligator weed eradication or control are ▪ The rule requires the issue of alligator weed to be alligator weed management significant regardless of the nature of development. addressed early in the development process, increasing to be addressed in the chances of successful control and minimising long subsequent resource term costs. consents (Preferred rule) ▪ The proposed earthworks create an opportunity to eradicate or substantially remove the alligator weed. p) Inclusion of a rule requiring ▪ There will be some additional consenting costs in ▪ Early consenting of the lakes provides greater certainty resource consents to develop advancing the consents for the lakes ahead of the other over their form and landforms adjacent to them. Their the main linear lake to LDPs which will generate revenue from sale of early construction will also provide amenity benefits precede most other land property. earlier for the land around them. The rule ensures that development consents they are an integrated part of the development, not and (Preferred rule) afterthought.

27 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Section 32(2)(c) refers to an assessment of the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the provisions. All of the preferred provisions in Table 3 are designed to enable the development of the site through rezoning as described in this report. For a plan change such as this the information needs to be sufficient to demonstrate that the site is suitable for the mix of activities and that the change in land use is not in conflict with high level policy directions. The environmental effects of individual activities can be managed through subsequent consenting processes that are designed into the new plan provisions, or are already in the ODP.

Therefore, less detailed information is needed for a plan change than for resource consents. The detail required for resource consents is to a higher design standard, whereas for a plan change concept design is sufficient. For the purposes of this plan change technical assessments that have been undertaken have provided information that is sufficient and at an appropriate level of certainty to allow additional methods and rules to be designed to address the residual issues identified. Therefore, there is sufficient information to inform a plan change and an assessment of risk of acting or not acting is not needed.

Reasons for Option Chosen

Rezoning of the land to provide for T Awa Lakes (Alternative (d) in Table 2) is the most appropriate planning method to address the issues associated with the limitations of uses enabled by the existing zoning, the ample supply of industrial land, and the geotechnical and physical constraints on economic industrial development caused by the previous sand quarrying activities. The various assessments, including the industrial viability assessment at Appendix 19, lead to a conclusion that the current industrial zoning of the site is not fit for purpose. Rezoning of the land properly enables and supports two land uses that are not catered for adequately within the existing Industrial Zone provisions:

• Establishment of a regional tourist attraction (the Adventure Park) at a gateway location to Hamilton; and Provision of serviced residential land to meet the city’s short and medium term housing needs.

Other options of seeking Non-Complying Activity consents or waiting for the next District Plan review potentially could deliver the same outcome as Alternative (d), but they are inferior in terms of efficiency of process and do not provide the same long term certainty to the landowners and other stakeholders. With a plan change, the intended land use outcomes can be properly and spatially defined and tested for acceptance by the community in a comprehensive manner. Quite apart from a high risk of an unsuccessful Non-Complying Activity application, it also requires a substantial amount of upfront design to achieve the certainty required for a resource consent. The District Plan review alternative represents a potential 10- year delay. Only the private plan change alternative involves an efficient and effective process that also has the ability to address the elements of uncertainty associated with the early stage of design of the project. A plan change allows for District Plan rules to be designed to capture and address the detailed environmental effects, at the appropriate stage when sufficient design has been undertaken.

For the above reasons Alternative (d) is the most efficient means of achieving the relevant existing objectives of the ODP and the new objectives outlined in this report. The relevant

28 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

existing objectives are in particular Objectives 2.2.1 to 2.2.13 in the Strategic Framework. It is efficient because a viable development can be delivered at lowest cost and least risk through a plan change. The alternative of doing nothing would most likely result in the land being left vacant and unused. An alternative of non-complying activity application is more costly and there is a higher risk that the costs would not be recovered because it may be unsuccessful. The alternative of waiting for a District Plan review is not efficient because the 10 year delay leads to significant holding costs and an unacceptable delay in achieving any return on the investment in the development.

Alternative (d) is also the most effective option as the method involving a plan change setting out the zoning, rules and other provisions based on conceptual design, followed by a series of resource consents dealing with detailed environmental effects. This is more likely to contribute to the achievement of the objectives because it allows a staged design and investment approach, rather than requiring significant upfront design work.

Advice from Iwi Authority

As set out in sections 4.4.1 and 4.6.7 of this report, section 32(4A) requires inclusion of a summary of the advice received from iwi authorities and the responses to that advice. The iwi authority is Waikato-Tainui Te Kauhanganui Inc (‘Waikato-Tainui’)8. In order to fulfil this requirement Perry’s consulted with the Waikato-Tainui Environmental Manager and as a result established a Tangata Whenua Working Group (“TWWG”) to coordinate consultation with the appropriate mana whenua groups and organisations. Waikato-Tainui are also a member of the TWWG.

The engagement process to obtain advice from Waikato-Tainui through the vehicle of the TWWG is explained in more detail in section 6.6 of this report and in the ‘Waikato-Tainui Iwi Consultation Report’ by Boffa Miskell included as Appendix 15.

The TWWG forum has created a relationship between Perry’s and Waikato-Tainui that will be ongoing through the life of the project. At this initial plan change stage the advice provided by the TWWG (including the iwi authority) is summarised as follows:

• to work as a collective TWWG forum to uphold environmental and cultural values associated with the Te Awa Lakes Project • to ensure meaningful engagement and consultation with the TWWG as obligated under regulatory processes, conducted in a timely and efficient manner • to undertake a Cultural Environmental Assessment of the area, so as to avoid, remedy and mitigate cultural, environmental concerns, past, present and future • to acknowledge the significance of archaeological sites on land immediately to the south of Hutchinson Road around the gully area • to encourage upgrading of the existing stormwater outlet, including opportunity to enhance fish spawning, such as inanga • to protect the archaeological site (S14/284) adjacent to the river by including it in the proposed esplanade reserve

8 Waikato-Tainui Environmental Plan, Tai Tumu Tai Pari Tai Ao, p21

29 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• the need to follow best practise stormwater management methods • eco sourcing plants and ensuring species are planted that reflect the history of the area Perry’s response to this advice is to accept it and to implement the proposals in a staged manner as opportunities arise through the development and design process. Most of these opportunities will arise through subsequent subdivision and resource consent processes. For example, the protection of archaeological site S14/284 will need to be implemented through the subdivision application that creates the esplanade reserve. Opportunities to improve fish spawning habitat and use plants that reflect the history of the area will be an outcome of the Ecological Rehabilitation Plan which will form part of the Land Development Plans as set out in proposed Rule 1.2.2.289.

A Cultural Impact Assessment has also been prepared and is included as Appendix 15. The Cultural Impact Assessment includes detailed Whakapapa/traditional history of the area as well as detailed mitigation recommendations. The litigation recommendations are accepted by Perry’s and will be implemented in staged manner. Some are reflected in plan provisions but the majority will be delivered through late resource consents and physical development.

A letter from Waikato-Tainui as iwi authority is included in Appendix 14. It confirms that they have sighted the application document and support the plan change in principle.

3.0 Proposed Amendments to the Operative District Plan

Background to Existing Zoning

Up until 2011 the site was within WDC jurisdiction. The Proposed Waikato District Plan review was publicly notified on 25 September 2004 and included a proposal to rezone about 400ha of land at Horotiu as ‘Heavy Industrial’. One hundred and fifty submissions for and against the zoning were lodged, including from major landowners such as Riverlea Sands (later known as Northgate Developments), Perry’s and Fonterra.

A Council hearing of the submissions was held in June 2006. The WDC released its decision on submissions in November 2006. Its decision was to not proceed with the Heavy Industrial zone but to largely revert to the Rural zoning in the previous District Plan. Appeals to the Environment Court against this decision were lodged by Northgate, Perry’s and Fonterra.

Between 2007 and 2012 these three appellants, together with WDC, HCC and Transit NZ (now NZTA) undertook a mediation process to secure agreement on the zoning and rules for the area. Several residential and rural neighbours were also involved as parties under section 274 of the RMA.

On 1 July 2011, the boundary between Waikato District and Hamilton City Councils was amended to follow the designation for the Te Rapa and Ngaruawahia sections of the Waikato Expressway, resulting in the site shifting into the jurisdiction of Hamilton City.

9 ODP Information Requirements in Schedule One, page 1-43

30 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

On 26 September 2012, the Environment Court issued a Consent Order zoning the site as Te Rapa North Industrial Zone and partly as Deferred Industrial. It was labelled as ‘Stage 1B’ and only 30ha was zoned; 7ha of which was allocated for development before 2021 and 23ha allocated for development after 2021. The balance of approximately 32ha was zoned Deferred Industrial. The locations of the above land areas were not specified; the development could take place anywhere within the site. Perry’s accepted this mix of zoning although it was different to what it sought in its submission.

In 2012 HCC notified a new Proposed District Plan (PDP). The PDP largely ‘carried over’ the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone provisions from the previous Waikato District Plan. Perry’s lodged a submission on the PDP and also gave expert evidence focused on development standards at the HCC hearing of submissions on 9 December 2013.

HCC subsequently issued decisions on the PDP confirming the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone provisions.

Existing Consent Approvals

Table 4 is a schedule of all resource consents currently applying to the site. Copies of the consents that have some relevance to this plan change (i.e. 1, 9-16) are included in Appendix 13. Those most relevant to this plan change are described after Table 4.

Table 4: Schedule of Existing Resource Consents

Resource Consents

Council Consent Reference Consent Description

1 Waikato DC 69 95 341 Original application for establishment and operation of a sandwinning and processing activity.

Note: This consent has been amended by subsequent S.127 applications as follows: ▪ 69 96 002 - 13 September 1995 ▪ 69 95 341 - 18 November 1999 ▪ 69 95 341- 5 December 2002 ▪ 69 03 028 - 23 April 2003 ▪ LUC 0193/10 – June 2010 2 Waikato RC 940657 Land use consent to remove vegetation to facilitate site development. 3 Waikato RC 930658 Land use consent and water permit to undertake works in and adjacent to existing water courses, such as the extraction of sand and other aggregate materials, and the construction of dams, bunds and silt ponds. 4 Waikato RC 940654 To discharge stormwater, perched groundwater and process water into ground. 5 Waikato RC 940656 To discharge dust into the air from site preparation, vegetation and soil stripping, stockpiling, restoration and rehabilitation and sand excavation, processing storage, transport and other activities associated with the. 6 Waikato RC 940650 To dam and divert an unnamed tributary of the Waikato River 7 Waikato RC 940651 To dam and divert (i) stormwater, (ii) release groundwater and (iii) process water in silt ponds and supply ponds.

31 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Resource Consents

Council Consent Reference Consent Description

8 Waikato RC 940652 To take water from (i) a sump and (ii) surface water from settlement ponds, for establishment and replenishment of process water supply ponds and use in dust suppression and sand aggregate processing. 9 HCC 010/2013/7458/001 To undertake earthworks in the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone (being Stage 1 of the indicative Development Plan). 10 HCC 010/2013/7358/001 Indicative Development Plan (IDP) for the site which authorised a staged release 30ha of land for industrial development. 11 HCC 010/2013/7358/002 Change of conditions to land use resource consent to amend boundary of Stage 1 and 2 of the IDP. 12 HCC 011/2015/6102/001 Staged subdivision consent for lots within Stage 1 of the approved IDP. 13 Waikato RC AUTH130673.01.01 To undertake earthworks in a high-risk erosion area associated with Stage 1 of an industrial subdivision development. 14 Waikato RC AUTH130673.02.02 Divert and discharge stormwater associated with a residential/commercial subdivision development. 15 Waikato RC AUTH130673.03.02 Construct a discharge structure in the bed of the Waikato River 16 Waikato RC AUTH135035.01.01 To discharge sediment laden water to water in association with clean filling operations.

In November 2013, a resource consent for an Indicative Development Plan was lodged. The IDP was for the 30ha of land in Stage 1B as referred to on the planning maps; with 7.63ha of the land to be developed immediately as Stage 1 and the remaining 23.628ha of land to be developed after 2021 as Stage 2.

The IDP also included approval of bulk earthworks for Stage 1 of 7.63ha. This was essentially a cut and fill operation comprising approximately 117,000m3 of cut and 78,000m3 of fill over about 10.2ha. The purpose was to produce a final land form of relatively flat sites to support Stage 1 development and to provide for initial installation of infrastructure.

The IDP was approved on 20 May 2014 and included approval of the 31.258ha of land for development. As a result, the initial development of a service centre on the corner of Te Rapa Road and Hutchison Road took place. The Stage 2 development of 23.6ha is not permitted to be developed until after 202110.

At the time of the IDP approval in 2014 a series of regional consents were also obtained. They were:

To undertake earthworks in a high-risk erosion area, associated with Stage 1 of an industrial subdivision and development. To divert and discharge stormwater associated with an industrial subdivision development. The two discharge points approved as part of this consent were the existing discharge point through a culvert under Hutchinson Road and then through the gully

10 Resource Consent No 010/2013/7358/001 from Hamilton City Council, in Appendix 13

32 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

system to the river, and a new discharge point at the northern end of the site near the Waikato River bridge. This discharge point has not been established. To construct a discharge structure in the bed and bank of the Waikato River in association with an industrial subdivision development. To discharge sediment laden water to water in association with cleanfilling.

The original quarrying application was granted approval by WDC on 21 April 1995 following a notified resource consent process. The conditions of that consent were subsequently varied several times.

The consents for the quarry have been fully given effect to and the IDP consents have been partially given effect to.

If the plan change is confirmed, prior to development the existing consents will need to be revisited and they may need to be either varied or relinquished to avoid conflicts with subsequent resource consent that will be needed under the plan change rules.

Master Plan

A master plan led design process is best practice and enables the delivery of a high-quality living, working and recreational environment that is also efficient and sustainable. A well- considered master planning process undertaken from the outset creates the best chance of a design that leads to an attractive, liveable and sustainable built outcome.

Boffa Miskell have led the master planning for the Te Awa Lakes project. This has involved a comprehensive assessment of the site, its constraints and opportunities and working closely with a multi-discipline consultant team to create a masterplan that meets the project objectives. The process has been responsive to the natural and physical attributes, including the topography, the presence of existing water bodies, proximity to the Expressway and integration with the Waikato River and the Te Awa River Ride trail. The whole ‘consultant team’ has been involved in the master planning exercise to ensure that the master plan is informed by technical experts and is responsive to all the actual and potential effects of the changed land use.

A vision of a regionally significant destination comprising an adventure park, short stay accommodation and tourism centre is the catalyst for the new community. The new residential community is at a medium density to ensure efficient use of land and the critical mass of people is achieved to ensure the place is activated, safe and thriving. A high level of on-site amenity is essential to support the medium density housing and a variety of living options are proposed to encourage a cross-section of ages and demographics. A strong legible open space network that builds on existing infrastructure is also a key aspect of the masterplan.

Details of the masterplan process and outcomes are included in the Urban Design Statement contained in Appendix 2, but the key principles underpinning it are:

• Creating a gateway to Hamilton. • Creating an integrated mixed-use development to support an active community. • Creating a regionally significant tourism destination. • Creating local distinctiveness and neighbourhoods based on landscape features and views.

33 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Utilising a legible network of slow speed streets that allow for commercial and residential demands. • Allow for public transport (bus) routes with good legibility and maximization of catchments for commercial and residential users. • Consolidating density around commercial development, public transport access and landscape amenity. • Utilising short stay residential as a buffer between permanent residential land use and adventure park land use. • Open space that enhances the legibility of the urban form and long term connections between built form and the river. • A legible pedestrian and cycling network that connects to the wider network and creation of a series of interesting circuits that provide alternative options to the street network. • Water sensitive design starting with on-site features extending into infrastructure within the public realm. • Prevalent east west orientation of lots for solar access. • Utilising a commercial/mixed use buffer zone between residential and existing industrial land uses.

The masterplan does not form part of the plan change but it has informed the structure plan, the zoning plan and many of the development controls that are included in the plan change provisions. Key elements of the roading network, the walking and cycling network, open spaces and access locations are included in the Structure Plan that must be complied with as part of the proposed amendments to the ODP provisions11.

Perry’s are committed to following best practice design processes to implement the key urban design elements contained in the masterplan and the assessment and advice contained in the Urban Design Statement in Appendix 2. As the site is under single ownership Perry’s are in a position to control development through either direct involvement in the design process or through conditions of sale and purchase to other parties. A Land Development Plan process will control the design of individual stages. There are 19 Land Development Plan areas in Te Awa Lakes. This process will be undertaken by multi-disciplinary teams who will work closely with HCC.

Perry’s will produce a Design Guide to control the quality of built outcomes across the project once Land Development Plan consents have been obtained. The Design Guide will ensure that houses and commercial buildings are built to the highest standard and align with the objectives of the masterplan. This process will be overseen by a Design Review Panel.

It is proposed to establish a Design Review Panel to facilitate high quality built outcomes consistent with the Masterplan. The panel will be made up of independent experts chosen by Perry’s as well as a representative of the development company. Internal Design Review Panels are increasingly being used successfully by developers with local examples being Chedworth Properties Ltd at Greenhill Park and Titanium Park business park at Hamilton Airport.

11 Amendments to ODP in Schedule One, p3-77

34 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Proposed Provisions

In accordance with Principle 3.2 of the ODP the plan provisions that form part of this plan change adopt as far as practicable existing ODP provisions. Because of this approach it is possible to implement the rezoning without any need to address or amend any wider Plan provisions, such as in the Strategic Framework. The plan change does not affect the internal consistency of the ODP.

The only new objectives and related policies are in Section 3 - Structure Plans and Section 4 - Residential. Additional objectives and policies are proposed to support the specifics of the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan and the Medium Density Residential Zone applying to the site, generally matching the approach taken with existing growth areas identified in the ODP.

In summary, the proposed provisions are based on the following zones:

• Adventure Park Precinct: Major Facilities zone with a Visitor Accommodation Overlay on the northern and eastern fringe of the zone. • Residential activity: Medium Density Residential Zone including 19 Land Development Plan (“LDP”) areas, each with an allocated approximate dwelling yield (except for the three LDP’s applying to the lake and wetland). Development of each of the LDP areas would require consent as a Restricted Discretionary Activity. • River Interface Overlay: An area within the Medium Density Residential zone providing for low density residential (minimum lot size of 1,000m2) along the eastern edge of the site. • Mixed Use commercial activities: Business 6 zone (neighbourhood centre) including provision for visitor accommodation, places of assembly and residential activities above ground floor. • Riverside esplanade reserve: Natural Open Space zone.

A key aspect of the design of the plan change provisions is the need to obtain further resource consents before development can commence. These consents are necessary because the technical investigations have been based on concept design only, and while they are sufficient to confirm the suitability of the site for rezoning for urban purposes they are not sufficient to support resource consents. The next stage of preliminary design will be needed to support resource consents. This plan change will provide a framework to implement the objectives and policies for the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan Area through consents and their conditions.

The resource contents required are:

Zone Consent Required Status Te Awa Lakes Medium Density Residential Land Development Plan Restricted Discretionary Zone Consent Major Facilities Zone Concept Development Restricted Discretionay Consent Te Awa Lakes Business 6 Zone Depends on the proposed Restricted Discretionary or activity Discretionary

The proposed zoning, structure plan and the detailed plan provisions are contained in Schedule One to this report.

35 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Other Consents and Authorisations

The proposed plan change provisions require some further land use and subdivision consents to be granted by HCC before development can proceed. In addition, there are several other consents or approvals required from HCC and other authorities that will need to be obtained, as follows:

Archaeological Authorities

As set out in the Archaeological Assessment by Dr. Caroline Phillips in Appendix 10, an Archaeological Authority under Section 44 of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 will need to be obtained. This is because the site includes two scheduled archaeological sites (S14/164 and S14/284). An application will be lodged with Heritage New Zealand, to damage, modify or destroy, prior to earthworks occurring on the site. Such an application will be supported by the archaeological assessment, and they will process the application in accordance with the provisions of the Act. It is expected that an application will only be needed to destroy site S14/264 as site S14/284 will be able to be protected.

Consent under National Environmental Standard for Soil Contamination

The Environmental Site Investigation undertaken by Coffeys and included in Appendix 11 identified contaminants in excess of background levels. Therefore, before physical change of land use or soil disturbance is carried out a restricted discretionary application will be required under regulation 10 of the National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health (“NES Contamination”). The consent authority is HCC and the usual practice will be followed, which is to apply for this NES Contamination land use consent for the whole site as part of the first resource consent application for development of any part of the land.

Regional Council Consents

As set out in section 3.2 above, Horotiu Farms Ltd hold a series of regional resource consents, that were granted in 2014, for stormwater discharges. These consents were based on the assumption that the site was to be developed for service centre/industrial purposes, and some have been given effect to for that purpose. The stormwater discharge consent authorised the collection, treatment and discharge of stormwater from the total site (i.e. 62ha). That consent has been partly given effect to by the construction and subdivision of the service centre and installation of associated stormwater infrastructure. The discharge point from that Stage 1 area remains through a culvert under Hutchinson Road and across neighbouring land to the south of Hutchinson Road to the river.

The proposed stormwater arrangement described and assessed in the Stormwater Management Strategy (SMP) contained in the Subcatchment ICMP (Appendix 3) retains the same principles as the 2014 consent in that stormwater drainage will generally be from north to south and west to east across the site. Treatment is to be through a treatment train approach, including wetlands. However, the stormwater management strategy is now proposed to have larger internal water bodies and residential development is finer grained, includes more open space and has some different runoff characteristics to industrial development which had more impermeable surfaces. As a result, the existing consents have recently been amended under section 127 of the RMA to reflect the revised land uses and the SMP. The section 127 consent was granted on 25 July 2017. The only amendments to the

36 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

conditions were to change the reference to the updated SMP and to ensure detailed design is undertaken in accordance with the staging.

NZTA Designation

Although the Expressway adjacent to the site has been constructed and is in operation the full extent of its boundaries on the Te Awa Lakes site have not yet been legalised. As a result, part of the Expressway designation remains on the site. It is Designation 81a in the ODP.

It is understood from discussions between Perry’s and NZTA that the intention is to legalise the Expressway boundary near the bottom of the Expressway batter. That is the location that has been adopted for the boundary of this plan change.

Section 176 of the RMA specifies that no person may do anything on designated land that would prevent or hinder the designation without the prior written consent of the requiring authority. NZTA have been consulted on this matter and have advised that as the proposal is a plan change and not a resource consent application no approval under section 176 is required at this time12.

Existing Quarry Consent

Perry’s will need to meet its obligations in terms of site closure under its existing quarry consent. The key control is the site management plan required under condition 38 of that consent. It sets out how the site will be rehabilitated to ensure it is appropriately vegetated and stabilised to control soil loss.

There is considerable flexibility in the consent conditions to allow the consent holder to decide the post quarrying landform and layout of rural uses. The management plan that formed part of the resource consent in 1994 envisaged a combination of pasture, horticulture, forestry, lakes and wetland planting. The only specific soil quality standard is that reinstated soils meet a standard of 150mm topsoil and at least 300mm of subsoils.

A return to rural use effectively became unlikely once the site was zoned for urban purposes in 2012. However, it is acknowledged in the industrial viability assessment in Appendix 19 that rehabilitation to rural use should be treated as a ‘sunk’ cost that should be factored into the feasibility of industrial development.

When this plan change is confirmed, Perry’s propose to update the management plan to reflect the changed end use of the land and seek its approval by HCC under condition 38 of the consent. If necessary, it will also apply for a change of conditions to reflect the changed end use.

Condition 26 of the consent requires that prior to the felling of the pine trees along the river edge of the site a visual impact assessment is to be prepared. These pine trees will be removed as part of the residential development if this plan change is approved. The Landscape and Visual Assessment by Boffa Miskell contained in Appendix 5 of this report will fulfil this requirement as it specifically addresses the visual impacts of the removal of the pine trees. Proposed Ownership Structure

HCC has raised concerns about ownership and management of the lakes and associated stormwater infrastructure through its submission on PPC2. It has never been intended that

12 E-mail correspondence between Lana Gooderham (from NZTA) and Paul Radich, dated 26 June 2017, in Appendix 14

37 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

ownership of the lakes vest in HCC, nor that management of the lakes be the responsibility of HCC or fall on HCC ratepayers. Rather, the lakes are to be privately-owned recreational facilities, comparable to other privately owned facilities.

There are a number of other examples of lakes being privately owned, including the following:

(a) Lake Rotokakahi, in the Rotorua area, is privately owned by iwi.13 At 440ha, this lake is significantly larger than any of the Te Awa Lakes.

(b) There has been recent media attention on properties formerly owned by Solid Energy, now transferred into private ownership, and with plans to develop a private lake for watersports.14

(c) Sinclair Wetland in Otago, also known as Te Nohoaka o Tukiauau, is a privately owned wetland. Previously owned by Mr Sinclair, it is now owned by Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu.15

(d) Lake Pounui, in the Wairarapa, is in private ownership.16

(e) Lake Rotoaira, in Rotorua area, is held by trustees on trust for 11,000 beneficial owners of Ngati Tuwharatoa. 17

Perry’s intends that the cable ski lake, and any other water facilities in the Adventure Park, will remain in private ownership. The likely structure is:

(a) The Adventure Park lakes will be owned by a private company, tentatively called Te Awa Lakes Ownership Limited. Perry Group intends to have an ownership stake in this company.

(b) The Adventure Park lakes will then be leased to another private company, Te Awa Lakes Recreation Limited, which will operate the lake recreation facilities on a day- to-day basis. This company will pay a rental to Te Awa Lake Ownership Limited.

(c) Day-to-day management and oversight of the lakes will rest with the operating company Te Awa Lakes Recreation Limited. Te Awa Lakes Ownership Limited will, as owner, have ultimate responsibility for compliance with relevant consent to overriding legal obligations.

Perry’s intends that the main linear lake will be owned by Te Awa Lakes Residents Society. Te Awa Lakes Development Ltd will have a membership in this Society:

(a) Various landowners within the Te Awa Lakes development will have a membership in this Society.

(b) The landowners’ obligations will be to:

• Join the Society;

13 See https://www.rotorualakes.co.nz/lake-rotokakahi 14 See https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/101298362/excoal-mine-land-sells-to-neighbours-as-part-of-solid-energy-liquidation- sale-in-huntly 15 See https://qeiinationaltrust.org.nz/places/otago-sinclair-wetland-te-nohoaka-o-tukiauau/ 16 See http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/celebrities/9715060/Hollywood-director-keeps-quiet-on-lake-access 17 See eg https://treasury.govt.nz/publications/information-release/extending-mixed-ownership-model-consultation- m%C4%81ori

38 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Retain membership of the Society; and

• Pay levies to the Society;

(c) will be set out in a covenant to be notified on each landowner’s title, and set out in the rules of the Society. Therefore, membership of the Society (and the resulting obligations to pay levies) will not be able to be separated from title ownership. Each relevant landowner will also have an easement registered against its title, setting out the right to use the lake, and the terms of that use.

Perry’s will:

(a) Provide initial funding to the Society, to ensure it has sustainable funding in place from the outset.

(b) On the sale of each relevant lot, collect an initial ley from each relevant landowner/Society member, to be paid to the Society’s account.

(c) Maintain a controlling interest in the Society until development is complete, and the society is in a position to be self-sustaining.

While it is intended that the Society will be perpetual, we expect that the Society rules and covenant will provide that if the Society is wound up, ownership of the lake, and consequential obligations of management and maintenance, will transfer to the various adjacent owners in shares. This is a common structure used around the country for privately owned infrastructure and/or recreational facilities within residential developments.18 For example:

(a) Pauanui Lakes Resort, Pauanui.

(b) Whitianga Waterways, Whitianga.

(d) Lake Hood, Ashburton.

(e) Jack’s Point, Queenstown.

(f) Newhaven, Auckland.

These arrangements also received official acknowledgement through the Securities Act (Real Property Developments) Exemption Notice 2007, now replaced (in relation to companies) with the Financial Markets Conduct (Communal Facilities in Real Property Developments) Exemption Notice 2016. These arrangements work well when they have effective rules, are properly funded, and owners are clear on their responsibilities. These points can be managed through quality legal documentation, and the input of Perry’s as described above.

Maintenance and monitoring responsibilities will in all cases fall on the lake owner. The lake owner may then contract with other parties (such as a management company) to carry these out. HCC can have certainty of tenure/ownership and certainty about lake care responsibilities, and in particular, that these will not fall on HCC or ratepayers.

Responsibility for ensuring the main linear lake maintains an appropriate water quality standard will fall on the Society, as outlined above. Perry’s intends to set up the development in a responsible and sustainable way, will ensure that it maintains a controlling interest

18 See for example J Pidgeon, “Common Property Ownership and Incorporated Societies”, Auckland District Law Society Property Law Half Day Conference, 22 February 2018.

39 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

throughout the development phase and will ensure that the Society has appropriate funding and is set up in sustainable way. Ultimately, the Te Awa Lakes community will ensure the sustainability of the lakes for recreational purposes.

HCC has also expressed concerns about owning assts such as roads, open space areas, and stormwater treatment wetland areas, where these publicly-owned areas would discharge to the privately-owned water body. Given the lake ownership structure described above, Perry’s proposes that a consent notice is placed on titles for the lakes and relevant landowners recording that HCC is not responsible for the quality of general stormwater run-off, even if this compromises lake quality. This consent notice should however not limit HCC’s general duty of care or responsibility for deliberate acts.

While this ownership structure has been principally designed for management of the lakes, it is also relevant to the ongoing environmental and management obligations that are likely to arise from future land use and subdivision consent conditions, as described in following sections of this report. These could include obligations to implement travel demand management plans and to manage alligator weed.

The detailed structure of private asset ownership is not usually a district plan matter but is dealt with through conditions of subdivision and land use consents. However, in this case to avoid doubt the principle of private lake ownership is recorded in the Structure Plan provisions.

40 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

4.0 Statutory and Strategic Framework

Legal Framework for Plan Change Request

The private plan change process is subject to the provisions in the RMA, including Part 2, the Purpose and Principles, and Sections 31, 32, 74 and Part 2 of Schedule One. Part 2 of Schedule One links the private plan change process back to the provisions of Part 1 (Council initiated plan changes) via clause 29, meaning there is a degree of commonality between both.

However, the framework needs to be applied correctly so that the assessments and information contained in this report are used to draw the right conclusions. In particular, the Supreme Court 2014 decision Environmental Defence Society Inc. vs the New Zealand King Salmon Co Ltd19 provides guidance as to how Part 2 of the RMA applies to plan changes. Prior to the King Salmon decision an ‘overall judgement’ approach was taken, whereby it was considered whether a plan change gave effect to Part 2 including assessing it individually against the various matters is sections 6, 7 and 8 of the RMA. King Salmon changed the decision-making process for district and regional plan changes. It found that there was no need to refer back up the hierarchy of plan provisions to Part 2, because other high level planning instruments (in that case the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement) are deemed to have given effect to Part 2 at the national, regional or local level.

However, the Court also noted that there are three exceptions to this general rule:

a) Invalidity, i.e. the higher order document may be illegal.

b) Incomplete coverage, i.e. the higher-level document may not fully cover the issue being considered.

c) Uncertainty of meaning, i.e. the higher-level document is not clear in its application to the issue.

In this case, the relevant planning instruments that are being applied are the RPS, the ODP, the NPS – Urban Development Capacity and the NPS – Freshwater Management. The question to be considered is the extent to which they can be relied on as incorporating all relevant Part 2 matters, or whether any of the above exceptions apply, meaning that Part 2 needs to be revisited. In terms of timing, the RPS and the NPS – Freshwater Management were in place before the ODP was made operative. In terms of the issues of business and residential land allocation, integration of land use with infrastructure and meeting peoples’ needs for residential and industrial land the objectives and policies of the RPS and ODP provide comprehensive coverage and are valid documents that took into account Part 2. The RPS also includes ‘alternative release criteria’, which are a reasonable and valid method for dealing with the inherent uncertainties of sub regional land allocation over a 50-year timeframe.

The ODP does not include provisions allowing for flexibility of land allocation. That is because it is principally a regulatory instrument and the flexibility needs to come from resource consents or plan changes, supported by the RPS or other higher order instruments. However, the objectives and policies of the ODP are relevant to guide the decision makers. The NPS –

19 NZSC 38, (2014) NZLR 593

41 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Freshwater Management is of less relevance as water management is a secondary issue for this plan change.

The Strategic Framework of the ODP and the RPS which directed it, are key aspects of the framework. This is because as set out in the Environment Court decision AA King Family Trust vs Hamilton City Council (2016) the strategic direction is one that has been developed over a lengthy period of time with involvement of the key regional players and should be given significant weight.20

The NPS – Urban Development Capacity is different. It was published on 3 November 2016 so the RPS and the ODP predated It. The NPS – Urban Development Capacity gives effect to Part 2 in respect of urban development capacity issues and the RPS and ODP did not take it into account. Therefore, the assessment against the NPS – Urban Development Capacity is particularly important in respect to any aspects that are not fully addressed in the RPS or ODP. Therefore, the assessment in Section 7 of this document places most weight on the NPS – Urban Development Capacity, given that it superseded both the RPS and the ODP and is a higher-level document. It is directly relevant to the urban development capacity issues addressed in this plan change. Where there is any inconsistency with those planning instruments the NPS – Urban Development Capacity prevails. However, for completeness, in case there is any concern by the decision maker that the issues are not fully covered or are uncertain, this report includes a Part 2 RMA assessment.

Part 2 of Schedule One RMA

Part 2 of Schedule One is largely a procedural provision which specifies that any person may request a change to a district plan (clause 21), the local authority considers the request and decides whether to ‘adopt’ or ‘accept’ the request (clause 25). It may also reject the request (clause 25(4)) or deal with the request as if it were an application for resource consent (clause 25(3)). These are procedural matters considered by the local authority once the request has been lodged.

Clause 29 specifies that Part 1 of Schedule One, which applies to local authority initiated plan changes, should apply to private plan changes, with all necessary modifications.

This raises the question of how clause 4A of Part 1 of Schedule One should be interpreted. This clause was inserted into the RMA by the Resource Legislation Amendment 2017. It requires that:

“(1) Before notifying a proposed policy statement or plan, a local authority must – a) provide a copy of the relevant draft proposed policy statement or plan to the iwi authorities consulted under clause 3(1)(d); and b) have particular regard to any advice received on the draft statement or plan from those iwi authorities.”

The reference to clause 3(1)(d) is to an obligation on a local authority to consult tangata whenua during the preparation or change of their own district plan. It is a logical extension of this provision to then follow it up by requiring the local authority to provide a copy of the draft plan to iwi authorities and obtain advice from them prior to notification and have particular regard to that advice. There is no equivalent specific obligation on private plan change applicants to consult tangata whenua during plan change preparation. Therefore, it is not clear

20 AA King Family Trust vs Hamilton City Council (2016) Env C 229 paragraph 75

42 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

whether private plan change applicants should seek and have particular regard to the advice of iwi authorities. The tangata whenua consultation aspects of Part 1 of Schedule One are designed around the intent that local authorities have or should have a relationship with the tangata whenua of their area, and should consult with them through the preparation of their planning documents.

However as this provision is not clear and for the avoidance of doubt the applicant has worked with HCC by providing a copy of the draft plan change to the iwi authority and requesting their advice. Their advice was subsequently received, confirming they support the plan change in principle. A copy of their letter is included in Appendix 14.

Section 31 RMA

Section 31 sets out the functions of territorial authorities under the RMA. In particular, it identifies the functions of a Council at section 31(1) as including:

“(a) The establishment, implementation and review of objectives, policies, and methods to achieve integrated management of the effects of the use, development, or protection of land and associated natural and physical resources of the district. (aa) the establishment, implementation, and review of objectives, policies, and methods to ensure that there is sufficient development capacity in respect of housing and business land to meet the expected demands of the district:”

The Council is therefore required to consider the plan change application in accordance with its function of achieving integrated management of land use. The use and development of the land for the purposes outlined in this application is clearly within the scope of the Council’s functions under section 31 and integration of effects of the activities with infrastructure and other nearby activities is a key issue addressed by the plan change.

Similarly, section 31(aa) requires that development capacity of land for housing and business be addressed by the Council as one of its functions. This is a new matter introduced into section 31 by the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017, so until then it had not been specifically recorded as a Council function. As a result, the ODP does not include explicit objectives, policies and methods to ensure sufficient development capacity. It is now relevant for the Council to consider how this plan change assists it to fulfil its function of ensuring there is enough development capacity for housing and business land.

Section 32 RMA

Section 32 of the RMA imposes a duty on Council before making a decision on a plan change application to carry out an evaluation. An evaluation under section 32 is provided in Section 2 of this report. The relevant parts of section 32 are:

(1) An evaluation report required under this Act must – a) examine the extent to which the objectives of the proposal being evaluated are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this Act; and b) examine whether the provisions in the proposal are the most appropriate way to achieve the objectives by - i) identifying other reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives; and ii) assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions in achieving the objectives; and iii) summarising the reasons for deciding on the provisions; and

43 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

c) contain a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the proposal.

(2) An assessment under subsection (1)(b)(ii) must – (a) identify and assess the benefits and costs of the environmental, economic, social, and cultural effects that are anticipated from the implementation of the provisions, including the opportunities for – i. economic growth that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and ii. employment that are anticipated to be provided or reduced; and (b) if practicable, quantify the benefits and costs referred to in paragraph (a); and (c) assess the risk of acting or not acting if there is uncertain or insufficient information about the subject matter of the provisions.

(3) If the proposal (an amending proposal) will amend a standard, statement, regulation, plan or change that is already proposed or that already exists (an existing proposal), the examination under subsection (1)(b) must relate to – (a) the provisions and objectives of the amending proposal; and (b) the objectives of the existing proposal to the extent that those objectives – i. are relevant to the objectives of the amending proposal; and ii. would remain if the amending proposal were to take effect ……

(4A) If the proposal is a proposed policy statement, plan, or change prepared in accordance with any of the processes provided for in Schedule 1, the evaluation report must- (a) summarise all advice concerning the proposal received from iwi authorities under the relevant provisions of Schedule 1; and (b) summarise the response to the advice, including any provisions of the proposal that are intended to give effect to the advice. …

(6) In this section, - objectives means, - (a) for a proposal that contains or states objectives, those objectives: (b) for all other proposals, the purpose of the proposal proposal means a proposed standard, statement, regulation, plan or change for which an evaluation report must be prepared under this Act provisions means, - (a) for a proposed plan or change, the policies, rules or other methods that implement, or give effect to, the objectives of the proposed plan or change: (b) for all other proposals, the policies, or provisions of the proposal that implement, or give effect to, the objectives of the proposal.”

As set out in section 2 of this report this plan change is an ‘amending proposal’ in accordance with section 32(3). The evaluation contained in section 2 does not stand alone. In terms of assessing the appropriateness of the objectives in achieving the purpose of the RMA, considering reasonably practicable options for achieving the objectives and assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of the chosen option, the evaluation relies on the various assessments in this report, particularly:

• The assessment of environmental effects in section 5. • The economic benefits and costs described in the Assessment of Economic Effects by RCG in Appendix 6. • The statutory assessment against the NPS-Urban Development Capacity contained in section 7.6. • The assessment against Part 2 contained in section 7.3.

44 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Sections 74 and 75 RMA

Sections 74 and 75 set out matters to be considered by Council when changing its district plan and set out the prescribed contents and purposes of district plans. As this is a site-specific plan change it has minimal impact on the ODP as a whole, and does not affect its contents. The only new objectives are narrowly defined to apply to the new structure plan and site specific medium density zone being introduced. These are designed to integrate into the ODP.

Under Section 74 a plan change must have regard to regional policy statements and management plans and strategies prepared under other Acts. In this case the relevant plans and strategies include the Waikato Regional Policy Statement, Future Proof, the Hamilton Urban Growth Strategy, HCC’s Access Hamilton Strategy, the Hamilton City River Plan and the Waikato-Tainui Environmental Plan - Tai Tumu, Te Pari, Tai Ao.

Part 2 RMA

All plan changes are subject to the Purpose and Principles of the RMA (sections 5-8) with the overriding purpose being “to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources”. This is of course also subject to the King Salmon caveats discussed in section 4.1 above. Sustainable management is defined as:

“managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while- (a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and (b) Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and (c) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment.”

An assessment against section 5 is included in section 7.3 of this application. In terms of section 6, Matters of National Importance, the following matters are relevant to this plan change:

(a) The preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment (including the coastal marine area), wetlands, and lakes and rivers and their margins, and the protection of them from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development …… (d) The maintenance and enhancement of public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes, and rivers. (e) The relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga. (f) The protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development.

Section 6(a) is relevant because the site adjoins a 1.1km long margin of the Waikato River so the zoning and treatment of that margin are important issues. Section 6(d) is relevant because the rezoning includes methods of enhancement of public access to the Waikato River as well as incorporating the Te Awa River trail, which is an existing form of public access.

Section 6(e) is relevant because the Waikato River and its margin are an important element of Waikato-Tainui relationship with their culture and traditions. Therefore, the treatment of the interface with the river and the way it acknowledges cultural issues is relevant. In addition, the site has a history of Maori use as described in the Archaeological Assessment by Dr. Caroline Phillips in Appendix 10. Section 6(f) is relevant because there is evidence of archaeological sites on or adjacent the site, that need to be taken into account and appropriately managed.

45 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Section 8 requires that:

“all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development and management of natural resources, shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi).”

This section places an obligation on decision makers to act in accordance with it. However, to ensure that decision makers are fully informed and able to fulfill this obligation this plan change application provides information on:

• Consultation with tangata whenua. • The outcomes of that consultation where it is relevant to the RMA decision making process. • Cultural impacts and identification of any Maori interests that should be actively protected.

Section 8 now needs to be considered alongside section 32(4A) which was introduced by the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017, which requires that the section 32 evaluation report also include a summary of advice received from iwi authorities and the response to that advice. This is another method of consultation with tangata whenua that is now formalised in the RMA.

As set out in Section 4.2.4 above this is different from the specific pre-notification consultation requirements in clause 4A of Part 1 of Schedule One. It applies to the Assessment of Environmental Effects (“AEE”) that is prepared under clause 22 of Part 2 of Schedule One. The AEE is to address cultural effects and effects on cultural values. Consultation with tangata whenua has been undertaken to inform the effects on cultural values and the Cultural Impact Assessment at Appendix 15 records these effects and the proposed mitigation measures.

National Policy Statements

Introduction

National Policy Statements (“NPS”) are prepared under the RMA. They establish objectives and policies for matters of national significance relevant to achieving the purpose of the RMA. All District and Regional Plans are to give effect to NPS in their plans and policies. There are two NPS applicable to the Te Awa Lakes development, being the NPS on Urban Development Capacity (“NPS-UDC”) and the NPS for Freshwater Management (“NPS-FM”). The NPS-UDC came into effect on the 1 December 2016 and provides objectives and policies to increase capacity for urban development. The NPS-FM came into effect on the 1 August 2014 and provides objectives and policies to manage freshwater quality and quantity under the RMA.

NPS on Urban Development Capacity 2016

The NPS-UDC is one of several initiatives working towards improving the housing supply and affordability in New Zealand as well as ensuring adequate supply of business land. It is about recognising the national significance of:

(a) Urban environments and the need to enable such environments to develop and change; and (b) Providing sufficient development capacity to meet the needs of people and communities and future generations in urban environments.

46 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

This NPS covers development capacity for both housing and business, as it identifies that both aspects are important to achieving well-functioning urban environments. Urban planning should enable people and communities to provide for their social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing through development, while managing its effects. It also acknowledges that urban development is largely dependent on the development of infrastructure and encourages integration and coordination of land use and infrastructure planning. It is a requirement on councils under the NPS-UDC to ensure that their plans provide enough commercially feasible land to be developed and their planning methods should promote accessibility and connectivity between housing and businesses, now and in the future. Hamilton City is identified as a ‘High growth urban area’ in the NPS-UDC.

Group A Objectives and Policies – Outcomes for Planning Decisions

Policy PA1 requires local authorities to provide sufficient housing and business land for development in the short (3 years), medium (3-10 years) and long term (10+ years) as set out in the Table 5.

Table 5: Land Development Capacity Requirements

Short Term Development capacity must be feasible, zoned and serviced with development infrastructure Medium Term Development capacity must be feasible, zoned and either: • Serviced with development infrastructure, or • The funding for the development infrastructure required to service that development capacity must be identified in a Long-Term Plan required under the Local Government Act 2002. Long Term Development capacity must be feasible, identified in relevant plans and strategies, and the development infrastructure required to service it must be identified in the relevant Infrastructure Strategy required under the Local Government Act 2002.

Policy PA2 requires local authorities to satisfy themselves that infrastructure to support industrial development is likely to be available. Development infrastructure is defined as:

“Network infrastructure for water supply, wastewater, stormwater and land transport as defined in the Land Transport Management Act 2003, to the extent that it is controlled by local authorities.”

The key relevant objectives from Group A require there to be sufficient opportunities for housing development to meet demand, and provide choice of locations and housing types (OA2). They also require planning decisions and practices to enable urban development which provides for the wellbeing of people and communities in the short, medium and long-term (OC2).

Group B Objectives and Policies – Evidence and monitoring to support planning decisions

This group of objectives and policies requires that HCC prepare a Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment that assesses current demand for housing and business land and how well the supply of development capacity meets that demand. PB1 states:

“Local Authorities shall, on at least a three-yearly basis, carry out a housing and business development capacity assessment that: (a) Estimates the demand for dwellings, including the demand for different types of dwellings, locations and price points, and the supply of development capacity to meet that demand, in the short, medium and long-terms; and

47 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

(b) Estimates the demand for the different types and locations of business land and floor area for businesses, and the supply of development capacity to meet that demand, in the short, medium and long-terms; and (c) Assesses interactions between housing and business activities, and their impacts on each other.”

The assessment required under this section of the NPS-UDC is required to use information about demand including demographic change and future changes in the business activities of the local economy (PB2 a) and PB2 b)). It also includes an assessment of the sufficiency of development capacity through relevant plans, policies and strategies, such as the cumulative effect of zoning, objectives, policies, rules, overlays and designations and the actual and likely availability of infrastructure. (PB3) Currently, the deferment associated with the site are barriers to any development taking place, and the zoning is a barrier to the proposed development.

PB4 requires that:

“The assessment under policy PB1 shall estimate the additional development capacity needed if any of the factors in PB3 indicate that the supply of development capacity is not likely to meet demand in the short, medium or long term.”

PB5 requires that when carrying out the assessment under policy PB1:

“local authorities shall seek and use the input of iwi authorities, the property development sector, significant land owners, social housing providers, requiring authorities, and the providers of development infrastructure and other infrastructure.”

This plan change process is an opportunity for HCC to gain and use input from Perry’s into their capacity study, as they are a significant landowner and part of the property development sector. It is not a case of waiting for all of the investigations to be completed, but rather to work cooperatively on an evidence base to demonstrate whether this land provides a significant short term opportunity to provide additional residential development capacity.

Group C Objectives and Policies – Responsive Planning

Hamilton is identified as being a ‘high growth urban area’, therefore policies PC1 to PC4 apply. PC1 requires that feasible development capacity shall be provided by local authorities in medium and high growth urban areas over and above the projected demand by at least 20% in the short and medium term and 15% in the long term.

The RPS shall also give effect to policy PC5 of the NPS-UDC. This states that:

“Regional Councils shall set minimum targets for sufficient, feasible development capacity for housing”

In December 2018 the WRC amended its RPS to include short-to-medium term and long-term residential targets for Hamilton City. The targets are listed in Table 8 below.

PC9 requires that Territorial Authorities set minimum targets for sufficient, feasible development capacity as a portion of the minimum targets set by the Regional Council. These must be incorporated into the relevant plan as an objective.

Policies PC12 to PC14 impose a requirement on ‘high-growth local authorities’ to prepare a Future Development Strategy. The Future Development Strategy is required to describe how sufficient development capacity in the medium and long term is to be provided across an agreed geographic area. It is also required to show how the minimum targets for sufficient housing development capacity can be met.

48 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Hamilton City is one of a number of Council’s who developed urban growth strategies prior to the NPS – UDC coming into effect. Future Proof, for example, is based on a cross-jurisdictional, collaborative approach that is encouraged in the NPS – UDC. Further, the Ministry for the Environment encourages the adaptation of such strategies to meet the requirements of NPD – UDC rather than developing strategies from new. With this in mind, HCC has not produced a Future Development Strategy per se. Rather NPS – UDC requirements are to be met through stage two of the Future Proof review process, with stage one having been completed in 2017. Work is still ongoing with respect to stage two of the Future Proof review process, however the Housing Development Capacity Assessment (‘HDCA’) undertaken under the NPS-UDC has provided a capacity assessment. It is commented on in the Economic assessment at Appendix 20.

Hamilton City Housing Accord (HCHA)

Also directly related to the NPS-UDC is the HCHA. The intention of this Accord is to increase the supply of housing in line with the NPS-UDC and the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013. The Accord aims to:

“maintain a well-functioning, private-sector led housing market in Hamilton”

Because Hamilton has been recognised as a high-growth urban area, HCC is required to ensure there is sufficient housing and business development capacity in the short, medium and long term. The HCHA identifies that the population in Hamilton is growing, future projections will see growth in Hamilton from an estimate of 161,000 in 2016 to 177,000 in 2021, and therefore an increased supply of housing is important. HCHA states:

“Hamilton currently has sufficient land supply for four years of greenfield housing supply, with the current 10-year infrastructure plan providing for a further seven years of supply.”

A major challenge Hamilton faces as set out in this Accord is the financial hurdles faced to fund lead infrastructure to open up zoned growth areas. The Accord has set targets for the total number of sections and dwellings to be consented under this housing accord. These are stated in the Table 6 below.

Table 6: HCHA Targets

Year 1 (2017) Year 2 (2018) Year 3 (2019) Total number of sections and dwellings 1,300 1,400 1,500 constructed

Construction of sections and dwellings in accordance with the table above can be supported through the use of Special Housing Areas (“SHA”). An SHA is an area of land that may not be currently zoned for housing, however is appropriate and suitable for the development of housing. HCC is able to identify key areas in the City that have the potential to be SHAs and these areas can be rezoned and/or consented quickly, avoiding lengthy planning processes under the RMA, to enable more houses to be built.

The subject site had the potential to be identified as an SHA as a result of the suitability for development of housing as demonstrated in this report. As outlined elsewhere in this report an SHA was supported by HCC and recommended to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development but subsequently declined by the Minister.

49 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

NPS for Freshwater Management 2014

New Zealand faces challenges when it comes to managing fresh water as it is highly valued for recreation purposes and is important in terms of New Zealand’s biodiversity and natural heritage. Fresh water in New Zealand gives the primary production, tourism and energy generation sectors a competitive advantage in the global economy and it is highly valued for its recreational aspects, biodiversity and natural heritage. Management of New Zealand’s freshwater is important as it enables water to contribute both to New Zealand’s economic growth, and environmental integrity and provides for the values that are important to New Zealanders. Managing land use and development helps to minimise the impact on fresh water. This NPS-FM provides a means of managing water in an integrated and sustainable way while also providing for economic growth and human demand. The key purpose of this NPS is to set enforceable quality and quantity limits that must be given effect to in regard to any development.

Objective and policy group ‘CA. National Objectives Framework’ provides a nationally consistent approach to freshwater management while still recognising and providing for regional and local circumstances. Policy CA1 works to achieve this by:

“every regional council identifying freshwater management units that include freshwater bodies within its region.”

The Waikato River catchment is included in a freshwater management unit identified by the WRC under the NPS-FM and is therefore subject to the objectives and policies set out in this NPS-FM. The proposed Te Awa Lakes development borders the lower/middle catchment of the Waikato River and the Waikato River is proposed to be used as an outlet for stormwater disposal.

Group A of objectives and policies in the NPS-FM provide for management of the quality of freshwater. The two relevant objectives are A1 and A2 as follows:

“To safeguard: (a) The life supporting capacity, ecosystem processes and indigenous species including their ecosystems, of fresh water; and (b) The health of people and communities, at least as affected by secondary contact with fresh water; (c) In sustainably managing the use and development of land, and of discharges of contaminants.”

“The overall quality of fresh water within a region is maintained or improved while: (a) Protecting the significant values of outstanding freshwater bodies; (b) Protecting the significant values of wetlands; and, (c) Improving the quality of fresh water in water bodies that have been degraded by human activities to the point of being over-allocated.”

Policy A1 gives effect to the above objectives as it requires regional councils to make or change regional plans to establish freshwater quality limits for all freshwater management units in their regions and to establish rules to avoid over allocation. The allocation rules are contained in the Waikato Regional Plan.

Group B of objectives and policies in the NPS-FM relates to the water quantity of freshwater. The two relevant objectives and B1 and B2 as follows:

50 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

“To safeguard the life-supporting capacity, ecosystem processes and indigenous species, including their associated ecosystems of fresh water. In sustainably managing the taking, using, damming, or diverting of fresh water.”

“To avoid any further over-allocation of freshwater and phase out existing over-allocation.”

Policy B1 gives effect to these objectives by requiring that regional council make or change regional plans to establish freshwater objectives in accordance with objectives in this NPS and environmental flows and/or levels for all freshwater management units in its region.

Policy B2 requires that regional plans also provide for the efficient allocation of fresh water to activities within the limits set under Policy B1.

Group D of objectives and policies in the NPS-FM requires that iwi and hapu are involved in the management of freshwater and the associated ecosystems. Objective D1 is:

“To provide for the involvement of iwi and hapu, and to ensure that tangata whenua values and interests are identified and reflected in the management of fresh water including associated ecosystems, and decision making regarding freshwater planning, including on how all other objectives of this national policy statement are given effect to.”

Policy D1 is set out as follows

“Local authorities shall take reasonable steps to: (a) … (b) Work with iwi and hapu to identify tangata whenua values and interests in fresh water and freshwater ecosystems in the region; and (c) Reflect tangata whenua values and interests in the management of, and decision-making regarding, fresh water and freshwater ecosystems in the region.

Government Policy Statement on Land Transport

The Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018 (GPS) outlines the Government’s strategy to guide land transport investment over the next 10 years. The GPS takes into consideration a range of government policies including but not limited to the NPS – UDC. The key strategic priorities of the GPS are ‘safety’ and ‘access’. However, to advance those outcomes, investment needs to demonstrate environmental benefits and value for money. For that reason, ‘environment’ and ‘value for money’ are included within the GPS as supporting priorities. The GPS is underpinned by two fundamental commitments:

• To address the widening infrastructure deficit in the regions, towns and cities; and

• To invest in the best projects, no matter what kind of transport modes they may be.

Access is of particular relevance to this plan change because the GPS prioritises improved access to economic and social opportunities. The nature of TAL is such that it will inevitably give rise to economic and social opportunities and the GPS seeks to ensure that access is not a barrier to the uptake of those opportunities.

The GPS has a focus on access to urban areas in particular, to ensure that transport and land use planning are fully integrated. In so doing it reduces reliance upon private motor vehicles and reduces the distance or time required to access social and economic opportunities. TAL is aligned with the strategic intent of the GPS because of its integrated nature and its accessibility to existing transport corridors. Due to its connectivity with the Te Awa River trail and with Te Rapa Road, TAL also supports a modal shift from private vehicles to more efficient low-cost

51 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

modes such as walking, cycling and public transport. That in turn contributes towards environmental priorities such as reduced vehicle omissions and improved public health. These items assessed in detail in the ITA at Appendix 4.

Regional and Strategic Planning Assessment

Waikato Regional Policy Statement 2016 (RPS)

The RPS aims to achieve integrated management and protection of Waikato’s natural and physical resources by identifying and addressing resource management issues within the region. The RPS must give effect to National Policy Statements. Two regional issues of particular relevance for this development are management of the Built Environment (Section 6) and of Freshwater Bodies (Section 8), in this case the Waikato River.

Section 6 Built Environment

Section 6 of the RPS aims to ensure that the built environment is planned and coordinated, including coordination with the provision of infrastructure. This section of the RPS ensures that the Future Proof Land Use pattern is implemented through District Plan provisions, in order to provide appropriately zoned and serviced land to enable development to occur now and in the future.

Policy 6.1 ensures that subdivision, use and development of the built environment occurs in a planned and co-ordinated manner. This leads into policy 6.3 which relates to co-ordinating growth and infrastructure. Specifically, policy 6.3 i) states:

“the nature and timing of new development is co-ordinated with the development, funding, implementation and operation of transport and other infrastructure, in order to: i. Optimise the efficient and affordable provision of both the development and the infrastructure.”

Policy 6.14 of the RPS is to adopt the Future Proof land use pattern. Clause (c) of policy 6.14 relates to industrial development in the future proof area. It states that:

“new industrial development should predominantly be located in the strategic industrial nodes in Table 6-2 (section D) and in accordance with indicative timings in that table except where alternative land release and timing is demonstrated to meet the criteria in Method 6.14.3.”

This policy is part of the implementation of broader growth policies contained in section 6 of the RPS, which have the purpose of ensuring the built environment is planned and coordinated, including coordination with the provision of infrastructure (6.1 and 6.3 above). Growth strategies are one of the other implementation methods used to ensure planned and coordinated growth, in this instance Future Proof is the relevant growth strategy.

Implementation methods 6.14.1 and 6.14.2 refer to implementing the Future Proof land use pattern through District Plan provisions and ensuring land is appropriately zoned to give effect to Table 6-2. These RPS policies and Table 6-2 specify ‘strategic’ industrial locations that enable development but not directing it. These strategic locations are based on the principles contained in the RPS of:

• Ensuring land development does not outstrip infrastructure provisions; • Ensuring industrial development locations fit with strategic infrastructure; and

52 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Ensuring a reasonable match of land supply and demand.

Te Rapa North is one of these strategic locations. Land allocation for Te Rapa North in Table 6- 2 of the RPS is as follows:

Table 7: Industrial Land Allocations from the RPS

Location Land Allocation and Staging Total Land Allocation Table Text 2010-2021 2021-2041 2041-2061 Te Rapa North 14 46 25 85

One of the purposes of the above policies is to avoid an oversupply of land that results in uncoordinated growth and development which conflicts with the compact urban form and sustainability principles of Future Proof21. This resulted in a ‘Business Land Reconciliation’ undertaken by Future Proof in 2010 that reduced the industrial land allocations contained in Future Proof in order to avoid excessive dispersal of industrial development and over allocation of industrial zoned land. The land allocation for industrial development was reduced from 280ha to 109ha, and then further reduced to 85ha as part of the RPS submission and hearing process. These allocations have been given statutory effect and have been reflected in the RPS and in the ODP.

HCC has taken this information and converted it into land use zones in the ODP which has a life span of about 10 years. The land use zones and related provisions in the ODP have several purposes:

• To broadly spatially identify the Te Rapa North strategic industrial node; • To enable up to 14ha of development up until 2021; • To enable another 46ha of development after 2021; and • To restrict further development beyond this 60ha until infrastructure is ready and to avoid oversupply.

The District Plan achieves this by establishing several layers of rules. Firstly, it zones 245ha of land as Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. It then applies a “deferred industrial” notation to all of this land. Within this land, 52ha south of Bern Road and west of Te Rapa Road is identified as “Stage 1A Dairy Industrial Area” and 60ha of land north of Hutchinson Road owned by Perry’s is identified as “Stage 1B Service Centre Industrial Area”. The rules accompanying Stage 1A and 1B enable 7ha of development in each area prior to 2021 and a further 23ha of development in each area after 2021. These are ‘floating zones’ that can therefore be developed anywhere within the areas. These land areas match the 14ha and 46ha contained in Table 6-2 of the RPS, therefore the ODP gives effect to the RPS. This zoning does not provide for the remaining 185ha of the 245ha zoned deferred industrial (i.e. Future Urban Zone) in the ODP. It will only be able to be developed following a plan change or a District Plan review. Table 6-2 only identifies a need for a further 25ha after 2041. As that timeframe is well beyond the lifespan of the District Plan there is no need to zone land for it.

Therefore, HCC has identified about 245ha of land in total for the Te Rapa North Industrial node. This is 160ha more than Future Proof and the RPS assess as likely to be needed to meet

21 Future Proof Business Land Reconciliation, November 2010, page 4

53 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

demand for the next 50 years. Within this 245ha it has zoned 30ha within the Te Awa Lakes site 5ha of this has been consented, subdivided and is partly developed. The balance of 25ha has been consented but not yet developed. It is this 25ha which the proposed plan change will reallocate to residential and adventure park activities. The balance of the site is zoned deferred industrial.

The only issues are District Plan zoning issues and are essentially site-specific ones following from Perry’s identifying alternative activities, being a significant tourism activity (the adventure park etc.) and residential that are far better suited to the site than industrial. The Industrial Viability Assessment in Appendix 19 concludes that industrial development is not viable due to site – specific factors. This conclusion calls into question whether the current industrial zoning is fit for purpose.

These issues lead to a need to consider demand for industrial land over the life of the District Plan, ensuring that it can be met if needed within or near the node. Perry’s has already consented and partially developed 5ha in Stage 1B. However, the balance 53ha of development in Stages 1A and 1B could be supplied within area 1A only, rather than being spread across 1A and 1B. The reallocation of 25ha for this plan change does not call into question the long term strategic allocation; it can be readily replaced from elsewhere within the deferred zone when needed. It is also a relatively small area of land in the context of the node.

The economic assessment by RCG in Appendix 6 confirms that there is an ample supply of industrial land, and even the potential for oversupply22, meaning this 25ha is not needed in the 10-year life of the ODP. The economic assessment by Market Economics in Appendix 20, based on a conservative assumption of all 62ha of the site being reallocated from industrial, also concludes that there is sufficient spare capacity.

This is a situation that the alternative release criteria in Method 6.14.3 is designed to address. That method provides for alternative residential or industrial land releases to be approved provided that:

• It will maintain or enhance the safe and efficient function of existing or planned infrastructure. • The total allocation in the strategic industrial node will not be exceeded, or an alternative timing of release allowed, unless justified by robust and comprehensive evidence covering at least planning, economic and infrastructure. • Sufficient zoned and serviced land within the greenfield area or industrial node is available or could be made available and making the land available will maintain the benefits of regionally significant infrastructure. • The effects of the change are consistent with the development principles set out in Section 6A of the RPS.

A full assessment under that Method is included in section 7.5 and Table 9 of this report.

Section 8 Fresh Water Bodies

Policy 8.5 relates to the Waikato River catchment. This policy highlights the prominence of the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River and seeks to ensure that it is the primary direction- setting document for the Waikato River and to develop an integrated, holistic and co-ordinated

22 Assessment of Economic Effects, RCG, in Appendix 6, p13

54 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

approach to implementation. The Vision and Strategy is particularly relevant to the management of stormwater on site and any discharges into the river.

In December 2018 the RPS was amended to include an additional objective in accordance with the requirements of the NPS-UDC. Objective 3.27 states as follows:

“The minimum targets for sufficient, feasible development capacity for housing in the Future Proof area are met, in accordance with the requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS-UDC) 2016.”

Table 8: RPS Residential Targets for Hamilton City Area Minimum Targets (number of dwellings)

Short to Medium Long Term Total

1-10 Years (2017 – 2026) 11-30 Years (2027 – 2046

Hamilton City 13,300 23,600 36,900 Waipa District 5,700 8,200 13,900

Waikato District 7,100 12,300 19,400

Future Proof Sub-Region 26,100 44,100 70,200

Future Proof Sub-Regional Growth Strategy (2009)

The Future Proof growth strategy was developed jointly in 2009 by HCC, WRC and Waipa and Waikato District Councils alongside Tangata Whenua, NZTA and Matamata-Piako District Council. The purpose of Future Proof is to provide a comprehensive and robust growth management strategy in order to ensure land use and infrastructure are managed collaboratively between the partner councils for the benefit of the whole sub-region. It is a long-term strategy that provides direction and implementation of a sub-regional settlement pattern which identifies land supply needs over the next 50 years.

Future Proof was adopted in 2009 and is now embedded in a number of statutory documents including the RPS through the industrial allocations. Central Government now recognises Future Proof as a best practice tool for implementing the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity (NPS – UDC). In 2017, Future Proof was updated as part one of a two- stage review process, to recognise national and sub-regional planning change that had occurred since 2009. The Future Proof Strategic Vision is essentially unchanged:

“In 30 years, the Future Proof sub region will: • Have a diverse and vibrant metropolitan centre strongly tied to distinctive, thriving towns and rural communities • Be the place of choice for those looking for opportunities to live, work, invest and visit • Be the place where natural environments, landscapes and heritage are protected and a healthy Waikato River is at the heart of the Region’s identity • Have productive partnerships within its communities, including tangata whenua • Have affordable and sustainable infrastructure • Have sustainable resource use.”

The 2017 Future Proof review responded to initiatives such as the Waikato Plan and the NPS – UDC. The Waikato Plan is an overarching Plan for the whole of the Waikato region,

55 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

documenting the issues and opportunities faced by Waikato members. Given the wider strategic matters now covered by the Waikato Plan, the focus of Future Proof was narrowed to growth management and settlement pattern implementation. The second stage of the Future Proof review is still under way and addresses the cross-over between the NPS-UDC and the Future Proof Strategy.

In the meantime, Part C, Section 6 of Future Proof retains the adopted settlement pattern for the sub-region. The settlement pattern is the cornerstone of the Future Proof Strategy: it ensures that development is to happen in a unified and coordinated way to avoid any adverse effects on the surrounding districts. It provides allocation of Industrial Business Land and Commercial Business Land for development. The industrial business land allocated in Hamilton City by Future Proof includes the Perry’s site.

The land allocations for industrial business land were subject to the Future Proof Business Land Reconciliation in 2010. As noted earlier, that investigation identified that there was inconsistency with the amount of land allocated for industrial development and the principles of Future Proof that promote compact urban form and sustainability. As a result, the amount of industrial land allocated in Te Rapa North was decreased to avoid dispersed land patterns in the area.

Part D, of Future Proof is the implementation plan. The sections in the implementation plan that are relevant to this development are:

Diverse and Vibrant Metropolitan Centre linked to Thriving Towns and Rural Communities and the Place of Choice – Live, Work, Invest and Visit

• Section 11.1 – Implementation of the Settlement Pattern – outlines an implementation focus for the Settlement Pattern in section 6, providing a long-term approach to when, where and how development takes place with a focus on a compact and concentrated urban form. There is a focus on structure plans as a tool to control development and to integrate land uses, funding and infrastructure. A key approach to the implementation of the settlement pattern is the use of private plan changes, but only where consistent with Future Proof. Future Proof requires action to amend the RPS to give statutory effect to the settlement pattern and to give effect to the land allocations outlined in the settlement pattern. • Section 11.4 – Residential Development – Generally, Future Proof encourages and supports residential development in areas where residential development already occurs. Key approaches relating to this development include higher density development occurring in suitable locations with good amenities and to promote live, work and play principles. The site is also close to land in Horotiu earmarked for residential development in the Proposed Waikato District Plan. Future Proof focuses on intensified residential areas to be located in Hamilton’s City Heart, transport hubs, areas of high public amenity and near town centres. A key principle with respect to residential development is the provision of housing and lifestyle choice within defined locations, with greater emphasis on good urban design outcomes. Where possible, housing and lifestyle choice is expected to respond to government policies on land supply and housing affordability. Future Proof recognises that the housing market is not currently providing for the range of housing types to suit the full range of home- buyers, which is an issue TAL is seeking to redress. Future Proof also recognises that the population is ageing and includes the provision of providing residential development that will support and meet the needs of elderly.

56 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Section 11.5 – Business - focuses on implementation of land uses for business purposes. Under Actions in 11.5, action 3 states: “provide for suitable business and employment opportunities close to where people live (e.g. the promotion of mixed use developments).” This development is mixed use and will generate employment opportunities along with other business opportunities (e.g. small scale retail associated with the adventure park, food and drink stalls/places, short stay accommodation and a range of tourism facilities) all of which will be located close to the residential component of the development. Affordable and Sustainable Infrastructure

• Section 12.1 – Transport. Amongst other things, the key transport outcomes sought for the Hamilton area include ‘well-connected public transport routes and improved opportunities for walking and cycling’ and ‘intensified residential development which is focussed around key nodes including transport hubs, town / suburban centres and areas of high public amenity such as parks and the river’. TAL provides a good fit with these outcomes because it is located on a key transport route which is planned as a mass transit corridor provides connectivity with walking and cycling networks and is an area of high public amenity designed to integrate with the Waikato River.

• Section 12.3 – Three Waters – A key principle of Future Proof is to give effect to the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River by restoring the health and wellbeing of the river, including the adoption of an integrated management approach. The Waikato River is a dominant feature of the TAL proposal, with the Plan Change having been designed to support the Vision and Strategy. It does this by providing for an integrated approach to stormwater management which improves the quality of the discharge of stormwater into the Waikato River. The Plan Change also enhances public access to the river, whilst at the same time providing for a range of commercial operations which leverage off its attraction.

Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment

The preparation of a Housing and Business Development Capacity Assessment (HBCA) is a statutory requirement of the NPS-UDC for high-growth areas such as Hamilton City. The Future Proof Partnership prepared an HBCA Summary Report for the Waikato sub-region in 2017. The report summarises the analysis of demand, supply and the sufficiency of development capacity for housing and business across the sub-region.

In consideration of housing demand, population projections over the 30 years from June 2016 indicate that Hamilton City needs to provide approximately 32,000 dwellings by 2046. With respect to Hamilton’s greenfield and infill areas, there is commercially feasible development capacity for approximately 10,500 dwellings in the short term (2021), 13,200 dwellings in the medium term (to 2026) and 18,000 dwellings in the long term (to 2046)23.

Sufficiency of housing supply is determined by comparing demand (plus a margin of 20% for medium term and 15% for long term) to the level of total capacity. The HBA Summary Report concludes that, overall, Hamilton has sufficient capacity to meet demand for houses over the short and medium terms. It will also have capacity to meet demand over the long term

23 The assessment capacity includes a small margin of redevelopment which is feasible. Excluding redevelopment potential, future feasible capacity adjusts to 11,500 for short term, 20,900 for medium term and 49,000 for long term.

57 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

providing additional housing capacity becomes available over time, as is expected through periodic District Plan reviews. TAL is well placed to meet this demand, not least because of the variety of dwelling types that are to be provided. As set out in the Economic Assessment in Appendix 20 it is also well placed to assist meeting the need for housing in the adjacent southern Waikato District.

In consideration of business capacities, the HBCA focuses is on retail, commercial and industrial land. Table 9 below provides a breakdown of projected demand for business sectors within Hamilton City over the short, medium and long term horizons.

Table 9: Business Land Demand for Hamilton City Sector Short Term Medium Long Term term Commercial Ha 15.0 69.1 86.7 GFA 53,689 164,829 402,548 Retail Ha 6.2 20.1 36.3 GFA 30,179 68,274 118,070 Industrial Ha 110.1 318 524.4 GFA 101,460 303,780 767,080

For the purpose of assessing business development capacity the HBCA considers appropriately zoned land, land enabled by rules which allow business activity, and land supplied by (or likely to be enabled by) key infrastructure. The HBCA demonstrates that Hamilton has a total of 1459 hectares of vacant business land, of which 643 hectares is commercial, 186 hectares is retail and 630 hectares is industrial.

The HBCA indicates that development capacity for commercial and retail within Hamilton is generally well catered for with more than ample supply. Industrial land capacity is less than that for commercial and retail but is still considered sufficient for long term needs. This conclusion is updated in the Economic Assessment at Appendix 20, which concludes that there is sufficient industrial land a capacity and there will still be a surplus even if the TAL site is not available for industrial use.

Hamilton Urban Growth Strategy (2010)

The Hamilton Urban Growth Strategy (“HUGS”) is a long-term growth planning exercise based around delivering coordinated and sustainable growth in Hamilton. It sets a pattern of future development within the Hamilton City boundaries. HUGS specifically details how, when and where growth should occur. The outcomes and recommendations of this process have been fed into Future Proof. Council has previously identified several growth cells suitable for development. These include areas such as Rototuna, Rotokauri, and Peacockes. Planning for development is well advanced with Structure Plans in place and development under way. The Ruakura growth cell was not included in HUGS, so it is now somewhat dated. TAL is nonetheless identified in HUGS as a Future Employment Zone.

Waikato Regional Land Transport Plan

The 2015 – 2045 Waikato Regional Land Transport Plan (“WRLTP”) was updated in 2018. It sets out the strategic direction for land transport in the Waikato region for the next 30 years. The strategic context for the WRLTP is described in three broad issues:

• Protecting the function of strategic corridors;

58 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Road safety; and

• Providing for access and mobility needs for our communities.

The Waikato Region has identified in a number of its plans and policies, the importance of the integration of land use with infrastructure in the region. There are a number of policies and implementation methods to ensure the development of the built environment occurs in a planned and coordinated manner to ensure that infrastructural needs of the Region are catered for. Some of the key messages include:

3.7 – Strategic corridors and economic development

Growth in the Upper North Island is impacting on strategic corridors and hindering economic development. The WRLTP seeks to address this by creating an efficient and resilient land transport system that advances regional economic wellbeing and facilitates freight movement on strategic corridors in the Upper North Island. A secondary objective is a planned transport response that supports future growth areas.

Relevant Policies:

“P1 – Manage growth to protect the efficiency of the strategic transport network, and in particular the Waikato Expressway”.

“P7 – Develop and grow the use of regional cycle trails”

“P8 - Develop transport infrastructure and services in high growth urban areas consistent with national policy requirements including the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity”

“P9 - Ensure regionally significant corridors are protected and developed to serve the future development and transport needs of the region.”

“P10 - Support key Hamilton city urban development projects that serve the economic development needs and desired outcomes of the greater Hamilton urban area.”

3.9 – Access and Mobility

A changing social, demographic, economic and technological landscape is impacting on the ability of people to connect with essential services, employment and recreation. The WRLTP recognises that transport has a key influence on health, particularly for the transport disadvantaged. Further, there is a strong correlation between having access and mobility and the extent to which people can participate in society.

Relevant policies:

“P15 - Provide an effective, efficient and affordable public transport system in urban centres and emerging growth areas.”

“P19 - Provide an inclusive transport system that is designed for all people, including those with mobility impairments.”

“P21 - Encourage the use of travel modes other than single occupancy vehicles and private vehicle use in Hamilton and surrounding towns.”

“P23 - Provide safe, connected, coherent and accessible walking and cycling networks and facilities supported by activities aimed at reducing barriers to participation in active transport modes.”

59 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

3.10 – Integration and Forward Planning:

The WRLT recognises that land use change is constantly occurring and, if uncontrolled or ineffectively managed, it can lead to unplanned and out of sequence development. It is this situation which can lead to inefficient and ineffective transport outcomes. Key to resolving this issue is a collaborative and integrated response to land use development.

Relevant policies:

“P25 - The land transport system is managed and developed in a responsive, collaborative and integrated manner.”

“P26 - Land use development does not compromise the safety and efficiency of the transport system.”

“P27 - The transport system is managed and developed in a way that is consistent with and supports the region’s strategic transport and land use pattern”.

3.12 - Environmental Sustainability and Resilience

Relevant policies:

“P33 - Develop and manage the transport system in a way that improves the environmental sustainability of the system for the environment and communities, including tangata whenua.”

“P35 - Recognise and plan for the anticipated effects arising from system resilience issues, such as climate change, and technological change.”

“P38 - Ensure the adverse effects of transport on the climate, local environment, and public health are reduced.”

The proposed development is located adjacent to the Expressway close to a grade separated interchange. The improvement and extensions to the Expressway means the development is already capable of having strong and coordinated connections with Hamilton City and also the Waikato region and its surrounding regions. In this case, infrastructure and land use can be integrated.

Access Hamilton

Access Hamilton is how Hamilton’s key transport partners work together to achieve outcomes for an integrated and effective transport system. The strategic vision of this document is to deliver an affordable, integrated, safe, responsive and sustainable transport system that supports economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being of the City. The three main components that make up Access Hamilton include the strategy vision, the Integrated Transport Plan and the seven action plans. Access Hamilton sets a strategic direction until 2040 and works alongside a number of other strategies that assist Council to achieve its strategic objectives and guide city development, including the WRLTP and Future Proof.

The Hamilton City River Plan (2014)

The Hamilton City River Plan (the River Plan) was developed by HCC in 2014. Its principles are: • The River plan is for the people who visit or live in Hamilton. • The River Plan will enable development that will promote enjoyment of the river and benefit to community. • The River Plan supports the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River.

60 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• The River Plan promotes the celebration of culture, sport, recreation and leisure.

The River Plan has six themes that underpin the principles. The most relevant to Te Awa Lakes development are: • Access: improving access to, along and across the river. • Recreation: promoting development that embraces the river. • Tourism: promoting and developing tourism along the river. • Natural Enhancement: protecting and enhancing the natural environment along the river.

The River Plan identifies a range of project areas along the river that are proposed as future development areas. Although Te Awa Lakes is not identified, nor would be expected given the document is dated 2014, there is reference to a medium to long term project to “Explore the future northern opportunity on the city’s boundary to connect with the river”.

Waikato-Tainui Environmental Plan – Tai Tumu, Tai Pari, Tai Ao

The Waikato-Tainui Environmental Plan (“WTEP”) is designed to enhance Waikato-Tainui participation in resource and environmental management. It is developed out of Whakatupuranga 2050, a 50-year long development approach to build the capacity of Waikato- Tainui. The vision of the WTEP is not only to maintain the environment, but also to restore or enhance the quality of natural and physical resources. The provisions of this plan that are relevant to the Te Awa Lakes development are described below and a full assessment is also included in Section 7.6.

Chapter 6: Consultation and Engagement with Waikato-Tainui

This chapter sets out consultation and engagement processes and supports and encourages early involvement of Waikato-Tainui in major projects to prevent delays in the latter stages of the process. Pre-application consultation is considered best practice planning to ensure that appropriate consideration is given to matters of importance to the people of Waikato-Tainui. For this plan change a specific Tangata Whenua Working Group has been established to provide advice and feedback from Tangata Whenua. This is further described in section 6.6.

Chapter 7: Towards Environmental Enhancement

“The goal of Waikato-Tainui is to ensure that the needs of present and future generations are provided for in a manner that goes beyond sustainability towards an approach that enhances the environment.”

Sustainability is an approach towards maintaining the standard of the environment for the benefit of the present generation and for future generations to experience the same quality of land use as is currently experienced. The enhancement approach is a step further than sustainability or maintenance and aims to improve the quality of the environment for future generations.

Chapter 10: Tribal Strategic Plan

Whakatupuranga 2050 is the ‘blueprint’ for cultural, social and economic advancement for people of Waikato-Tainui to ensure that in the changing times, tribal identity and integrity is upheld.

61 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The vision of Whakatupuranga 2050 is “to grow a prosperous, healthy, vibrant, innovative and culturally strong iwi”. The strategic objectives of Whakatupuranga are:

• Kingitanga (the king movement) remains an eternal symbol and that Waikato-Tainui remains as kaitiaki of the environment; • Tribal identity and integrity is upheld; • Tribal success, and • Tribal social and economic wellbeing thrives.

An issue for Waikato Tainui as set out in Chapter 10 is the impact of resource use and development on the achievement of Whakatupuranga 2050. The health and wellbeing of the environment is inseparable from the social, cultural, spiritual, economic and environmental health and wellbeing of tangata whenua. Therefore, the way the environment is used and developed can have a significant impact of the achievement of Whakatupuranga 2050. Objective 10.5.1 in the Waikato-Tainui Environment Plan states:

“Resource management, use and activities within the Waikato-Tainui rohe are consistent with the vision, mission, values and strategic objectives of Whakatupuranga 2050.”

Chapter 11: The Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River

The Waikato Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Act 2010 gives effect to the settlement entered into between Waikato-Tainui and the Crown. The settlement gives statutory effect to Te Ture Whaimana (Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River). Te Ture Whaimana is the primary direction-setting document for the Waikato River. It is reflective of the Waikato-Tainui vision, objectives and strategies for the Waikato River. The overarching purpose of Te Ture Whaimana is

“to restore and protect the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River for future generations.”

The objectives of the Vision and Strategy document consequently aim to meet the objectives of Waikato Tainui for the Waikato River by: • the restoration and protection of the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River; • the restoration and protection of the relationship of Waikato – Tainui with the Waikato River, including their economic, social, cultural and spiritual relationships; • the restoration and protection of the relationships of Waikato Iwi according to their tikanga and kawa with the Waikato River, including their economic, social, cultural and spiritual relationships; • the restoration and protection of the Waikato Region’s communities, with the Waikato River, including their economic, social, cultural and spiritual relationships; • the integrated, holistic and coordinated approach to management of the natural, physical, cultural and historic resources of the Waikato River; • the adoption of a precautionary approach towards decisions that may result in significant adverse effects on the Waikato River, and in particular those effects that threaten serious or irreversible damage to the River; • The recognition and avoidance of adverse cumulative effects, of activities undertaken both within the Waikato River and within its catchments on the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River;

62 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• The recognition that the Waikato River is degraded and should not be required to absorb further degradation as a result of human activities; • The protection and enhancement of significant sites, fisheries, flora and fauna; • The recognition that the strategic importance of the Waikato River to New Zealand’s social, cultural, environmental and economic wellbeing, requires the restoration and protection of the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River; • The restoration of water quality within the Waikato River so that it is safe for people to swim in and take food from over its entire length; • The promotion of improved access to the Waikato River to better enable sporting, recreational, and cultural opportunities; and • The application of the above of both matauranga Maaori and the latest available scientific methods.

The WTEP gives particular weight to the Vision and Strategy document in its objectives, policies and methods. Objective 11.7.1 of the Plan states:

“Te Ture Whaimana prevails in any resource management, use and activity within the Waikato River catchment in the Waikato-Tainui rohe.”

Chapter 14: Customary Activities

Access to traditional areas (e.g. Waikato River) for resource use and to undertake customary activities has been compromised in recent years which has had an impact on the ability for people of Waikato-Tainui to practice customary activities and transfer of knowledge between generations. Some examples of customary activities may include the launching of waka into the river for ceremonial, recreation, competition and sporting purposes, customary gathering and use of foods and the use of water bodies for activities relating to the spiritual, physical and cultural health and wellbeing of people (e.g. bathing and baptisms). Objective 14.3.1 of the WTEP states:

“Waikato-Tainui access to and ability to undertake customary activities and resource use, including along the margins of waterways, is protected and enhanced.”

Chapter 15: Natural Heritage and Biosecurity

Changes in land use have gradually depleted the natural plants and native animals and ultimately decreased indigenous biodiversity in the Waikato Region. Objective 15.3.2 states;

“Cultural, spiritual and ecological features of the Waikato landscape that are significant to Waikato-Tainui are protected and enhanced to improve the mauri of the land.”

Method ‘d’ of this objective states:

“Establishment and enhancement of ecological corridors linking areas of known high value indigenous habitat shall be treated as high priority for the allocation of resources by the authorities responsible. These corridors include riparian margins, gully systems, esplanade reserves, and vegetation alongside road corridors.”

While there are no high value indigenous habitats on the site it adjoins the Waikato River which is an ecological corridor and the adjacent gully is identified as having significant ecological values in the Ecological Assessment in Appendix 9. The creation of an esplanade reserve along the river edge and the low-density housing adjacent to it creates an opportunity to enhance that corridor.

63 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Te Awa Lakes will specifically contribute to achieving the Vision and Strategy by;

• aiming for a target of swimmable water quality in the main linear lake. As this lake receives treated stormwater from the development and discharges via the gully system to the Waikato River, it will improve the water quality of the discharge compare to the current and consented discharge.

• remediating the soil contamination on the site that exists as a result of previous land use practices, therefore avoiding any of that contamination entering the River via ground water or surface water.

• a specific ecological rehabilitation plan to restore and enhance the unnamed tributary to the Waikato River (that is also the stormwater outlet from the site) as required by Rule 1.2.2.28 of PPC 2.

• an indigenous landscape plan to provide suitable planting on the esplanade reserve adjacent to River, as required by Rule 1.2.2.28l) of PPC 2.

• a requirement to implement an alligator weed management plan designed with a target of eradicating alligator weed on the site, but if that is impracticable, stopping its spread and reducing its density. This will eliminate or significantly reduce the risk of alligator weed escaping the site into the River (see Rule 1.2.2.28 of PPC2).

Hamilton-Auckland Corridor Plan (H2A)

As part of the Government’s Urban Growth Agenda and focus on spatial planning, the Hamilton to Auckland Corridor Statement of Spatial Intent has been developed through a partnership between Central Government, Local Government and Iwi. The Corridor Plan was officially launched on 15 August 2019.

The Hamilton -Auckland Corridor Plan (the Corridor Plan) is a strategic wellbeing plan centred on the Waikato River, the Waikato Expressway and the Hamilton-Auckland rail link. Stretching from Papakura in the north to Cambridge and Te Awamutu in the south, the Corridor Plan identifies three areas for linked development: a Hamilton metro area, River Communities and Papakura-Pokeno. The intent of the Corridor Plan is to enable infrastructure to lead growth, rather than vice versa. The delivery platform for the Corridor Plan is Future Proof.

TAL is located within the Hamilton metro area, which is one of the Corridor Plan’s key focus areas. A Hamilton -Waikato Metro Spatial plan (‘Metro Plan’) is being developed to support and deliver on the growth management objectives of the overarching Corridor Plan. The growth management objectives for the Metro Plan include but are not limited to:

• Managing growth in a manner that protects and enhances the quality of the natural environments;

• Strengthening connections that improve access to housing, employment, public services and amenities through, along and within the corridor;

• Growing urban settlements and places that make efficient use of existing infrastructure and resources and which provide affordable housing choices and high quality live-work- play settlements;

64 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Supporting and underpinning urban growth through investments and initiatives that are responsive and timely, and which are delivered at the required pace and scale to realise development opportunities.

Although delivery and implementation of the Metro Plan is not scheduled until 2020, Te Rapa North/Horotiu is one of a number of locations within the metro area, identified within the Corridor Plan as having potential for residential and employment opportunities. Those opportunities are to be realised through joint planning, integrated growth management and key transformational projects. HCC is currently investigating a plan change covering the wider Te Rapa North area that will include consideration of further industrial zoning. Similarly Waikato District Council notified a Proposed District Plan in October 2018, and it provides an opportunity for some of the growth plans to be anchored in a statutory document. In particular, submissions on the Proposed Plan seek rezoning of an additional 48ha of industrial land at Horotiu, potentially increasing the capacity of that Node. The Proposed Plan also includes residential zoning at Horotiu, signalling a higher density of Urban development than the Current Country Living Zone. These emerging strategic land use changes are illustrated on the plan on the following page.

TAL is a transformational project that is consistent with this emerging land use pattern, and will give access to high-quality housing and amenities whilst making efficient use of existing infrastructure and resources (i.e. the Waikato River, the Waikato Expressway and existing three waters infrastructure). The proposed Plan Change is therefore well placed to support the strategic intent of the Corridor Plan and Metro Plan.

Waikato Regional Public Transport Plan

The Waikato Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP) 2018-2028 has a 10-year horizon. It sets out the priorities and needs of public transport services and infrastructure to be delivered in the Waikato. The vision for the Waikato region is to build a public transport system that enhances the vitality of our communities, strengthens our economy and helps create a healthier environment.

Relevant objectives of the RPTP include:

Delivery of a layered network of public transport services that meets a diverse range of travel needs;

Transition to a mass transit-oriented network over time; and

Provision of the infrastructure necessary for an accessible, effective and efficient public transport network

Due to its proximity to the Waikato Expressway and its location on a core corridor (Te Rapa Road), TAL is strategically located to benefit from, and support, the aspirations of the RPTP. In time, TAL will be developed as a regional tourism and recreational destination, integrated with a comprehensively master planned, mixed-use development. A combination of ‘mass transit’, ‘frequent’ and ‘connector’ services will be needed to support this gateway destination and this is already envisaged by the RPTP through its proposed ‘layered network of services’. Further, there are no aspects of TAL that would undermine the RPTP goal of an accessible, effective and efficient public transport network.

Waikato Regional Road Safety Strategy 2017-2021.

65 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The Waikato Regional Road Safety Strategy (RSS) 2017-2021 sets out a framework for the coordinated delivery of multiple agency road safety interventions. The purpose of the RSS is two-fold. Firstly, it seeks to identify short term priorities for the next three years for regional road safety partners, and to inform the review of the 2018 Regional Land Transport Plan’s road safety priorities. Secondly, it identifies signals for longer term priorities that could influence road safety culture change and a step change in road safety outcomes for the region. The long- term vision for the region is:

“Working together towards zero deaths and serious injuries on Waikato’s roads”.

Amongst other things, the key issues identified for the Waikato Region include ‘speed management’, ‘safer roads and roadsides’ and ‘safe road use’. TAL has the potential to contribute positively to each of these issues through the design of its integrated transport network. There are no aspects of TAL that are in conflict with the RSS. The ITA Appendix 4 advices the RSS in detail.

Hamilton City Council 10-Year Plan and Infrastructure Strategy

The Hamilton City Council 2018 – 2028 10 Year Plan identifies the expected infrastructure spend for the Council over the next 10 years. Part Two of the 10 Year Plan is the 2014-2018 Infrastructure Strategy. The purpose of the 30-year Infrastructure Strategy is to identify significant infrastructure challenges over the next 30 years, and to identify the principal options for managing those challenges and the implications of those options.

Of potential significance to TAL is a proposed new river bridge in the north of the city which is described as follows:

“The Northern River Bridge Crossing Programme is to plan for, designate and construct an additional river bridge crossing to the north of the city. The new bridge will be required to help reduce congestion on the existing network – particularly the existing Pukete Bridge and connecting roads. The bridge would also be required as part of the necessary strategic infrastructure to develop the city beyond the current Rototuna growth cell. A decision on the timing and nature of any new growth cell development is yet to be determined. The timing proposed for the Northern River Bridge crossing is primarily driven though the need to improve network efficiency.”

There is opportunity for the proposed new Northern river Bridge to integrate with TAL, albeit that a decision on that significant expenditure is not expected until 2026. The ITA in Appendix 4 comments on the influence of the River Bridge on the transport network near Te Awa Lakes.

From the 10-Year Plan, the funding allocation timeframes generally reflect those in the RLTP, with allocations made as follows:

Ring Road allocations in 2018 - 2021;

Network upgrades to allow for development in each of the next 10 years;

- Rototuna roading allocations in each of the next 10 years;

- Bus stop infrastructure allocations each year; and

- Biking plan implementation each of the next 10 years;

- Cross city connector allocations in 2025 to 2028; and

- A northern river crossing 2026 to 2028.

66 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

This indicates that a range of provisions are being made, with flexibility over time, for infrastructure to be established in a way that most effectively responds to urban growth.

5.0 Assessment of Environmental Effects

Existing Environment and Permitted Baseline

Under clause 22 of Schedule 1 to the RMA a request for a plan change must include a description of environmental effects that are anticipated. These effects are to be described in such detail as corresponds with the scale and significance of the effects, and taking into account clauses 6 and 7 of Schedule 4. These sections specify the information required in an AEE and matters to be address in an AEE.

Assessments of environmental effects in the context of resource consents have established the principles of an assessment being undertaken taking into account certain specified ‘baseline’ development. Essentially, an assessment can disregard effects associated with activities that are permitted by the District Plan (the ‘permitted baseline’) and only deal with effects over and above those permitted effects.

A permitted baseline is not directly relevant to plan changes and in this case all activities of any significance require resource consent under the provisions of the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. The only permitted activities are those permitted by the Future Urban Zone, which are limited to farming, single or ancillary dwellings, home stays and informal recreation.

However, when assessing effects on the environment, the ‘environment’ also includes the state of the future environment as it might be modified by the implementation of resource consents that have been granted, assuming that those consents are actually likely to be implemented24.

This is a relevant factor for the site as resource consents have been granted for 30ha of industrial development by way of the IDP approval of 20 May 2014. This resource consent has been partly implemented by construction of the service centre and other facilities on approximately 5ha of the site. That consent was accompanied by earthworks consents to recontour 7ha of the site and a stormwater consent to collect, treat and discharge stormwater to the Waikato River for the whole site. The works on site are sufficient that these consents are considered to have been given effect to and therefore form part of the existing environment.

The area of the 30ha consented development is generally the western half of the site adjacent to Te Rapa Road and the Expressway.

The IDP provides for all permitted activities in the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone to establish as of right. This would include industrial buildings of up to 20m high.

However, if this plan change does not proceed it is unlikely that the consented industrial development will be implemented. As set out in the Industrial Viability Assessment in Appendix 19 a comprehensive industrial development is not viable for the foreseeable future. As there is no other realistic option for development of the site it is most likely to lie vacant. The

24 Queenstown Lakes DC v Hawthorn Estate Ltd (2006) NZRMA424(CA)

67 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Adventure Park is an integral part of the Plan Change 2 development proposal, interdependent with the residential and business components, so would not proceed alone.

Therefore, the following assessment of effects takes into account the existing physical environment as represented by the existing service centre and the closed sand quarry;

Infrastructure Effects

Water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure effects are addressed in the Integrated Catchment Management Plan (“ICMP”) prepared by BBO included in Appendix 3 of this report. The ICMP is a sub-catchment ICMP that pulls together the water and wastewater infrastructure and stormwater investigations and assessments that have been undertaken by BBO and Stormwater Solutions/CKL respectively to demonstrate how three waters will be managed to service future development within the Te Awa Lakes development site.

The Stormwater Solutions/CKL Stormwater Management Plan (“SMP”) is appended to the ICMP report (see Appendix 1 of Appendix 3) whereas the BBO water and wastewater assessment is contained within the body of the report. A stormwater infrastructure update prepared by Aurecon is also included as Appendix 23.

The scope of the Subcatchment ICMP was agreed with HCC to align with the ICMP requirements in the ODP (Rule 1.2.2.6) and has the following purposes:

• To provide guidance on how water, wastewater and stormwater within the catchment will be managed in an integrated way and in accordance with proposed new land uses that occur within the development site. • To ensure the effects of stormwater discharges are mitigated in accordance with the requirements of the discharge consents held/obtained and Waikato Regional Council guidance.

In terms of the catchment the ICMP is generally limited to the Te Awa Lakes development site, which is 62ha in size. The total catchment however is approximately 100ha and includes land located on the western side of the Expressway. That land is zoned Country Living in the ODP and Residential PDP and falls within Waikato District Council’s jurisdiction. The ICMP has thus been prepared on the basis that such land area will be subject to similar three water assessments if and when further development of that land occurs.

The key aspects of the ICMP are summarised as follows.

Existing Water, Wastewater and Stormwater

Water and wastewater services were extended and connected to the site following the approval of the IDP in 2014. Whilst the IDP only provided for the development of 30ha of the site a condition of that consent was that the design and sizing of all three waters infrastructure needed to be undertaken for the whole site, which included the deferred industrial land. Implementation of the IDP consequently resulted in connections being constructed from the site and back to HCC reticulation closer to the city, with sufficient capacity to cover the entire site based on demands specified in the Hamilton Infrastructure Technical Specifications (“HITS”) for industrial land. More specifically the following infrastructure was put in place:

• The water network installed in Hutchinson Road is connected to the city network at the intersection of Old Ruffell Road and Te Rapa Road and consist of two PVC pipes, one at

68 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

250mm and the other at 150mm. The flows were modelled by AWT in 2013, on the basis of supplying 150ha of industrial land, being the site and other development in the surrounding environment. The AWT reporting confirmed that such demand would not negatively impact on other users within Te Rapa including Fonterra. • The sites wastewater is provided with an individual pump grinder pump solution connecting to a rising main (110 OD PE line) that runs from the site to Maui Street. This system’s capacity can service a population of 2,475 persons, based on a population density of 45 people per ha and over a 55ha site area. The current rising main discharge point on Maui St has limited capacity and HCC has limited discharges at this point to a maximum of 2 l/s. Flows were expected to exceed this rate once the industrial development exceeded approximately 600 people (assuming a peaking factor of 1.5). At that time, the rising main will require an 800m extension to the interceptor main. • In 2014, Perry’s obtained two consents25 from WRC relating to the management of stormwater from the site. At that time, the stormwater management concept was based on splitting the site into northern and southern catchment areas with discharges from each catchment occurring via two proposed treatment wetland and then via a new site outlet (northern catchment) and via the small existing tributary stream outlet (southern catchment). Both outlets incorporated downstream channel erosion protection measures.

Proposed Water and Wastewater

Due to the change in proposed land use some of the earlier design assumptions around water and wastewater demand and flow requirements have now changed. A number of amended assumptions have thus been made around water and wastewater demands to service the proposed residential/commercial development of the site. These assumptions have been provided to HCC for their review and confirmation that they reflect a realistic estimate of potential demand.

HCC has also requested that modelling of these assumed demands against their water and wastewater models (by Mott MacDonald and AECOM, respectively) is undertaken to confirm capacity within the existing HCC network is available. The results of this modelling are as follows:

• Water – Capacity is available for the proposed flows with residual pressures on site exceeding the minimum requirements. The development is not expected to affect the remaining water network within Hamilton City and existing water reticulation to the site is large enough to supply the development in the 2021 and 2061 models with capacity left over. No off site upgrades are required. • Wastewater – Capacity is available within the Far Western Interceptor for flows from the development. As the development progresses and flows increase a second wastewater rising main from the site to the Interceptor will be required. The second wastewater main will be required once the existing main reaches capacity which will be when the development reaches a full time people equivalent of around 2,475; approximately 50% of total development.

The wastewater modelling has been undertaken on the basis that the site will be serviced by traditional gravity wastewater reticulation. However, as the previous industrial development across the site proposed the use of individual grinder pumps connecting to the rising main, this

25 See consents numbered 14 (AUTH130673.02.02) and 15 (AUTH130673.03.02) in Appendix 13

69 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

is also an option for the land uses now proposed. As grinder pumps and pressurised rising mains are not subject to the same infiltration as traditional gravity wastewater reticulation actual flows will be less than modelled.

Based on this assessment and the modelling results, there are no adverse effects as a result of water and wastewater services and a positive benefit is to be able to utilise the previous investment in this infrastructure. A ‘trigger’ will need to be adopted to specify the point at which the wastewater network is upgraded. It is expected that this trigger will be addressed in future consents for the site and in a private developer agreement. Overall the serviced nature of the site is a key factor in being able to commence development and assist in meeting housing shortfalls in a timely manner.

Proposed Stormwater

Following the decision to modify the sites land use from industrial to residential/commercial development activities incorporating the proposed lake features, the original stormwater design has been revisited with the new proposal outlined within the SMP. The key change is that development stormwater from the entire site, including the proposed lake features, will now be routed to discharge via a single site outlet into the existing southern gully at Hutchinson Road with flows through to the unnamed tributary and the Waikato River thereafter.

The proposed stormwater concept is outlined in detail within the SMP. The SMP addresses quaity (extended detention for erosion protection), quality (water quality volume for stormwater treatment), primary conveyance, and secondary conveyance system for overland flow.

To achieve this the SMP provides a ‘tool box’ of at source and centralised stormwater management options that will be implemented to meet the proposed land use requirements, the level of service expectations of the landowners, asset owners and end users of the land. The tool box includes:

• Extended detention through the design of the recreational lakes; • At-source Low Impact Design treatment devices (i.e. treepits, raingardens or proprietary treatment devices); • Centralised wetlands; and • Overland flow paths within road reserves that drain directly into the lakes.

The SMP also splits the site into a number of sub-catchment and specifies the proposed stormwater management methods available for each sub-catchment to achieve the water quality and erosion control objectives for these areas. The best practicable option for each of these subcatchments is summarised as26:

• Subcatchments 1 and 2; Medium Density Residential – WQV (Water Quality Volume) and EDV (Extended Detention Volume) provided at centralised wetlands with additional on-lot phosphorus removal treatment devices. • Subcatchment 3; WQV at source, EDV at dry retention basin or in recreational lakes. • Subcatchment 4; Roof areas to feed cable ski lake and aqua park, other areas WQV and EDV at south wetland.

26 Stormwater Management Schematic (Drawing No 401) in Appendix 1 to the Subcatchment ICMP at Appendix 3

70 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Subcatchment 5; WQV at source with polishing devices prior to discharge to lakes for additional phosphorus removal, EDV at source or in recreational lakes. In terms of water quality and quantity effects the SMP will also meet the requirements of HITS and requirements of the existing stormwater discharge consent for the site. As the SMP differs from that consented by WRC consents for a variation to this resource consent was sought and has been granted.

Based on the revised SMP and the existing resource consents, it is not considered that the plan change will give rise to any additional adverse stormwater effects that have not already provided for through the IDP approval and the WRC consenting processes. The change to residential land uses is also likely to create a reduced potential for contaminant generation from the development catchment that that expected from industrial development. As such, the potential effects of the proposed land use changes upon stormwater runoff quality will continue to be less than minor and in fact, may be enhanced beyond the currently consented industrial development scenario.

The SMP also concludes that water quality in the recreational lakes should be maintained to a standard suitable for contact recreation. Preliminary assessments contained in the SMP and in the Water Quality Technical Review by NIWA in Appendix 18 show that this is achievable as all runoff will be treated for heavy metals and (to an extent) nutrient removal. The lakes also have a large surface area which is exposed to wind to maintain dissolved oxygen levels. Transportation effects

The Integrated Transport Assessment (ITA) by Stantec at Appendix 4 has assessed the transport effects of the plan change. The ITA was developed in consultation with the road controlling authorities, being NZTA, HCC and Waikato District Council.

Application of the Waikato Regional Transport Model (WRTM) was agreed by all parties as the best assessment tool for understanding the wider effects of the Plan Change. However, at the time of initial assessment (2016) the then current 2006 version of WRTM was considered to be nearing the end of its usefulness and use of the 2013 WRTM update was preferred. At the initial timing, the 2013 WRTM future year models had not been available for use and it was therefore agreed that the effects of the proposed Plan Change should be assessed using 2006 WRTM. These results were then to be reviewed against the 2013 WRTM future year models if/when they became available for public use, within the project timeframes.

This updated assessment has undertaken that further assessment in the updated 2013 WRTM model. The same method for assessment as was previously agreed was applied in this updated modelling case. The results of this updated assessment are described in the ITA at Appendix 4.

A comprehensive evaluation of the local road safety environment has been undertaken and is described in the ITA. The analysis has not identified any material significant road safety concern with respect to the current transport environment.

Notwithstanding this, recent Government Policy Statement (GPS) has directed an increased focus on road safety outcomes, and aligned with this, Hamilton City Council has adopted a “zero deaths” objective on the transport network by 2027.

The central, regional and local government policy and strategy direction has been assessed and is set out in the further detail in the ITA. The development of transport response measures has had particular regard for the current and changing operating environment with respect to road

71 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

safety outcomes. The developed recommendations both across the wider network and within the structure planned area, are made with a zero deaths, and reduced harm outcome as a primary factor in mitigation development.

An overall enhanced road safety environment has been assessed and is planned to accommodate the land use activities proposed when compared with the differing safety directions of recent times.

A review of the 2006 WRTM models confirmed that:

• Full development to 2041 of the Ruakura Plan Change area had been included;

• The Peacockes growth cell area was included to 2041;

• Part of the Rotokauri Stage 1 growth cell was included in the 2021 model, with the whole of the growth cell being included in the 2041 model; and

• The Ports of Auckland development at Horotiu was not specifically included, however 962 jobs, equating to some 28ha of industrial development at Northgate had been allowed for within WRTM.

In order to undertake the assessment for Te Awa Lakes Plan Change, allowance was made for 109ha of development at Northgate, including the Ports of Auckland site. Trip rates associated with this area of development were adopted at 14.1trips/ha in the AM peak and 15.0 trips/ha in the PM peak, as per the Northern Growth Corridor Study. The additional traffic associated with the completed Northgate / Ports of Auckland site has also been added to the 2021 and 2041 base, and the with development models.

Consent had previously been granted (within the site area) for 7ha of commercial /service centre use with a further 23ha of industrial use at the corner of Te Rapa Road and Hutchinson Road. The 7ha commercial/service centre site has since been substantially constructed. The 2021 and 2041 base models allow for 760 new jobs on the site which equates to 22ha of industrial development on the basis of the Northern Growth Corridor trip rates. Trips associated with the commercial aspects of the consent have therefore been identified based on the NZ Transport Agency Research Reports and supporting data sets, which allows identification of employees on a per site area basis. This enables conversion of trips/100sqm to employee numbers which has then been used within WRTM. The combined effect of consented development as included in the 2021 and 2041 base models is 839 trips (two way total) in the AM (two hour) peak period and 1,356 trips in the PM (two hour).

This level of trip making behaviour closely aligns with the consented level of effect in a prior BBO ITA27 for the area (i.e. 696vph/0.56 peak hour scaling factor = 1,243 trips over two hours).

At the time of the initial assessment, the HCC 2015 – 2025 10 Year Plan identified the expected infrastructure spend over the subsequent 10 years, with the 30-year strategy also being identified. This suggested that the major infrastructure identified in the Northern Growth Corridor Study is expected to be delivered within the next 20 years. However, for robustness, the effects of the proposed Plan Change have been assessed both with and without this infrastructure in place. No amendments were made to the WRTM model to allow for any lack of completion of the expected level of development.

27 BBO ITA November 2013, Section 5,3

72 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The 2021 WRTM base and with development analyses show that traffic demands along Te Rapa section of the Waikato Expressway (WEX) / SH1 are increased by up to 13%. However, the operation of the intersections along this route were assessed at generally Level of Service (LoS) A-C. Intersections with LoS below this only exhibit a 2% change as a result of the Te Awa Lakes Plan Change and therefore are outside the agreed LoS D and 5% change assessment thresholds.

At intersections along Te Rapa Road, other than at McKee Street, traffic demands may be up to 26% higher along the northern section of Te Rapa Road. Further south, in the vicinity of Wairere Drive and Pukete Road for instance, where network performance is at LoS D, the percentage effect of the proposed Plan Change is no more than 4%. Similarly, intersections along Great South Road (old SH1) north of WEX, changes in traffic demands arising from the proposed Plan Change are no more than 2%. This level of change is not material when considering model accuracy and daily variations in traffic demand. However, based on the initial consultation, the following intersections were assessed in order to address concerns raised by consultees:

• Fonterra on-ramps; and the

• Horotiu Interchange, and these assessments were carried through to the 2013 assessments as well.

At about the period following receipt of submissions on PPC2 the updated 2013 WRTM models became available for use. Further analyses, adopting the same prescribed methodology, were undertaken based on the updated 2013 model. The comprehensive modelling analysis results for the updated modelling are set out in the ITA, in place of the earlier modelling. These updated results are now relied on with respect to forward assessments.

The key findings mirrored the earlier results However the updated future growth forecasts and Government policy changes have resulted in minor changes to the recommendations. The strategic transport infrastructure recommendations and timing are set out in the Table at Section 7 of ITA. These recommended transport network infrastructure elements are generally summarised as follows:

• Te Rapa / McKee St signalisation at 2021;

• Consideration of the interaction between Te Rapa Road / Kapuni Street intersection with the McKee Street intersection at 2021;

• Te Rapa Road / Hutchinson Road intersection, further monitoring with land development plan applications beyond 500 households;

• Hutchinson Minor Arterial and Collector Road improvements, post 500 households; and

• Te Rapa Road, northbound lane monitoring from Fonterra interchange to Hutchinson Road, with land development plan applications beyond 500 households.

Further to the transport network for motor vehicle movement, a range of walking, cycling and public transport measures have been identified as necessary infrastructure responses. These are also detailed further in the Table at Section 7 of the ITA. The key elements can be summarised as follows:

• Te Rapa Road pedestrian crossing (potentially signalised) to bus stops;

73 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• Bus shelter west side of Te Rapa Road;

• Dedicated walking and separate off-road cycle facilities on Hutchinson Road with the Minor Arterial and Collector Road upgrades;

• Key and staged site walking/cycling permeability to Te Rapa Road, the Horotiu Interchange, WEX and the WEX shared path, and also the Te Awa River Trail;

• Significant enhancement of the Te Awa River Trail from the site south to Pukete Road including:

– CPTED improvement;

– Visibility improvements;

– Lighting;

– Surveillance; and

– Additional, new linkage locations; and

• Te Rapa Road targeted cycle safety improvements between Hutchinson Road and Church Road

On the basis of the assessments undertaken and with the recommended infrastructure responses described it is concluded that the proposed Plan Change supports the Transportation Objectives and Policies of the HCC HCDP. The plan change objectives, policies and rule requirements have included specific input from a traffic, transportation perspective, and subsequent to the initial proposal, now incorporate enhanced public transport, walking, cycling and alternative transport mode outcomes.

It has been concluded the transport infrastructure is able to be established in response to the demands generated, and with this, the plan change transport elements are appropriately provided for. Landscape and Visual Effects

The landscape and visual effects are described in the Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment by Boffa Miskell contained in Appendix 5. The report confirms that the character of the subject site is of generally low quality with low levels of amenity, highly modified by the quarrying. The site has also become significantly more exposed to the public with the construction of the Waikato Expressway adjacent to it.

Overall the proposed plan change will facilitate a moderate level of landscape change relative to the wider landscape around the site. In summary, the development will lead to:

• Up to a moderate to high beneficial effect upon the attractiveness, scenic values, interest and legibility of the northernmost entrance/gateway into Hamilton city – via the development of the site for largely residential purposes instead of industrial uses and from provisions which promote the retention of an open space corridor adjacent to the road corridor. • A moderate to high beneficial effect upon the recreational values of the site and the Waikato River corridor, including the Te Awa River Ride path, via the introduction of new

74 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

connections into the site, access to new amenities, improved natural surveillance and planting within the new esplanade reserve. • A moderate to high impact upon the character of the Waikato River, and north and east of the site more generally. The ultimate level and nature of this effect will depend on the final design/layout, and specific standards used within any residential development alongside the river. • A low, and largely benign, effect upon the wider character surrounding the site, to the west and south. The character of areas to the west and south of the site have a low susceptibility to the proposal, given either their existing urban and/or anticipated urban character.

The report also considers visual effects, which are the likely visual changes taking into account a range of specific assessment viewpoints around the site. These include people using the Waikato River, the Te Awa River Ride path and the path on the site’s western boundary. For these people the landscape impact is assessed as ‘moderate adverse’ or ‘low adverse’.

Residents of the properties on the eastern side of the river that have a view of the site will notice a considerable change to their outlook as a result of removal of the pine trees and opening up of views into the site. Based on the existing environment baseline comparison, this view can be considered in a positive manner because it will be into residential development rather than industrial uses. However, relative to the current screened appearance of the site, the effect will be moderately adverse.

For those people using the Expressway and the Horotiu interchange, which are elevated and overlook the site, the replacement of the existing quarry site with a master planned, largely residential development with a network of open space, the visual change will be moderate beneficial and moderate to high beneficial.

People with closer views of the site, from Hutchinson Road and Kernott Road will experience changes that are rated low to very low or benign.

Any site that changes from rural character to urban will exhibit significant visual and landscape change. However, the susceptibility of the wider area to change is based on its ability to accommodate the changes without undue effects on the overall character. This locality is already characterized by a sense of change from urbanisation as a result of the Northgate industrial park, the Expressway and plans for more residential development at Horotiu. This wider landscape has a low level of sensitivity to change.

In summary, the landscape and visual effects are generally low/benign to moderate. The exceptions are the moderate/high beneficial effects on elevated views from the Expressway and in relation to improved recreational values. The only moderate/high impact is on the character of the Waikato River corridor and to the north and east of the site, but the Landscape and Visual Assessment report qualifies this by saying the impact will depend on final design and layout.

In terms of layout the proposed Framework Plan28 has been developed so that the proposed land uses will integrate within the wider landscape, and with the provision of an appropriate level of amenity for its future residents, visitors and workers. The Framework Plan has also been designed with particular regard to the site’s primary amenity and its most sensitive

28 Refer Appendix 1 – Figure 20

75 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

interface; the eastern boundary to the Waikato River. More specifically, the proposed Riverside Interface Overlay provisions will ensure a low density of residential development and an appropriate interface with the river, the Te Awa River Ride and the rural residential properties to the east.

The report addresses the potential for adverse visual and landscape reverse sensitivity effects. These could include the visibility of large industrial buildings having a negative effect on the character of the Te Awa Lakes residential area. It concludes that these potential effects will be avoided by the layout of the zones with the Business zone on Hutchinson Road largely forming a buffer and filter for the main residential areas. As a result no significant visual or landscape reverse sensitivity effects are identified.

Overall, it is considered that the land uses proposed can be appropriately integrated into the existing visual landscape and will give rise to a range of potentially beneficial landscape and visual amenity effects, particularly when considered in comparison to the existing state of the site or the future industrial potential of the site. Similarly, an appropriate rule framework is proposed in the amended ODP provisions to ensure that where necessary visual and landscape effects are addressed.

Economic Effects

The initial Assessment of Economic Effects, in Appendix 6, by RCG deals with economic effects under four topics, being industrial land availability, housing supply and demand, tourism in the Waikato and retail demand. The key points from each of these sections are summarised below.

The Industrial Market

The report concludes that the industrial land supply-demand balance is very healthy, both now and into the future. This is quite different to the situation in the mid 2000’s when there was an undersupply. The actions by Future Proof and its partners have rectified that situation. However, there is now the potential of an oversupply.

Specifically, the rate of uptake is between 16-18ha per year for the sub region. This is significantly lower than the figures now contained in the RPS that provide for 1148ha of land, and thus a rate of 23ha per year.

Furthermore, the Horotiu and Te Rapa North nodes need to be considered together as they are adjacent to one another and share many of the same characteristics. Horotiu has a much larger share of potential land. As a result, industrial development in Te Awa Lakes site would be likely to have a slow uptake as it does not have some of the same attractions that the Northgate site has (i.e. proximity to rail, proximity of Ports of Auckland development and existing infrastructure/roading developed). Industrial development at the site could reduce the speed of uptake in other areas, such as Te Rapa Gateway and Ruakura as well.

Therefore the 25ha zoned industrial land proposed to be reallocated to other uses is not needed to meet industrial land demand. There is ‘sufficient’ zoned land in the node without the 25 ha being needed. This satisfies one of the RPS alternative land release criteria.

Housing

Housing, by contrast with industrial, is experiencing high demand and supply is under pressure. Marginal (population based) demand is running ahead of consented supply. The Housing

76 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Accord sets targets to grow the number of sections and dwelling consents even further, as discussed earlier in this report. The report also concludes that economic arguments for housing at the site can be summarised as follows:

• “The area is currently zoned for industrial (with much of its deferred), but as per our analysis elsewhere Te Awa Lakes is not required for these purposes; overall industrial demand/supply is not stretched, and our view is that Te Awa Lakes does not offer particular strategic advantages for industrial. • Hamilton is facing a housing shortage and will need to provide for increased supply in the years to come to mitigate this. • Te Awa Lakes can offer a high level of residential amenity. It is adjacent to the Waikato River and residents will be part of an attractive mixed-use community which includes distinctive tourism and adventure activity. The location adjoining the river is advantageous for residential, and adds value to that activity, whereas it would not have the same effects for industrial uses. Te Awa Lakes is also one of two remaining riverside locations in Hamilton which can offer these advantages (the other being the Peacocke growth node – riverfront locations in Flagstaff are now almost all spoken for). • Intensification should be encouraged in Hamilton, but like all cities it will need to be provide a balance of ‘growing up and out’. • I understand that Te Awa Lakes is already bulk serviced, and as such it will be relatively straightforward to bring onstream, helping competition in the housing supply market.”29

The Adventure Park and Accommodation

The adventure park and associated tourist accommodation are assessed as leading to at least 20,000 extra international visitor nights in Hamilton and $3.7 million extra spending. Total visitor numbers are predicted to be 190,000 guest nights per year based on the 400 accommodation units and a slightly higher volume of guests per night because of the targeted market being families and leisure travellers. This could lead to a yield of $34.2 million in spending, although not all this spending is new to the region and is therefore not a complete economic figure. It is solely a conservative estimate of how much accommodation guests could spend in the Waikato region. That being said, the new increase is still likely to be significant. This is an economic benefit that only arises if this type of development is established on a suitable site such as this.

The adventure park will be a key anchor enabling establishment of other tourism-related activity such as visitor accommodation, food and beverage and related services. These will help to support the main activity of the adventure park. Most of Hamilton’s accommodation is in or close to the city centre and it is expected to be where most of the future accommodation will be, supporting the city centre’s position at the top of the commercial hierarchy. The accommodation offer at Te Awa Lakes is likely to be different to what would be realistically provided in the city centre; being low-rise resort style rather than the more intensive multi- storey building.

The report concludes by stating that the net effects of the adventure park are positive.

Retail

Local retail services will be needed to service the requirements of the additional 800-1,000 potential households plus visitors to Te Awa Lakes. To provide for this the report proposes that

29 Assessment of Economic Effects, RCG, in Appendix 6

77 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

a neighbourhood centre, capped at 2,500m2 GFA retail and with individual shops limited to 150m2 GFA or less per tenancy to align with the current Business 6 Zone rule framework.

The report concludes by stating that this level of retail provision is unlikely to have an impact on other commercial centres and is in line with likely demand for convenience retail, food and beverage and associated uses at Te Awa Lakes.

Following the receipt of submissions in 2017 further economic analysis has been commissioned. The first analysis was undertaken by Castalia Strategic Advisors who provided a high level qualitative strategic response to the BERL report, which had been commissioned by the Future Proof partners. The Castalia report is Appendix 21.

The Castalia report included an economic evaluation of PPC2 against the status quo industrial zoning, and concluded that PPC2 clearly outperforms the status quo industrial zoning due to:

• earlier delivery, due in part to the site specific geotechnical constraints being addressed comprehensively

• higher value mixed development compared to idle land or low value industrial

• significantly lower uncertainty as PPC 2 reduces the whole site’s reliance on future RPS / Future Proof decisions over land allocation

In addition Market Economics were engaged to undertake as economic assessment taking into account the Housing and Business Capacity Assessments that have been completed since PPC 2 was notified. The Market Economics report is included in Appendix 20.

The Report assessed the full 62ha of PPC 2 against the Business Capacity assessment and concluded that a surplus of industrial land capacity would still exist even if the site was removed. In addition, it noted that the actual surplus is likely to be much larger due to the conservative nature of the NPS-UDC modelling. As a result, the Future Proof area will still be able to meet future industrial demands in the long term, including in the locality.

PPC would also provide additional residential capacity in northern Hamilton. While there is already considerable residential capacity in the northern Hamilton- southern Waikato District area it includes a large amount of Country Living zoned land which has a specific market. PPC 2 would likely provide for a wider range of dwelling types and price points to meet community needs.

The report also notes that the planning and development context for PPC 2 is evolving quite rapidly. This is especially because the H2A Corridor initiative is now a formal partnership between Government, iwi, councils and the private sector. That initiative is likely to see greater growth emphasis on the Corridor, with transport links as a catalyst for development, including the Waikato River as an axis.

They also refer to the Waikato District Plan review notified in October 2018 which is likely to see changes in the adjacent Horotiu Industrial Node, including the potential for the industrial zoning to be increased through submissions on the Plan. Overall, the conclusion from this assessment is that PPC 2 would not be inconsistent with the Future Proof growth strategy, and would be in line with the objectives of the H2A Corridor initiative.

78 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Noise Effects

The noise effects are described and assessed in the report by Marshall Day Acoustics assessment in Appendix 7. The report considers the noise effects of the development, both in terms of effects on land outside the proposed zones and effects on other receivers within the zones. It also assesses the effects of sound emissions from outside the site such as that received from the Expressway, the Te Rapa North Industrial Zone and Fonterra operations to address the potential reverse sensitivity effects of those activities on the proposed land uses.

The proposed new zones for Te Awa Lakes will be subject to the existing Waikato District30 and Hamilton City noise rules outside the development site. The types of activities expected in the proposed zones would typically have little problem complying with these limits and as such highlights a compatibility regarding existing and proposed receiver sites. It is also important to recognise that the underlying zoning for the site provided for the establishment of industrial activities and as such a higher ambient noise environment to some external receivers may have been experienced.

In order to achieve land use compatibility regarding existing and proposed receivers the noise assessment recommends zone specific noise performance standards for the proposed zones (except the Natural Open Space Zone). The majority of these noise standards are those in the existing noise rule framework, with minor amendments, as recommended in the Malcolm Hunt Associates peer review. The proposed performance standards are considered to be appropriate and consistent with other similar Hamilton City areas and will provide general protection against the adverse effects of noise.

The noise rules specifically address the reverse sensitivity effects of noise from the Expressway and potential noise generated within the Business 6 zone as a result of its mixed use character. They require appropriate acoustic treatment of sensitive land uses (principally dwellings) as the main method of addressing reverse sensitivity noise effects with such treatment required within 100m of the Expressway, consistent with rules elsewhere in the ODP. These rules are based on noise effects that can be predicted based on the existing and proposed land uses, but they will also assist in mitigating the possible future (undefined) effects of additional industrial development in the node.

With the recommended noise performance standards, the various noise effects of the proposed land uses are considered to be negligible to minor.

Geotechnical Effects

The Geotechnical Summary Report by CMW Geosciences at Appendix 8 is a descriptive report outlining the constraints and opportunities of the site in terms of the proposed plan change. Its purpose is to confirm the broad suitability of the site for the activities provided for in this plan change.

In that respect, it confirms that the site has some geotechnical constraints for any development as a result of its past quarrying use and particularly the extensive uncontrolled fill and likely

30 The Waikato District Plan rule referred to sets the baseline as what level of noise can be made at that zone boundary i.e. what is the receiving noise level that is appropriate within the Waikato District land.

79 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

pockets of organic material. This leads to total and differential ground settlement which has adverse effects on buildings, road pavements and underground infrastructure. The widely variable uncontrolled fill also limits its suitability as a source for structural fill.

Although these are constraints, small lightweight residential buildings with stiff raft foundations are typically better suited to the situation where uncontrolled filling remains in place, compared to large industrial building footprints. With large industrial buildings, the risk of differential settlement is exacerbated by the larger floor areas. Industrial buildings have heavy and unevenly distributed live floor loads, compared to residential buildings. Overall these site conditions indicate a more effective management of risk and more cost-effective development with residential, recreational and commercial use than for industrial use.

Further site investigations and laboratory testing have been carried out in 2018 to provide greater certainty of ground conditions. In conclusion, the report confirms that the site is suitable for the proposed level of development and that further targeted site investigation, laboratory testing and geotechnical deign will be necessary as part of the earthworks design to address geohazards’ relative to the site and the proposed development as part of the future consenting processes.

Ecological Effects

The Assessment of Ecological Effects by Kessels Ecology is included in Appendix 9 and reports on the ecological features of the site and associated receiving environment. The purpose of the report was to outline the baseline ecological conditions of the site and assess the potential ecological effects of the proposed land use. That assessment makes the following conclusions in relation to ecological values:

• Due to historic quarrying activities, the site is situated in a highly modified agricultural and industrial landscape, with no intact original indigenous vegetation communities or indigenous fauna.

• The pine trees that separate the site from the Waikato River will be removed to facilitate the development. No bats or lizards were detected in this area of pines during monitoring, though it is possible these may be present.

• The northern two-thirds of the site are currently used by a sand quarry operation that is in the process of disestablishing, while the southern third contains a service centre and grazed pasture.

• On site is a gully containing ponds that receive stormwater inputs from the quarry and feed an unnamed natural tributary of the Waikato River. The stream provides habitat for native freshwater biota, including the nationally ‘At Risk’ inanga (a type of whitebait) in its lower reaches.

Based on the existing ecological conditions of the environment, the report confirms that through careful design and construction will avoid most of the potential adverse effects on the ecological values and indigenous wildlife. As such a number of specific avoidance, remediation, mitigation and monitoring measure will be required to be undertaken during the development to ensure that adverse ecological effects associated with the development are minimised as far as practicable.

80 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Such measures will need to be implemented at the time of physical development works. The proposed amendments to the ODP provisions reflect this by requiring an Ecological Rehabilitation Mitigation Plan to be prepared as part of the Land Development Plans for the site31.

In conclusion, the site has limited ecological values. The ecological assessment identifies opportunities for habitat enhancement and wetland restoration through the creation of the lake and associated wetlands together with restoration planting.

Archaeological Effects

An assessment of the archaeological features and values on the site and within proximity of the site has been undertaken by Dr Caroline Phillips (Appendix 10) to inform the Te Awa Lakes development and any requirements under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act.

Based on investigations of historical records and other archaeological investigations in the locality it is known that the general area was extensively used by Maori, with the naturally level ground and soil types in the subject property being suitable for gardening, kumara storage pits and general occupation. The steep sided streams would also have provided resources such as eels and flax.

There are two known and recorded archaeological sites in the subject area, as follows:

• S14/164 – borrow pits and garden site • S14/284 – middens/umu

Most parts of S14/164 within the site have been effectively destroyed by the historical quarrying and the construction of the Expressway. The majority of S14/284 lies on a low river terrace and the site has been partially damaged by the Te Awa cycleway and pine plantation. The proposed earthworks, involving recontouring of the site for the proposed land uses will damage and destroy the remains of both sites.

On that basis, the report recommends an investigation strategy for two small parts of site S14/164 that are undisturbed by quarrying activity. Pine tree removal from site S14/284 will be undertaken in a manner that will not affect the archaeological evidence, after which the site on the riverbank will be able to be included in the proposed esplanade reserve and therefore will be able to be protected from disturbance. The access points for pedestrians and cyclists will be designed to avoid this site.

Archaeological sites are subject to the requirements of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2013 which requires an archaeological authority to be approved by Heritage New Zealand prior to disturbing any known archaeological site. Perry’s will be applying for an authority to modify S14/164 and remove the pine trees from S14/284 prior to development taking place. As recommended in the Archaeological Assessment an archaeological investigation will be carried out prior to development to ensure any archaeological evidence is identified and recorded or protected.

Given the opportunity to preserve site S14/284 by containing it in the esplanade reserve, it is proposed to provide additional protection by scheduling it in ‘Schedule 8B Group 1 Archaeological and Cultural Sites’ in the ODP. This scheduling means the site will be identified

31 Rule 1.2.2.28, Information Requirements, in Schedule One

81 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

on the Planning Maps and will be subject to planning rules in the ODP. The rules require that any earthworks and any installation of signs on the site require a restricted discretionary activity consent (Rules 19.3(w) and (x)). These rules would be additional to the protection afforded by the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2013.

In addition once the esplanade reserve is vested site S14/284 will fall under the jurisdiction of HCC in accordance with its Riverside Reserves Management Plan (July 2008) which is a Management Plan prepared under the Reserves Act 1977. It includes a ‘Cultural Values’ section with policies requiring reserve land boundaries to be extended where necessary to include culturally significant sites and for park development to be sensitive to such sites32.

Overall these sites have archaeological values, despite the historical effects of sand quarrying and road construction. The effects will be adequately mitigated by the proposed archaeological investigation and Heritage NZ authority process and by the proposed preservation of site S14/284 as a result of its inclusion in the riverside esplanade reserve.

Contamination Effects

The Environmental Site Investigation (ESI) by Coffey in Appendix 11 confirms that contamination concentrations in excess of background levels for the proposed land uses were detected in some isolated areas. Therefore the requirements of the NES Contamination legislation are applicable for the change of land use and any future soil disturbance above the NES Contamination.

This will require an application for restricted discretionary consent to be granted by HCC under regulation 10 of the NES Contamination. Such an application will be sought once the proposed extend of earthworks and finished levels has been confirmed and will include a Remedial Action Plan (“RAP”).

The RAP will set out the management and monitoring requirement (if required) to be implemented during disturbance of soils at the site, in order to mitigate potential adverse effects to human health and the environment.

Cultural Effects

Consultation with the Tangata Whenua Working Group (TWWG) as described in section 6.6 indicated that the site and its surrounds held cultural values. The area has an extensive pre- european Maaori history, including traditional occupation of the land that was fought over and shared by a number of different hapuu over time. The whakapapa/traditional history of the area (while not exclusive), connects Ngaati Wairere, Ngati Tamainupo, Ngaati Haua, Ngati Maahanga and Ngati Mahuta (Turangawaewae Marae)33.

In order to formalise and record the cultural effects and the mitigation measures that were identified by the TWWG a Cultural Impact Assessment was prepared by Boffa Miskell, based on the engagement undertaken with the TWWG and research documentation from primary and secondary sources, including other cultural assessments undertaken for major developments in the Waikato. The Cultural Impact Assessment is included in Appendix 15.

32 Hamilton City Council, Riverside Reserves Operative Management Plan (2008), p28 33 Cultural Impact Assessment by Boffa Miskell, in Appendix 15, page 8.

82 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The Cultural Impact Assessment includes at chapter 13.0 a series of mitigation recommendations which were developed through TWWG meetings, including Perrys, and are all agreed in principle. Specific comments on the recommendations are as follows.

Recommendation 1: The Tangata Whenua Working Group continue to work in good faith with Perry Group on partnership outcomes of Te Awa Lakes Developmen throughout before and during construction.

Comment: Perrys have established an ongoing relationship with the TWWG and are committed to continuing to work with them through the planning and construction phases of the project.

Recommendation 2: Ensure that the future resource consent applications provide an appropriate summary of the engagement undertaken with TWWG as well as the issues (and potential remedies) identified in this cultural impact assessment.

Comment: In accordance with recommendation 1 above all future resource consent applications will include a summary of engagement with the TWWG and will address issues from the cultural impact assessment that are relevant to the particular resource consent application.

Recommendation 3: To reaffirm ‘whakapapa’ the traditional cultural story/cultural narrative to support the cultural indigenous place-making throughout the Te Awa Lakes Development The focus on opportunities to recognise and provide for the enhancement and tangible reflection of mana whenua cultural values as a key element of land management and developments, including but not limited to:

• Using traditional mana whenua names for street and neighbourhood names

• Use of indigenous plant species in riparian restoration, as street trees, in open space and reserves;

• Landscaping design that reflects cultural perspectives, ideas and materials, contemporary Maaori culture in building design, artwork and furniture in public open space;

• Inclusion of interpretation materials, communicating the history and significance of places, resources and

• Use of taangata whenua inspired and designed artwork and structures

• Appropriate karakia or other cultural protocols to be implemented when appropriate

Comment: Perrys are committed to incorporating the cultural narrative in the form of indigenous place marking into the development. The appropriate stage for that to occur will be at the design stage and ongoing engagement with the TWWG will provide the opportunity for review of designs and input to them. One of the information requirements for LDP’s is to provide landscape design and species that have a cultural perspective and to include an indigenous landscape plan34. Perrys have committed to supporting appropriate karakia or other cultural protocols.

Recommendation 4: Protect the archaeological site adjacent to the Waikato River by including it in the proposed esplanade reserve. This includes implementation of accidental discovery

34 Rule 1.2.2.28 j) in Schedule One.

83 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

protocols (ADP) whereby in the event of a discovery or archaeological material, earthworks will stop and appropriate iwi and NZ Heritage advice will be sought and appropriate actions followed. That any contractors involved in earthworks be given appropriate guidance on the ADP (via cultural health and safety induction) by a designated TWWG representative and that agreement to this is duly noted.

Comment: This recommendation has been implemented in part by including site S14/284 in Schedule 8B, ‘Group 1 Archaeological and Cultural Sites’ of the ODP as described in section 5.9. This will be supplemented by the Archaeological Authority that will be obtained.

Recommendation 5: Best practice storm water management methods will be followed including:

• Upgrading the existing storm water outlet to reduce erosion risk, and enhance fish spawning habitat, such as inanga.

• Treating storm water close to source, using native plant species

• Ongoing monitoring and maintenance of storm water treatment and control according to regulatory requirements.

Comment: Best practice stormwater management methods are included in the Stormwater Management Plan that forms part of the subcatchment ICMP at Appendix 3.

Recommendation 6: Water take and water allocation applications be reviewed by TWWG to ensure efficient use and management of the resource

Comment: No water take or water allocations are currently envisaged but if they are proposed in the future the TWWG will be consulted.

Recommendation 7: Water sensitive designs are included within the development to mimic natural systems including riparian restoration of the natural stream that flows through the site

Comment: Water sensitive design concepts are included in the subcatchment ICMP at Appendix 3.

Recommendation 8: To protect waipuna/freshwater springs that may be discovered during construction of the development by employing appropriate measures to be considered in conjunction with TWWG

Comment: This is a matter for detailed design that will be addressed as part of individual resource consents as development takes place.

Recommendation 9: That further consideration be given to the possibility of including rainwater tanks, greywater systems, vegetated swales, rain gardens, wetlands and/or reduced impervious surfaces within the development and within street and reserve design.

Comment: Although this is also a matter for detailed design, the subcatchment ICMP at Appendix 3 and the HCC Infrastructure Technical Standard support these matters.

Recommendation 10: That a subdivision design guideline be developed to require and/or encourage the incorporation of innovative low impact urban design by future development, including rainwater collection, landscaping, low energy/water fittings, insulation and solar or alternative energy sources/systems, as well as solar hot water system.

84 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Comment: While a number of low impact urban design (LIUD) initatives are recommended in the subcatchment ICMP, Perrys will explore further initiatives that may be able to be implemented through their own internal design review processes.

Recommendation 11: That focused protection, re-instatement and/or enhancement of indigenous biodiversity as a key element of all land use, management and development. That an Indigenous Landscape Plan is developed in conjunction with TWWG to include valued food gathering species or those that support habitat for mahinga kai species for both reserves and roads/streets. Consideration should be given to wider biodiversity gains for native birds, bats, insects and also lizards by providing specific habitat for these species including:

• Translocation of fish where required and provision of enhance access and habitat for native fish

• Eco-sourcing of plants from within the Waikato basin and ensuring species that reflect history of the area

• An internal lake will be formed based on the cut and fill balance, which will provide for amenity value with connection to the Te Awa cycle way and other development along the river.

• Revegetation and re-establishment of riparian margins with indigenous plants for land cover and the creation of indigenous habitat

• Development of reserve areas, integrated storm water ponds, green corridors and open space to provide buffer zones between the development and the commercial and residential areas

• Integration of the landscaping into the Te Awa Cycle/walkways and the esplanade reserve, taking into account corridor for native bats.

• Develop and restore indigenous riparian, forest, grassland and wetland habitats

• Support cultural harvest and long-term utilisation of natural resources.

Comment: The different elements of this recommendation will be addressed through subsequent design and resource consents and in particular through:

a) The Ecological Rehabilitation Management Plan (ERMP) required by Rule 1.2.2.28 k).

b) The specific ecological rehabilitation plan to restore and enhance the unnamed tributary required by Rule 1.2.2.28 k) x).

c) The landscape concept plan required by Rule 1.2.2.28 j).

85 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Reverse Sensitivity Effects

Concerns about reverse sensitivity have been raised through consultation and by several submitters on PPC2. They include Fonterra, Ports of Auckland, Contact Energy, AFFCO and Open Country Dairy. They are all industries operating in the Te Rapa North/Horotiu locality. However AFFCO and Open Country Dairy are some 1.8km to the west of Te Awa Lakes and separated by the Expressway and intervening topography meaning as set out in the Landscape Assessment at Appendix 5, they would not be visible from the site and therefore there would be no reverse sensitivity visual effect. Both industries operate with environmental constraints to internalise their environmental effects as set out in their resource consents.

Ports of Auckland’s Waikato Freight Hub (WFH) is also to the west of Te Awa Lakes but is separated by the Waikato expressway, Great South Road, other industrial zoned land and Country Living zoned land In Waikato District. WFH also operates under its own resource consent including noise conditions. Reverse sensitivity noise effects will not arise because the WFH noise emissions received at Te Awa Lakes site will be suitably low, any change in road and rail freight sound levels will be imperceptibly low and all Te Awa Lakes dwellings within 100m of the Expressway will be acoustically treated to the same standard as applies in the ‘Amenity Overlay’ in Waikato District.

Fonterra also operates under its resource consent conditions that largely internalise its environmental effects. The exception is noise as the ODP includes a ‘Noise Emission Boundary’ that extends beyond the site. However, Te Awa Lakes is 150m outside that boundary. PPC2 includes several provisions to address potential reverse sensitivity effects from Fonterra as described in paragraph 5.12.18 below.

Reverse sensitivity as a concept does not originate directly from the provisions of the RMA, however it has become a well-recognised term in resource management practice and law, becoming the label for a particular kind of effect when incompatible land uses are at question. Reverse sensitivity was first defined in Auckland Regional Council v Auckland City Council (1997) 3ELRNZ54;

“The term “reverse sensitivity” is used to refer to the effects of the existence of sensitive activities on other activities in their vicinity, particularly by leading to restraints in the carrying on of those activities.”

Reverse sensitivity has the potential to arise in situations such as PPC2, where a sensitive development (residential dwellings) proposes to locate near existing industrial activities. In this case, consideration also needs to be given to the land that may not yet be developed but is zoned Industrial, or where unimplemented resource consents for industrial activities may exist.

The general presumption in the RMA is that in the first instance environmental effects of an activity should be internalized within its boundaries, and that is the case for the industries referred to above. If this cannot be achieved other avoidance, mitigation or remediation measures are then considered where necessary to manage reverse sensitivity.

The Environment Court has expressed concern that the reverse sensitivity principle could have the effect of creating a ‘buffer zone’ around industrial activities to protect them and authorise

86 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

adverse effects beyond their boundaries, or that reverse sensitivity effects should necessarily be avoided by methods of constraining new sensitive activities35.

In these circumstances the legitimate rights of both activities must be considered, causing tension between the right of one property owner to continue operating an activity as is and another to develop their land as they wish to enjoy their property without unreasonable interference or experiencing adverse effects from nearby land uses. A balance must be found between the conflicting interests.

A concern has been raised in submissions that reverse sensitivity could become a ‘cumulative effect’. The definition of ‘effect’ in the RMA includes:

‘(d) Any cumulative effect which arises over time and in combination with other effects’

A cumulative effect is an effect that is predictable and certain if a particular pattern is established. It can also be an ‘additive’ effect. For example, a series of intermittent repeated odour discharges over time, that increased the overall effect would be a cumulative effect. Similarly, if an existing activity had a minor effect, and a proposed activity also had a minor effect, but if they were added together they would be more than minor; that would be a cumulative effect.

The issue that arises in this case is whether the concept of cumulative effects should be applied where the adverse effect is a potential future effect. There is substantial vacant land in the vicinity, but in Te Rapa North there is only 30ha of land zoned for industrial development (excluding the TAL site). Therefore, any other land in Te Rapa North would need to be rezoned Industrial through a plan change or following a District Plan review. If all of the vacant land was rezoned and developed for industrial use, would that amount to a cumulative effect? Based on the principle that a cumulative effect needs to be a predictable and actual or ‘additive’ effect the answer would be no. Several major assumptions need to be made before any actual adverse effect that could have reverse sensitivity implications would be apparent, as follows;

• the land would need to be converted to industrial use. The land would need to be rezoned by way of a plan change or District Plan review. This is a Schedule 2 RMA process involving many factors designed to ensure that the most appropriate land use for the circumstances eventuates. There is a large industrial land resource of about 414ha in the locality and much of this land is remote from the Te Awa Lakes site. Therefore, there is no certainty that these sites will result in industrial use, if so what type of industrial use will eventuate, and how far away from Te Awa Lakes they would be.

• even if the land was developed for industrial use there is no certainty that the activities would have adverse effects that would lead to reverse sensitivity concerns. They could be light industrial activities that are commonly found in urban areas close to residential activities, or other large well-managed and benign industries.

• any reverse sensitivity effects that resulted from the above would then need to be ‘additive’ effects or effects over time that could be predicted to be sufficient to be of concern.

35 For example, AFFCO NZ Ltd v Waikato DC (1998) A036/98, p8, Winstone Aggregates v Matamata-Piako DC (2205) 11 ELRNZ48

87 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Therefore, it is not possible to predict any reverse sensitivity effects on future unknown industrial activities, and as result there cannot be reasonably argued that there is any cumulative effect that should be considered. Based on a scenario of incremental industrial development as a result of future plan changes and resource consents, together with the 30ha of permitted industrial development, the effect would be categorized as a potential future reverse sensitivity effect. However, this effect would be of a very low probability because future development of currently deferred industrial land would take place in the knowledge of TAL and would be rezoned and developed with that in mind. As there is 240ha of land in the Te Rapa North industrial area plus another 150ha of industrial land in Horotiu adjacent to it to the north, there are extensive choices for large industries with potential effects beyond their boundaries to locate distant from TAL. That is likely to lead to light industrial or other compatible activities on the one boundary close to Te Awa Lakes (Hutchinson Road). The other two boundaries are already zoned Country Living and Residential.

For the same reason the future effects would also be of low impact because there is only one relatively short adjoining industrial boundary and TAL is designed with the least sensitive (commercial) activities along that boundary, adjacent to Hutchinson Road.

There are some potential reverse sensitivity effects that are acknowledged in PPC2. Reverse sensitivity effects from traffic noise on the Waikato Expressway are able to be mitigated so they are no more than minor through a combination of subdivision design, building setbacks and acoustic treatment of dwellings. The juxtaposition of some residential development and arterial roads is unavoidable in cities and the mitigation approaches adopted in PPC2 are widely used in planning provisions, including elsewhere in Hamilton.

There is no evidence of current resident complaints about major industries in the area, such as Fonterra and Affco, who appear to be managing their activities well in relation to their neighbours. The Odour Assessment by Pattle Delamore Partners at Appendix 17 confirms that the separation distances from the Fonterra Dairy Factory odour sources and the Affco Plant at 500m and 1,800m respectively are consistent with accepted practice and are appropriate. Similarly, the lighting assessment by LDP Ltd in Appendix 16 found that there are no existing reverse sensitivity effects from lighting and glare, and future development can be readily and cost effectively designed to meet acceptable standards without any onerous conditions. Some of the existing neighbours are closer to the activities than Te Awa Lakes will be; for example residents across the Waikato River are only about 200m form the Fonterra Dairy Factory site and Affco is about 250m from houses in the residential zone in Horotiu.

In addition there are some specific features of the Te Awa Lakes site that reduce the potential for reverse sensitivity effect. The triangular shape of the site means that it is bounded on the three sides as follows:

• to the east a boundary of 1.1km with the Waikato River, with rural residential development across the river

• to the west a boundary of 1.3km with the Waikato Expressway and Te Rapa Road, with residential (proposed) zoning across the Expressway in Waikato District

• to the south a boundary of 650m with Hutchinson Road. Land to the south of Hutchinson Road is zoned Te Rapa North Industrial (Deferred Industrial) and over half of it is owned by Perry’s so they can control its future use. Approximately 325m south is the Te Rapa Dairy Manufacturing site containing the Fonterra Dairy Factory.

88 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The boundaries created by the Waikato River and the arterial roads are key strengths of the site that reduce the potential for reverse sensitivity effects. There are no such effects on the eastern side of the site as the proposed residential development is consistent with the existing rural residential development across the river. The traffic noise effects of arterial roads are predictable and well understood. They are commonly addressed in urban areas through a combination of building setbacks, screening and acoustic treatment of houses. In Hamilton the rules relating to the Expressway have already set an acceptable benchmark in residential areas. Adopting the same approach and rules for Te Awa Lakes is logical and represents an acceptable method of controlling reverse sensitivity effects to traffic noise. As set out in the Acoustic Report in Appendix 7, Expressway noise is also likely to be the controlling factor in terms of all noise, meaning industrial noise is unlikely to require treatment.

Recognising the potential for reverse sensitivity PPC2 includes rules that:

• require acoustic treatment of all dwelling within 100m of the Expressway.

• include design criteria to direct outdoor living areas of dwelling within 200m of the Expressway to be orientated away from the Expressway.

• require no dwellings to be constructed within 25m of Hutchinson Rd. This equates to a 350m separation distance from the Fonterra Dairy Manufacturing Plant boundary, as recommended in the Pattle Delamore Partners Odour Assessment in Appendix 17.

• include design criteria to avoid any main living area outlook from dwellings within 100m of Hutchinson Rd being orientated to the south (ie towards the Fonterra Dairy Manufacturing site).

Therefore, given the above factors, reverse sensitivity effects on existing industries are low and future broader effects are of a low probability. Overall, they are not a significant effect that should outweigh others. Biosecurity Effects

The presence of alligator weeds on the site was recorded in the PPC 2 documents in 2017. Alligator weed is the most difficult pest plant to control in the Waikato Region and is among New Zealand’s worst weeds. Alligator weed management is addressed in the report in Appendix 23.

Under WRC’s Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan (‘RPMP’) alligator weed is classified as ‘progressive containment pest plant’ meaning that the intermediate outcome is to stop its spread, reduce its density and geographic distribution where possible. The long term goal is eradication from the region. The RPMP is administered by WRC and WRC is responsible for alligator weed region – wide management and control as it is difficult to identify and control.

A ‘Restricted Place Notice’ under the Biosecurity Act has been in place on the site since 2004 and was revised in July 2018. Where subdivision or development of weed infested sites take place a Weed Hygiene Plan (WHP) is required under the provision of the RPMP. While Te Awa Lakes was not at the development stage Perrys agreed with WRC in 2018 to put in place a WHP to cover the various investigation activities that have been taking place.

The report in Appendix 23 sets out how alligator weed will continue to be controlled on the site in collaboration with WRC staff. It also outlines the intent to eradicate the weed from the site

89 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

through deep burial as part of the earthworks and site remediation process. This is a unique opportunity to achieve eradication that would be unlikely to arise if the site was not developed.

A key concern of WRC is the potential for residual alligator weed infestations to remain if eradication is not successful, and the consequent need to deal with up to 1000 individual owners instead of the current single owner. With the comprehensive eradication programme to be undertaken during the earthworks phase it is expected at the very least the extent of infestation will be significantly reduced, so it is unlikely to affect all properties. However, some contingency planning is required. If necessary the ownership entities described elsewhere in this report will be take long term responsibility for the issue.

As pest plant management is not within the jurisdiction of HCC, rules directing management of alligator wees are not possible. However, HCC has wider biodiversity obligations and as alligator weed is an ecological threat PPC2 creates an opportunity for an integrated approach to its management. As a result, plan change rules are proposed that require an alligator weed management plan to be prepared and implemented, and cross – referenced to WRC biosecurity responsibilities. Positive Effects

The plan change will have a number of positive effects, some more difficult to quantify than others, such as improved public perception through a visibly unique City gateway and enhanced recreation amenities.

The Landscape and Visual Assessment Report in Appendix 5 identifies that the change to a predominantly fine grained residential development with a strong open space network would have a moderate to high positive effect on scenic values and the legibility and interest of the northern entrance into Hamilton.

There are also positive effects associated with the enhanced recreational use of the Waikato River, the Te Awa River Ride and the site itself36.

The more quantifiable positive effects include the adventure park and associated visitor accommodation economic benefits which will enable further employment and economic growth. These are conservatively estimated at $3.7m per year in extra spending37.A broad range of entertainment and recreational options in the locality provides a social benefit for the local and visitor community.

There are also positive economic and social effects associated with increasing the potential housing supply in Hamilton to assist in addressing the shortfall identified in the Hamilton Housing Accord and as described in the economic assessment.

Summary of Environmental Effects

The adverse environmental effects of the plan change are minor to moderate. They include moderate traffic effects on one or two intersections on Te Rapa Road. However, those effects will be mitigated through a range of transport infrastructure upgrades and enhancements.

36 Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment, Boffa Miskell, in Appendix 5, p25 37 Assessment of Economic Effects, RCG, in Appendix 6, p38

90 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Adverse visual and landscape effects are confined to those to the north and east of the site, particularly the properties across the River to the east, where effects are moderate to high due to the significant change as a result of the urbanisation of the land and removal of the pine trees along the eastern edge of the site. The extent of impact will depend on final design of the river edge but is mitigated by the proposed low density lots and 8m building heights along that edge. Any urbanisation of the site would have similar effects, but in principle finer grained residential development is expected to have lower adverse effects than an alternative of industrial development.

The reallocation of the land from industrial to residential recreation and commercial has also not been found to give rise to any adverse economic effects due to the sufficiency of industrial land supply and demand for residential land. Similarly, there are no perceived retail leakage effects due to the GFA constraints proposed for the Business Zone. The visitor accommodation component has also been found to be appropriate as it is directly attributed to and will support the adventure park.

There are some potential reverse sensitivity effects although these have been dealt with through design and planning rules. Reverse sensitivity effects from traffic noise on the Waikato Expressway are able to be mitigated so they are no more than minor through a combination of subdivision design, building setbacks and acoustic treatment of dwellings. The juxtaposition of some residential development with arterial roads is unavoidable in cities and the mitigation approaches adopted in this plan change are widely used in planning provisions, including elsewhere in Hamilton.

Potential future reverse sensitivity effects could arise if new development occurred in the Re Rapa North Industrial Zone or if existing activities expanded. However, given the overall zoned area is some 245ha, and the Te Awa Lakes site is largely separated from other zoned land by the Expressway and River, there are good options for managing any reverse sensitivity effects through land use buffers and setbacks. Land to the South of Hutchinson Rd is partly owned by Perrys, further controlling development in the area.

Other environmental effects such as geotechnical, archaeological, contamination and ecology are minor and can be managed through further site investigations directly associated with development intent and with plan change rules that include subsequent consenting requirements.

Balancing these adverse effects are a range of positive effects including enhanced public access and recreational use of the Waikato River margin, visual and landscape benefits for those experiencing the gateway to Hamilton and economic benefits related to the adventure park and tourism components of the plan change. In addition, there is a significant positive effect by enabling the development of up approximately 1000 dwellings on land that is already serviced and can contribute to meeting the shortfall in housing supply identified in the Hamilton Housing Accord. Other benefits include the opportunity to eradicate alligator weed from the site, improvements to the water quality of the discharge to the Waikato River, ecological enhancements to the gully system to the south of the site, permanent protection of an archaeological site and remediation of soil contamination.

91 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

6.0 Consultation

This section of the report has not been updated as consultation with these parties has been taking place since submissions were lodged and subsequently since PPC 2 was reactivated. Consultation is ongoing. Hamilton City Council

Engagement and consultation with HCC has taken place on several levels since March 2016. Initially the consultation was at a conceptual level to provide information and gain feedback on the broad concept. Since late 2016 when the draft masterplan was produced more detailed consultation has taken place. Key issues discussed were:

• The potential effect of removal of the site from the industrial land allocation in the RPS. • Reverse sensitivity issues from nearby existing and potential future industrial activities. • Relationship of the project to the Hamilton Housing Accord. • Water and wastewater infrastructure, capacity and reallocation from industrial to other uses. • Traffic effects. • Land and infrastructure to be vested in HCC.

Regular meetings have been held with HCC staff during this period, up to notification of the plan change and will continue during the process of the plan change. This has included the receipt of comments on draft technical reports from HCC staff and peer reviewers. As a result, a number of the appended sub-consultant technical reports have been amended to take into account the peer review feedback where those comments were directly relevant to the plan change process. The peer reviewers were as follows:

• Noise Effects – Malcolm Hunt Associates • Traffic Effects – Gray Matter • Geotechnical Effects – Beca • Landscape and Visual Effects, Ecology, Archaeology, Contaminated Land – Opus International Consultants Draft ODP provisions have also been the subject of internal HCC staff review and comment. This process has led to the plan change adopting the LDP rules that were introduced into the ODP by the Ruakura Variation, rather than the CDP rules relating to Medium Density Residential zones. Other changes have also been incorporated as a result of HCC’s most recent review and the peer reviews.

Waikato District Council

Waikato District Council staff were briefed on the project on 1 December 2016. They were supportive of the project and discussion focused on infrastructure servicing, reverse sensitivity to industrial neighbours’ and traffic effects. Separate consultation was undertaken with

92 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Waikato District Council staff as part of the preparation of the ITA. A letter from WDC confirming the current status of consultation is included in Appendix 14.

Waikato Regional Council

A meeting was held with WRC stormwater/infrastructure staff on 8 May 2017. They confirmed that the existing stormwater discharge consents set a reasonable starting point for the site and that they may need amendment but can be relied on. They indicated that the Healthy Rivers Plan Change to the Regional Plan could not be given full effect to yet due to its procedural status. However, at the policy level it reinforced the need to ensure consistency with the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River for any new or varied consents. This plan change has aimed to be consistent with the principles of the Healthy Rivers Plan Change, within the parameters of the plan change effects

Ongoing discussions with WRC stormwater staff were undertaken as part of the s127 application to vary the stormwater discharge consent to ensure it authorised discharge from the new adventure park/residential/commercial development. This variation was approved on 25 July 2017.

A meeting was held with WRC policy staff on 6 June 2017. Following this a number of technical reports were provided to them.

WRC public transport staff have also reviewed the draft ITA and provided feedback on it.

New Zealand Transport Agency

Engagement with NZTA has been ongoing since mid-2016 as the roading authority responsible for the adjacent state highway network, a requiring authority responsible for a designation that affects the site, and as a Future Proof partner.

Regular meetings have been held with NZTA staff dealing with each of these issues. NZTA have been broadly supportive of the project provided the industrial land allocation issues and traffic effects on the State Highways are dealt with satisfactorily.

NZTA agreed with the traffic modelling methodology for the ITA and have provided feedback on the draft ITA. The draft acoustic report was provided and comments received in turn.

NZTA have confirmed that there is no need for them to provide an approval under s176 of the RMA at the plan change stage. Any such approval will be provided at the time of resource consent or subdivision. They have also confirmed that they will initiate the uplifting of the redundant NZTA designation on the site38.

Future Proof Partners

Perrys have undertaken ongoing consultation with Future Proof Partners for several months both individually and collectively. They presented to a Future Proof meeting in April 2017. Future Proof have not raised concerns about the plan change.

38 Email from Lana Gooderham dated 26 June in Appendix 14

93 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Tangata Whenua

Initial contact with the iwi authority, Waikato-Tainui Te Kauhanganui (Waikato Raupatu River Trust), took place in August 2016. In February 2017, further contact was made with them to provide details of the project and brief them on the master plan that had been drafted and to identify appropriate groups to consult and the appropriate process of consulting them. The groups were identified as:

• Te Ha o te Whenua o Kirikiriroa (THaWK) • Ngati Wairere • Nga Mana Toopu o Kirikiriroa (NMTOK) • Turangawaewae Marae

Following further guidance from Waikato-Tainui, Perry’s decided to establish a Tangata Whenua Working Group (TWWG) to effectively coordinate this process of consultation and engagement with tangata whenua. This approach recognises that consultation is necessary throughout the life of the project. There will be subsequent resource consents, design, and physical works that will also require input.

The establishment of the TWWG and consultation process with them is fully described in the Waikato-Tainui Iwi Consultation Report in Appendix 15.

During these discussions with tangata whenua, the archaeological, ecological, and stormwater aspects of the site were identified as areas of particular interest. This information was conveyed by distributing the relevant technical reports, then providing the experts in the meetings to present their findings to the group and take any questions. The outcome of the meetings to date have been;

• Briefing of project proposal and establishment and terms of reference for the TWWG. • Identification of the site’s southern outlet and tributary to the Waikato River as an opportunity to enhance the current state of waterway and provide for native fish spawning if possible. • Riverside planting to be native where appropriate. Provision for recognition of historical Miro, Matai or Karaka, which were once found in area as demonstrated from surrounding archaeological evidence. • Further archaeological investigation to confirm existence of any remnant cultural value in identified riverside location prior to earth works. • Protection of the archaeological site on the river bank. The Cultural Impact Assessment at Appendix 15 records the cultural impacts of the project and the recommended mitigation measures. The Cultural Impact Assessment was developed through a series of workshops and meetings with the TWWG.

Nearby Landowners and Residents

There are a number of different landowners both residential and Industrial that are located in the vicinity of the site, including Northgate Industrial Park, Ports of Auckland and the Horotiu Primary School

94 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Northgate Industrial Park and Ports of Auckland were consulted with on the 6 April and June 6 respectively. Northgate did not raise any concerns. Ports of Auckland raised potential concerns in relation to reverse sensitivity effects of noise and visual effects. As a result the Landscape and Visual Assessment in Appendix 5 and the Acoustic Assessment contained in Appendix 7 addresses the potential for reverse sensitivity effects on these (and other) neighbours. They conclude that the distance and land contours results in the Waikato Expressway embankment effectively screening the site means there are no material reverse sensitivity effects on these neighbours. Consultation with the neighbours is ongoing.

The Principal of Horotiu Primary School was briefed on the plan change proposal on 15 June 2017. This proposal was then brought to the attention of the School’s Board of Trustees. The response was supportive of a number of different aspects of the proposal including the change from industrial to residential, and the positive impact on the Waikato River. They also had a number of queries on the effects of the development and its timeframe. They will continue to be engaged throughout the process. A copy of their correspondence is included in Appendix 14.

There have also been several meetings with local residents of Hutchinson Road and River Road who have been supportive of the land use change from industrial to predominantly residential. Their concerns raised were the potential effects from dust and light during the site’s development. Letters from two neighbours on Hutchinson Road confirming they have no concerns, are included in Appendix 14.

Other consultation has occurred with The Te Awa River Ride Trust and Hamilton Waikato Tourism who are in full support of the plan change. Copies of their correspondence are included in Appendix 14.

Fonterra

A meeting was held with Fonterra staff and consultants on 1 February 2017. Their concerns were reverse sensitivity, traffic impacts on their interchange and reallocation of industrial land to other activities. These concerns were ensured to be considered in the technical assessments undertaken for this plan change and have concluded there are no negative effects on their operation. Fonterra were concerned that the additional residential area would lead to unjustified complaints or concerns about their operation and could make future expansion more difficult and uncertain. They advised they did not currently have any expansion plans. A follow up meeting was held with Fonterra on 15 July and a number of technical reports were provided to them. A letter from Fonterra’s consultants was received on 25 July 2017 recording concerns in terms of reverse sensitivity, plan provisions, consistency with the RPS, traffic effects, economic effects and landscape and urban design. A copy of the letter is included in Appendix 14. Consultation with Fonterra is ongoing.

The ITA at Appendix 4 specifically addressed the traffic impacts on the Fonterra intersection with Te Rapa Rd. It found that with the additional traffic from the plan change area the intersection ramps continue to operate at LoS A.

Affco

A meeting was held with Affco’s General Manager on 14 February 2017. Also in attendance was the project manager for Open Country Dairy who have recently secured consent to build a dairy

95 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

factory on the Affco site. The concerns they raised related to reverse sensitivity effects and in particularly visual reverse sensitivity. In light of this the Landscape and Visual Assessment addressed these potential visual reverse sensitivity effects and confirmed that the Affco buildings and the future Open Country Dairy buildings would not be visible from the site so there would be no visual reverse sensitivity.

First Gas

First Gas own the high-pressure gas pipeline through the site that is protected by an easement. They have been contacted on several occasions to discuss the development plans and have not expressed any major concerns with the development intent provided that the gas line is protected.

96 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

7.0 Statutory Assessment

Overview

This section summarises and supplements the various assessments included within this document taking account of the overall statutory framework to be applied.

Council Functions and District Plan

This section assesses the policy ‘fit’ of this plan change with the ODP. The ODP was made partly operative in 2016 and then fully operative on 18 October 2017, so it is a recent and up to date planning instrument. As described elsewhere in this report, this plan change proposes only minimal and necessary additional objectives and policies. Overall the plan change is designed to fit into the objective, policy and method framework of the ODP, not affecting its overall coherence.

Section 2 of the ODP is the Strategic Framework which sets out the strategic objectives and policies for the city, based on its functions under the RMA. It also provides links between the ODP and other strategies. Notably those include Future Proof, the RPS, HUGS, and Access Hamilton which have all informed this plan change.

The Strategic Framework notes the importance of urban limits in order to give effect to the Future Proof Settlement Strategy. This plan change is within the urban limits.

Objective 2.2.2 is that:

“urban development takes place within areas identified for this purpose in a manner which uses land and infrastructure most efficiently”.

The plan change is consistent with this overall purpose because the site has been identified for urban development since it came into the city in 2011. The only issues have been the type of development and the timing. However, given that the plan change satisfies the criteria for alternative land release contained in the RPS, which in turn reflects the Future Proof Strategy, then it is consistent with this objective and the associated policies. The policies require Structure Plans to support new growth areas. Although the subject site is not one of the greenfield growth areas currently identified in the ODP it has similarities to them. Therefore, for consistency and certainty a Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan is proposed for inclusion in the ODP.

Section 32 and Part 2 Assessment

This section provides an overall assessment of the proposal under Part 2 of the RMA and section 32 and draws conclusions on them. The relevant aspects of Part 2 are outlined in section 4.6 of this report and section 2 of this report provides an evaluation under the relevant subsections of section 32.

The plan change achieves the overall purpose of the RMA in section 5. It achieves the right balance between providing for people’s social, economic and cultural wellbeing while providing for the foreseeable needs of future generations for housing, recreation/tourism and

97 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

commercial services. At the same time, environmental values are protected or enhanced, and environmental effects are appropriately mitigated.

The establishment of a regional tourist attraction in the form of an adventure park will provide broad economic benefits to the people of the city and sub region through a combination of new employment, increased tourist visitation and the economic flow on of support services to the park39.

Provision of additional capacity for approximately 1000 dwellings in a medium density master planned community provides people with additional housing choice, both in type and location. It assists in increasing housing supply at a time when housing demand in Hamilton is running ahead of (consented) housing supply40 including in the southern Waikato District area. The increase in supply has the potential economic benefit of improving housing affordability. This provision for medium density housing provides for growth in a land efficient manner making the most of land resources within the city boundary and reducing pressure to expand prematurely outside the boundary.

In terms of section 5(c) there are no significant adverse effects on the environment of the plan change. There are several moderate adverse effects, including:

• Landscape and visual impacts on residents across the river; • Moderate reverse sensitivity effects as a result of traffic noise from the Waikato Expressway; • Visual effects on people using the Waikato River near the site; and • Moderate traffic impacts that require infrastructure upgrades.

All of these adverse effects are to be mitigated. As a plan change the mitigation is largely built into the plan change methods and in particular the rules that require additional assessments, consenting requirements and building standards. In terms of the reverse sensitivity noise effects they are mitigated by internal noise standards for dwellings and setbacks from the other effects are mitigated by processes of individual LDP consents for separate LDP areas and larger minimum lot sizes near the river, a height limit of 8m and additional setbacks for buildings near the river.

In addition, there are a range of positive effects as set out in section 5.11 of this report. They are summarised as:

• Economic benefits of the adventure park tourist attraction; • Economic and social benefits of an increase in housing supply in the short term; • Moderate to high beneficial landscape and visual effects for people viewing the site from the Waikato Expressway and the Horotiu interchange, and in terms of its character and legibility as a gateway to the city; • Beneficial effects on recreational values by the introduction of new accesses and additional opening up the Waikato River corridor and the Te Awa River Ride path; and Beneficial effects of enhanced public access to the Waikato River.

39 Economic Assessment by RCG in Appendix 6, p39 40 Economic Assessment by RCG in Appendix 6, p22

98 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Positive ecological and water quality effects.

In terms of sections 6(a) and 6(d) the character of the margin of the Waikato River will change as the existing row of pine trees on the site will be removed and residential development will take place. However, an esplanade reserve will be created, incorporating the existing Te Awa River Ride path which is currently authorised by an easement over the private land. The esplanade reserve will enhance public access by providing 20m wide full public access under the relevant provisions of the Reserves Act 1981. In addition, access will be enhanced by the provision of multiple access points for pedestrians, cyclists and (more limited) vehicles as prescribed by the master plan in section 3.3 of this report.

The character of the river margin is already anticipated to change through future urbanisation of the land. This change will not be out of context with other parts of the river within Hamilton City. Low density residential development is proposed along the river front, planting of the esplanade reserve boundary is proposed and the character will be more natural than future urban industrial development envisaged by the current zoning.

The proposal is consistent with sections 6(e) and 6(f) as the creation of the esplanade reserve, and the associated low density residential development acknowledges the relationship of tangata whenua with the river and the site. Consultation with tangata whenua is ongoing and their input is being sought to elements of design within this project. Effects on archaeology are being appropriately managed through archaeological investigations.

Section 7 refers to Other Matters to be taken into account. In terms of section 7(b) the proposal provides for the efficient use of land. Given the current ample supply of industrial land and the shortage of serviced residential land, it is more efficient to allocate it to residential use. Efficiency is enhanced through a master planned medium density zone as a higher dwelling yield can be achieved compared to a traditional general residential zone.

Sections 7(c) and 7(f) are provided for as amenity values will be enhanced through opening up access to the river, creation of public open spaces and water bodies, and establishing open space views through the site. This will lead to a greater sense of amenity and attractiveness of the site. Similarly, the finer grain of residential development and the more intimate scale of residential streets, reserves and cycleways will be more interesting and engaging compared to ‘big box’ industrial buildings, enhancing the quality of the environment.

In terms of section 7(i) the effects of climate change have been taken into account in the stormwater assessment, including predicted flood levels. Refer to the Stormwater Management Strategy in the ICMP (Appendix 3) for further information.

In terms of section 8 meetings have been held with tangata whenua and a Tangata Whenua Working Group (TWWG) has been set up to provide advice and input into the project. The TWWG will be providing ongoing input into the project ensuring that there are appropriate cultural inputs at the time of design and delivery of the various components of the project, therefore implementing the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi to the extent practicable.

Overall the project exhibits a high level of consistency with Part 2 of the RMA because of the significant contributions it can make through economic benefits of a new tourist attraction, meeting a shortfall in housing supply, enhancing access to the Waikato River and improving the amenity and appearance of a site that is currently of low amenity value.

In terms of section 32 the evaluation in section 2 of this report demonstrated that in policy terms this plan change is the most appropriate response. It is an ‘amending proposal’ under

99 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

that section and is consistent with the broad ODP strategic framework and wider objectives. Therefore, it is a good fit in terms of being able to be inserted into the ODP with minimal impact on the document and contributing to the achievement of objectives in it. National Policy Assessment

As set out in section 4.7 there are two NPSs that are relevant to this plan change; the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016 (“NPS–UDC”) and the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2014 (“NPS–FM”).

An overriding purpose and objective of the NPS-UDC is to provide sufficient development capacity to meet people’s needs and to provide choice and range of dwelling types and locations (Objective OA2). The site is a key element in Hamilton City’s ability to achieve this objective in the short term and implement Policy PA1. It is a strategic site adjacent to the Expressway, already connected to water supply and wastewater services and has a consented and partly constructed stormwater disposal system.

The question then arises as to whether the capacity offered by the site is better allocated to business or residential land. Historically it has been allocated to business (industrial) use but as outlined elsewhere in this report it is not well suited to industrial use because:

• Geotechnical conditions as a result of previous sand winning have created constraints on standard industrial development that make it uneconomic; • Industrial development adjacent to a 1.1km frontage to the Waikato River is environmentally undesirable; and • As set out in the Economic Assessment in Appendix 6 there is ample industrial land in Hamilton but there is a shortage of serviced residential land. The need to provide residential land is reinforced by the Hamilton Housing Accord.

On this basis, the development of the site with a proposed dwelling yield of approximately 1000 dwellings fits the category of short term housing land required by Policy PA1. It is feasible, and serviced with development infrastructure, and only needs to be rezoned to be able to fulfil this function.

If it was rezoned and development was staged generally as proposed it is estimated it could contribute 100 new dwellings per year to the targets of 1,300 to 1,500 dwellings each year set by the Hamilton Housing Accord.

Much of the NPS-UDC is focused on requiring high growth Councils to undertake capacity studies and strategies to provide additional development capacity. Those activities are necessary but they should not detract from pragmatic opportunities that are available to provide more capacity now. The overriding purpose of the NPS-UDC is to provide additional capacity to support more supply and better operation of the housing market. It would be perverse to delay rezoning or consenting of suitable land while waiting for the capacity studies to be completed.

Therefore, the plan change is highly consistent with the NPS-UDC and it has the potential to assist HCC in meeting its short-term obligations to provide development capacity. As set out in section 4.1 above the NPS-UDC should take priority over the RPS and the ODP, because the plan change specifically implements Policy PA1 which is to ensure there is sufficient housing and business land development capacity. In the short term (3 years) it must be ‘feasible, zoned

100 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

and serviced with development infrastructure.’ Based on the economic assessment in Appendix 6 and the aspirations of the Hamilton Housing Accord, it should be allocated to residential use.

Regional Policy Assessment

As set out in section 4.8.3 of this document the overriding Built Environment policy 6.1 in the RPS is to achieve planned and co-ordinated subdivision use and development which has regard to the development principles contained in Section 6A of the RPS, addresses potential cumulative effects of development, is based on sufficient information on long-term effects and has regard to the existing built environment.

The more specific policy direction is found in Policy 6.14, ‘Adopting Future Proof land use pattern’. The specific aspects of that policy that are most relevant to this plan change are:

‘a) New urban development within Hamilton City, Cambridge, Te Awamutu/Kihikihi, Pirongia, Huntly, Ngaruawahia, Ragaln, Te Kauwhata, Meremere, Taupiri, Horotiu, Matangi, Gordonton, Rukuhia, Te Kowhai and Whatawhata shall occur within the Urban Limits indicated on Map 6.2 (section 6C);

b) New residential (including rural-residential) development shall be managed in accordance with the timing and population for growth areas in Table 6-1 (section 6D);

c) New industrial development should predominantly be located in the strategic industrial nodes in Table 6-2 (section 6D) and in accordance with the indicative timings in that table except where alternative land release and timing is demonstrated to meet the criteria in Method 6.14.3; …

….g) Where alternative industrial and residential land release patterns are promoted through district plan and structure plan processes, justification shall be provided to demonstrate consistency with the principles of the Future Proof land use pattern.’

Methods 6.14.1 and 6.14.2 require district plans to zone land and prepare structure plans to give effect to the residential and industrial allocations referred to above which reflects the requirements of s73 of the RMA for District Plans to give effect to the RPS. However it is important that the above RPS policies and Tables 6-1 and 6-2 are not treated as land use zones. They are broad principles and Table 6-2 specifies only ‘strategic’ locations of which Te Rapa North is one. The land allocations and staging are essentially maxima, enabling development but not directing it. They are based on the principles contained in the RPS of:

• Ensuring land development does not outstrip infrastructure provisions; • Ensuring industrial development locations fit with strategic infrastructure; and • Ensuring a reasonable match of land supply and demand.

The ODP has taken the land allocations and established land use zones based on them. The land use zones and related provisions in the District Plan have several purposes:

• To broadly spatially identify the Te Rapa North strategic industrial node; • To enable up to 14ha of development up until 2021; • To enable another 46ha of development after 2021; and

101 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• To restrict further development beyond this 60ha until infrastructure is ready and to avoid oversupply.

The ODP achieves this by establishing several layers of rules. Firstly, it zones approximately 245ha of land (excluding the Te Rapa Dairy Manufacturing site) as Te Rapa North Industrial Zone. It then applies a ‘deferred industrial’ overlay to all of this land. Within this land, it identifies an area of 52ha south of Bern Road and west of Te Rapa Road as ‘Stage 1A Dairy Industrial Area’. It identifies the subject site of 62ha of land north of Hutchinson Road as ‘Stage 1B Service Centre Industrial Area’. The relevant rules for Stage 1A and Stage 1B areas enable up to 7ha of development in each prior to 2021 and another 23ha of development in each after 2021. The specific areas are not defined so they are essentially ‘floating’ zones that can be developed anywhere within the Stage 1A and 1B areas.

These land areas match the 14ha and 46ha contained in Table 6-2 of the RPS. In this way, the District Plan has given effect to the RPS. The zoning does not provide for any development of the balance of 185ha of land. It is a deferred zone and would only be able to be developed following a plan change or District Plan review. Table 6-2 only identifies a need for a further 25ha after 2041. As that timeframe is well beyond the lifespan of the District Plan it is not currently zoned and there is no need to zone land for it.

Therefore, HCC has identified about 245ha of land in total for the Te Rapa North Industrial node. This is 160ha more than Future Proof and the RPS assess as likely to be needed to meet demand for the next 50 years. Within this 245ha it has zoned 30ha within the Te Awa Lakes site. Approximately 5ha of this has been consented, subdivided and is partly developed. The balance of 25ha has been consented but not yet developed. It is this 25ha which forms the basis of an alternative land use pattern.

In terms of residential development, the most relevant policy is 6.14 b) which states that ‘new residential (including rural-residential) development shall be managed in accordance with the timing and population growth as in Table 6.1’. Implementation method 6.14.2 states that the Councils in the Future Proof area shall ensure that land is zoned and appropriately serviced in accordance with Policy 6.14 and Table 6.1.

Table 6.1 of the RPS includes the following population growth allocations in Hamilton City.

Table 8: Population Growth Allocations in Hamilton City

Growth Area Residential/Population 2006 2021 2041 2061 Hamilton existing urban 119400 136000 161100 187900 Hamilton Greenfield (Rototuna, 15000 37000 60000 60000 Rotokauri, Ruakura, Peacockes) Future Hamilton Greenfield 3000 29700

This site would not have been considered for housing when the RPS was prepared and therefore is not accounted for. However, it can be considered as a contributor to meeting housing needs within the ‘Hamilton existing urban’ category as that category is for infill and pockets of development within the city intended to intensify and consolidate housing.

102 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Section 3.27 was inserted as an amendment to the RPS in 2018 in accordance with the requirements of the NPS – UDC. It identifies the minimum housing targets for sufficient, feasible development capacity in the future proof area, as indicated in Table 9 below.

Table 9: RPS Housing Targets for Hamilton City

Area Minimum Targets (number of dwellings) Short to Medium Long Term Total 1-10 Years (2017-2026) 11-30 Years (2027-2046) Hamilton City 13,300 23,600 36,900

TAL is designed to deliver approximately 892 (+ or -10%) dwelling units comprising a mix of single dwellings, duplexes, apartments and terrace houses. It can therefore be considered as a contributor to meeting minimum RPS housing targets in the short to medium term.

Policies 6.14c) and g) acknowledge that the RPS land allocations should not be treated as land use zones, and that the detail of zoning needs to be left to local authorities. Policy 6.14c) is focused on flexibility in industrial land use allocation and Policy 6.14g) refers to ‘alternative industrial and residential land use patterns’ jointly. These policies create the flexibility for land use to depart from Tables 6-1 and 6-2 provided certain criteria and principles are met and clearly envisage a situation where the exact land areas contained in Table 6-2 are varied.

This plan change involves an alternative land release pattern in accordance with Policy 6.14g). In this case the alternative is to rezone 25ha of currently zoned industrial land (although 23ha of that cannot be developed until after 2021), and reallocate the 25ha to a combination of recreational (adventure park) and residential. It has no impact on the residual 25ha of 2041- 2061 land in table 6-2 as that land has not been zoned or otherwise defined. Given the 245ha of Te Rapa North deferred industrial land, no difficultly would be expected in identifying 25ha for rezoning post 2041.

Method 6.14.3 ‘Criteria for alternative land release’ is designed to address this situation to ensure that matters of detailed land use zoning are able to be dealt with practically by local authorities. In this case the 25ha of industrial development will be delayed until additional land is zoned. This may be achieved through rezoning of land through a proposed Te Rapa North plan change which HCC has resolved to initiate, or it may be achieved through additional industrial zoning at Horotiu through the current Waikato District Plan review process. One of the submissions on the Plan has sought to rezone to Industrial 48ha of land adjoining the Horotiu Industrial zone.

The issue of allocation of land to residential/recreational rather than industrial is not as clearly an alternative release pattern. If the residential land is treated as ‘Hamilton existing urban’ in Table 6-1 of the RPS as a pocket of land within the urban area then it does not create any conflicts with the RPS and would be a site specific District Plan zoning issue. However, for completeness the following assessment against the alternative land release criteria (Table 9) addresses both industrial and residential land use.

As described in section 1.2 of this report the proposal is now to develop areas for an adventure park, supporting commercial and residential activities. Five hectares will remain allocated to the service centre development, which forms part of the industrial land allocation in Table 6-2. Therefore, the alternative land allocation proposed in terms of Table 6-2 would be 2ha in the period 2010-2021 and 23ha in the period 2021-2041, a total reduction of 25ha. This is

103 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

consistent with the RPS Explanation of Method 6.14.3 which states it is ‘an opportunity for district plans and structure plans to refine Table 6-2’.

This is a situation that the alternative release criteria in 6.14.3 are designed to address. The following table addresses them.

104 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Table 9: Criteria for alternative land release at Te Rapa North

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

a) To do so will maintain or enhance the safe and efficient function of Water Supply existing or planned infrastructure when compared to the release Water supply services were extended to the site in 2014 following approval of provided for in Tables 6-1 and 6-2 the IDP. At the time the design and sizing of the infrastructure was to service the whole 62ha site. The capacity has been remodelled by Mott McDonald based on the proposed new land uses. This exercise has confirmed that the water infrastructure has sufficient capacity to service the whole of the Te Awa Lakes plan change area and the development is not expected to affect the remaining network and existing water supply reticulation to the site is large enough to supply full development of the site with some capacity left over41.

Use of this available capacity in water supply infrastructure to meet the adventure park, residential and associated commercial needs is more efficient than the industrial land release in Table 6-2 as otherwise it would remain underutilised until such time as sufficient industrial land has developed and the industrial land uptake is likely to be slow. In terms of the subject site it would be unlikely that it would ever be fully utilised given the lack of viability of industrial development of the site42 and the potential oversupply of industrial land.43

Wastewater Similarly, as part of the IDP development in 2014, wastewater services were designed and installed. The site is currently serviced with a grinder pump solution connecting to a rising main that runs from the site to Maui Street. The system is designed to service the whole site.

41 Subcatchment ICMP by BBO in Appendix 3, p20 42 Industrial Viability assessment by Essentia Consulting in Appendix 19 43 Economic Assessment by RCG in Appendix 6, p54

105 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

Recent modelling of wastewater infrastructure by Aecom has also confirmed that there is sufficient capacity to service the plan change site with some residual capacity. A second rising main will need to be installed once the existing main reaches full capacity, which will be at approximately 50% of development44.

Similarly to water supply, it is efficient to use these existing wastewater services early and fully utilize them for the wider economic benefit of the city, rather than wait for uncertain and unlikely industrial land uptake.

Stormwater Stage 1 of the service centre development is already serviced with a stormwater collection and discharge system, which forms part of the overall stormwater reticulation and discharge system designed and consented in 2014. A single discharge point to the Waikato River is currently utilised, but a second discharge point was also consented. The SMP for the plan change area will be consistent with the concept developed as part of the IDP and it is efficient to use the consented and partly installed stormwater system. A variation to the existing comprehensive stormwater discharge has been approved by WRC to confirm the SMP for the site based on the revised land uses. This is an efficient use of existing infrastructure and investment in it by adapting it to the new land uses. b) The total allocation identified in Table 6-2 for any one strategic The total allocation in the Te Rapa North Strategic Node will not be exceeded. industrial node should generally not be exceeded or an alternative timing of industrial land released allowed, unless justified through The alternative industrial land release proposed is a reduction in zoned land by robust and comprehensive evidence (including but not limited to 25ha. This is made up of 2ha in the 2010-2021 period and 23ha in the 2021- planning, economic and infrastructural / servicing evidence). 2041 period. This report provides the necessary evidence to support the alternative industrial land release as follows: ▪ Planning evidence is provided in section 7.5 above and in section 2, the section 32 RMA evaluation. These sections demonstrate that the rezoning of 25ha of industrial land is essentially a practical, local zoning issue, rather

44 Subcatchment ICMP by BBO in Appendix 3, p19

106 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

than a regional allocation issue. It is the type of change that is intended to be accommodated within the flexibility criteria in the RPS, as the RPS is not a land use zoning tool and deals with large strategic nodes, not individual sites. ▪ Infrastructural / servicing evidence is provided in this report (see Appendix 3, ICMP) to demonstrate that infrastructure is in place and available to be utilised. The safe and efficient function of existing and planned infrastructure will be enhanced as set out in a) above. ▪ Economic evidence is provided in this report (see Appendix 6, Economic Assessment by RCG, Appendix 20 by Market Economics and Appendix 21 by Castalia) to demonstrate that the rezoning of 25ha of industrial land will not have any measurable impact on the supply of industrial land. There is ample land within the Te Rapa North Node and the adjacent Horotiu Node to meet any predicted needs. Overall the industrial land allocations developed by Future Proof and adopted in the RPS include a large factor of safety, meaning a small change such as this rezoning is acceptable. The Economic Assessments also confirm that housing supply in Hamilton is under pressure and is running behind demand. The reallocation of the site partly to housing will assist to meet housing supply targets in the short to medium term. The Economic Assessment by Market Economics in Appendix 20 confirms that even if the full 62ha site was reallocated as part of an alternative land release pattern there is sufficient industrial land to accommodate industrial demand in the long term, including in the locality. c) Sufficient zoned land within the industrial node is available or could be The economic evidence contained in Appendix 6 and Appendix 20 demonstrates made available in a timely and affordable manner; and making the land that the remaining zoned land of 10ha before 2021 and 23ha from 2021 to 2041 available will maintain the benefits of regionally significant committed is sufficient to meet the needs for industrial land in this location. This is infrastructure investments made to support other industrial nodes. because the Te Rapa North Strategic Node forms part of the same locality as the Horotiu Strategic Node which has a predicted supply of 150ha of land. Because the land allocations are deliberately generous there is scope to reduce the zoned area by 25ha without any measurable impact. In addition, HCC has zoned 245ha of land at Te Rapa North as ‘deferred Te Rapa North Industrial’. This has provided a public indication of the potential future land use change, meaning

107 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

that a future plan change to rezone some of the land industrial would be feasible, and more likely to be a timely and affordable process than if it was not tagged as deferred. HCC has signalled its intent to commence that plan change process. In addition, the current Waikato District Plan review process has created another opportunity to make further industrial land available. A submission from Northgate Developments has requested an area of 48ha be added to the current Horotiu industrial zone. This request is likely to be considered by the Waikato District Council hearing panel in 2020 with a decision likely in 2021. This will also be a timely and affordable process. The rezoning does not affect any regionally significant committed infrastructure investments supporting other industrial nodes. That issue only arises if additional land was being allocated and zoned. d) The effects of the change are consistent with the development This rezoning supports an existing urban area by utilising a worked-out quarry principles set out in section 6A. These specify that new development site within the Hamilton City boundary to provide a mix of urban activities. It should: infills an area within the city that is otherwise very difficult to efficiently utilise. i. Support existing urban areas in preference to creating new ones; It does not create any new urban area. The land has been intended to be urbanised for some time, as indicated by it coming within the city boundary in 2011, and it adjoins the Horotiu Village which is in the process of urbanisation. ii. Occur in a manner that provides clear delineation between urban As the site is within Hamilton City and adjoins land that is earmarked for future areas and rural areas; urban development there is no issue in relation to urban boundaries. The site is clearly delineated to the west and east, where the Hamilton city boundary follows the Expressway and the Waikato River. It does not adjoin any rural land. iii. Make use of opportunities for urban intensification and This rezoning makes use of an opportunity for urban intensification. The site is redevelopment to minimize the need for urban development in a closed sand quarry with significant constraints on its reuse. Its history and greenfield areas; strategic location creates a unique opportunity for its reuse to enable a regional tourist attraction and a medium density residential development to meet the city’s housing needs. It is of large enough scale to allow a medium density residential development of high quality. As a result, there is no need for these activities to extend outside the city boundaries into greenfield areas. iv. Not compromise the safe, efficient and effective operation and use The site has existing water and wastewater infrastructure that can be efficiently of existing and planned infrastructure, including transport utilized. As set out in the ICMP included in Appendix 3 the wastewater and infrastructure, and should allow for future infrastructure needs, water infrastructure has sufficient capacity for development.

108 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

including maintenance and upgrading, where these can be anticipated; Stormwater disposal has been designed and consented based on industrial use. The same system, including existing discharge consents, can be efficiently adapted to the proposed new uses.

Strategic infrastructure is already largely in place, including the Waikato Expressway and the Horotiu interchange adjacent to the site. The ITA in Appendix 4 shows that there is sufficient capacity in the Expressway and the interchange to accommodate traffic generation from the plan change subject to some intersection upgrades and associated works that are likely to be needed at some stage anyway as a result of any urbanisation. Hutchinson Road will also need to be upgraded to minor arterial / collector road standard as part of the staged development. Therefore all infrastructure will be safely, efficiently and effectively operated. v. Connect well with existing and planned development and The site connects well with existing infrastructure. It will utilise the existing infrastructure; Hutchinson Road/Te Rapa Road roundabout and the existing Horotiu interchange. It is highly accessible to the Expressway. Te Rapa Road and the Te Rapa section of the Expressway provide alternative routes to Hamilton’s CBD. The site is highly accessible to The Base shopping centre, being the city’s primary subregional centre. The site will connect well to, and enhance the Te Awa River Ride path which extends for 1km along its eastern boundary and will have multiple connections to the residential, commercial and tourism activities. It also connects well with Horotiu via Te Rapa Road the Te Awa River Ride path, where there is a primary school. vi. Identify water requirements necessary to support development and As set out in the ICMP report in Appendix 3 the volumes of water required for ensure the availability of the volumes required; the development are available from HCC services that are already in place. vii. Be planned and designed to achieve the efficient use of water; The development will achieve efficient use of water through detailed design at the time of subdivision and development. The land use zones to be adopted in this plan change incorporate rules requiring efficient water use through individual Water Impact Assessments. The stormwater management strategy in Appendix 3 proposes water efficient methods.

109 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

viii. Be directed away from identified significant mineral resources and The site is a worked-out quarry so no longer contains any significant mineral their access routes, natural hazard areas, energy and transmission resources. A high-pressure gas pipeline traverses the site generally in a north- corridors, locations identified as likely renewable energy generation south direction. The constraints associated with this gas pipeline have been sites and their associated energy resources, regionally significant taken into account in the master planning and rezoning of the site. The industry, high class soils, and primary production activities on those majority of the pipeline will traverse the adventure park area where there is low high-class soils; density of buildings and large areas of open space. The site does not contain high class soils.

The site is approximately 420m from the Te Rapa Fonterra Dairy processing plant, which would be classified as ‘regionally significant industry’. It is outside the Dairy Processing plant’s noise contour. This separation distance and the noise contour provides mitigation of potential reverse sensitivity effects. In addition, the site layout will create a ‘buffer’ of commercial and mixed use development along Hutchinson Road and a specific setback from Hutchinson Rd will be implement to mitigate any risks of odour from the factory wastewater treatment plant. Any residential activities in this area will be built to achieve appropriate internal noise standards as outlined in the Noise Assessment in Appendix 7. ix. Promote compact urban form, design and location to: The proposed plan change will promote compact urban form by: 1. minimize energy and carbon use; ▪ Implementing a medium density of residential development made possible 2. minimize the need for private vehicle use; by a comprehensive master planning approach to provide approximately 3. maximize opportunities to support and take advantage of public 1000 dwellings (made up of 852 + or – 10% for the residential including 40 transport in particular by encouraging employment activities in in the river interface overlay and another 100 in the business zone) locations that are or can in the future be served efficiently by households at a gross density of 23 households per hectare. This exceeds public transport; the RPS target of 16 households per hectare, contributing to the city as a 4. encourage walking, cycling and multi-modal transport whole achieving the target. connections; and ▪ Implementing a master planned design that maximizes walking and cycling 5. maximize opportunities for people to live, work and play within within the development, connecting to the Te Awa River ride path and their local area; providing local convenience services within walking distance. ▪ Live, work, play opportunities are a key strength of the development as a result of the unique combination of an adventure park, a range of

110 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

residential housing types, an existing river frontage and path and proximity to major industrial employers in Te Rapa and Horotiu. ▪ The roading layout will be designed to provide for public transport walking, cycling and multi-modal transport and other associated infrastructure as set out in the ITA in Appendix 4. x. Maintain or enhance landscape values and provide for the Landscape values will be significantly enhanced as a result of the development, protection of historic and cultural heritage; particularly by sensitive development of the 1km of river frontage. The existing and proposed landscape values are described in more detail in the report in Appendix 5. Cultural heritage will be reflected in the final design of the development including protection of an archaeological site by including it in the proposed esplanade reserve. Consultation has been undertaken with tangata whenua to define how these values will be carried over into the development through individual resource consents and subdivision consents in accordance with the mitigation recommendations contained in the Cultural Impact Assessment in Appendix 15. xi. Promote positive indigenous biodiversity outcomes and protect There is no significant indigenous vegetation and no significant habitats of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna on the site. indigenous fauna. Development which can enhance ecological Indigenous biodiversity has been addressed in the Ecological Assessment in integrity, such as by improving the maintenance, enhancement or Appendix 9. As set out in that report a number of initiatives are proposed development of ecological corridors, should be encouraged. including restoration planting, provision of passage into the proposed lake for indigenous fish, while excluding exotic fish species, incorporating diversity into lake shore habitats and creation of instream cover. These will be implemented through subsequent resource consents and subdivision consents. xii. Maintain and enhance public access to and along the coastal marine Public access to the Waikato River will be significantly enhanced by creation of area, lakes and rivers; additional road and walkway access through the development. xiii. Avoid as far as practicable adverse effects on natural hydrological Adverse effects on hydrological characteristics and processes will be minimised characteristics and processes (including aquifer recharge and as set out in the report in Appendix 3; Subcatchment ICMP. The report flooding patterns), soil stability, water quality and aquatic recommends various LIUDD treatments. ecosystems including through methods such as low impact urban design and development (LIUDD);

111 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

xiv. Adopt sustainable design technologies, such as the incorporation of Sustainable design technologies, including Low Impact Urban Design and energy-efficient (including passive solar) design, low-energy street Development will be adopted through subsequent resource consents and lighting, rain gardens, renewable energy technologies, rainwater subdivision consents, as set out in the Subcatchment ICMP in Appendix 3. harvesting and grey water recycling techniques where appropriate; Passive solar design has been incorporated in the masterplanning. xv. Not result in incompatible adjacent land uses (including those that Potential incompatibility of activities has been taken into account through a may result in reverse sensitivity effects), such as industry, rural range of initiatives incorporated into the plan change as follows: activities and existing or planned infrastructure; ▪ The adventure park includes an area allocated to visitor accommodation around its fringe to provide a visual and acoustic buffer between the active and potentially noisy recreational activities, and the residential development. ▪ Establishing commercial and mixed use activities along the Hutchinson Road frontage as a buffer from the Te Rapa Dairy processing plant. Residential activities in this area will also be acoustically treated to meet appropriate internal noise levels and also set back from Hutchinson Rd in accordance with the recommendations in the Odour Assessment in Appendix 17. ▪ Implementing internal noise standards for dwellings within 100m of the Waikato Expressway. ▪ Landscape treatments to screen views of industrial areas. The nature of effects from these nearby activities are not sufficient to mean the site is not suitable for residential use. They can all be mitigated by design treatments. xvi. Be appropriate with respect to projected effects of climate change The effects of climate change have been integrated into the assessments of and be designed to allow adaptation to these changes; effects, in particular the SMP in Appendix 3. xvii. Consider effects on the unique tāngata whenua relationships, Tangata whenua values and aspirations will be acknowledged and expressed in values, aspirations, roles and responsibilities with respect to an the design and construction. Consultation with tangata whenua is underway as area. Where appropriate, opportunities to visually recognize described in section 6.5 of this report. That consultation process is designed to tāngata whenua connections within an area should be considered; identify the particular elements to be reflected in the development, such that they can be implemented through subsequent resource consents and subdivision consents. xviii. Support the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River in the The site is adjacent to the Waikato River and the development addresses the Waikato River catchment; Vision and Strategy by:

112 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

District Plans can only consider an alternative land release provided that:

▪ Significantly improving public access to the River through the design of vehicle, cycling and pedestrian access. ▪ Ensuring that the stormwater discharges to the River are of a better quality than they currently are and the receiving water. ▪ Setting a target of a swimmable water quality in the lakes on the site. ▪ Improving the appearance of the interface of the site with the Waikato River. ▪ Establishing a consultation process to allow for River iwi to influence the design of the project in relation to its interface with the River as set out in the Cultural Impact Assessment in Appendix 15. ▪ Aiming to eradicate alligator weed from the site thereby eliminating or at least significantly reducing the risk of it entering the River. xix. Encourage waste minimization and efficient use of resources (such Waste minimization is not able to be addressed as part of a plan change but will as through resource-efficient design and construction methods); and be addressed through subsequent construction processes. xx. Recognize and maintain or enhance ecosystem services. The site has been highly modified as a result of its previous quarrying. As a result, no indigenous vegetation remains and there are limited ecological values in the streams and ponds on the site. As set out in the Ecological Assessment in Appendix 9 an Ecological Rehabilitation Management Plan will be produced and implemented as part of the detailed design and implementation of subsequent resource consents and subdivision consents. This will enhance ecological values and will rehabilitate the existing gully that accommodates the stormwater outlet from the site.

113 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Implementation Method 6.1.2 of the RPS refers to reverse sensitivity and states that “consideration should be given to discouraging new sensitive activities locating near existing and planned land uses or activities that could be subject to effects including the discharge of substances, odour, smoke, noise, light spill, or dust which could affect the health of people and/or lower the community values of the surrounding area”. To some extent this is a repetition of Development Principle d) xv in Table 9 above and the discussion on reverse sensitivity effects in section 5.12 of this report, but the following additional commentary is provided given reverse sensitivity is a potential issue.

The triangular shape of the site means that it is bounded on the three sides as follows:

• to the east a boundary of 1.1km with the Waikato River, with rural residential development across the river

• to the west a boundary of 1.3km with the Waikato Expressway and Te Rapa Road, with rural residential (and proposed residential) zoning across the Expressway in Waikato District

• to the south a boundary of 650m with Hutchinson Road. Land to the south of Hutchinson Road is zoned Te Rapa North Industrial (Deferred Industrial). Approximately 420m south is Te Rapa Dairy Manufacturing site containing the Fonterra Dairy Factory.

The boundaries created by the Waikato River and the arterial roads are key strengths of the site that reduce the potential for reverse sensitivity effects. There are no such effects on the eastern side of the site as the proposed residential development is consistent with the existing rural residential development across the river. The traffic noise effects of arterial roads are predictable and well understood. They are commonly addressed in urban areas through a combination of building setbacks, screening and acoustic treatment of houses. In Hamilton acoustic treatment rules already apply to development within 100m of the Waikato Expressway45. As this has already set an acceptable benchmark in residential areas, adopting the same approach and rules for Te Awa Lakes is logical and represents an acceptable method of controlling reverse sensitivity effects of traffic noise. As set out in the Acoustic Report in Appendix 7, Expressway noise is also likely to be the controlling factor in terms of noise, meaning industrial noise is unlikely to require treatment.

However, the less predictable aspect of reverse sensitivity is the extent to which it could lead to future restrictions on existing or future industrial activities nearby. These restrictions could arise as a result of complaints or opposition from residential occupants of Te Awa Lakes in the future and are somewhat speculative. However, the likelihood of this occurring is low because:

• there is only the 650m Hutchinson Road frontage where industrial activities in the future could have an interface with Te Awa Lakes

• the Hutchinson Road land will need to proceed through a rezoning process to remove the current deferral and that will require consideration of how to treat the interface; it may well be that some restrictions an industrial development on that frontage are desirable

• Perry’s owns approximately half of the land between Hutchinson Road and the Fonterra Diary Factory so can control future use of that land to ensure it does not create reverse sensitivity effects.

45 Rule 25.8.3.10c) in Schedule One, page 25-67

114 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

• there is no evidence of current complaints about industrial activities in the area

• there are no known future plans for industrial expansion beyond existing zoned land. With some 200ha of deferred industrial land in the vicinity there are plentiful options to create industrial zones that are not adjacent to Te Awa Lakes, or otherwise mitigate the effects of proximity to it

• the design of Te Awa Lakes means that there are limited residential activities where they could be close to industrial activities

• potential reverse sensitivity noise effects from the Fonterra dairy factory are defined by the noise emission boundary in the ODP, with Policy 25.8.2.2a stating that noise sensitive activities within the Noise Emission Boundary ‘should include design and materials to reduce interior noise to acceptable levels’. Te Awa Lakes is 150m from the nearest point of the Noise Emission Boundary.

For these reasons the reverse sensitivity effects of the plan change can be mitigated and managed and as a result it will not be in conflict with implementation method 6.1.2.

Implementation method 6.3.1 of the RPS relates to integration of land use and infrastructure through district plans, with particular emphasis on roading infrastructure. The following is an itemised assessment against this method which states:

6.3.1 Plan Provisions

Regional and district plans shall include provisions that provide for a long-term strategic approach to the integration of land use and infrastructure and that give effect to Policy 6.3, including by ensuring as appropriate that:

a) roading patterns and design support the use of public transport;

The current situation is that there are a pair of bus laybys on Te Rapa Road (one with a shelter) immediately adjacent to the site. These stops are served by Route 21; Northern Connector which links Hamilton CBD, The Base, Ngaruawahia and Huntly.

They provide an initial level of service of public transport access46. However, the masterplanning of Te Awa Lakes includes a planned internal roading network. Access to the site will be via Hutchinson Road for all access from the south. The existing slip lane from Te Rapa Road to the service centre will provide a secondary access to the site, including for traffic from the north.

Primary access into the plan change area, will be via two collector road intersections to Hutchinson Road. The collector road network will support public transport service provision into Te Awa Lakes as the layout will allow a loop service to be provided. Initial consultation with Waikato Regional Council suggested that Te Awa Lakes could be serviced by a stand-alone service or preferably as part of an onward service to Horotiu and other communities to the north47.

The main roading layout, including the loop, forms part of the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan that is to be included in the ODP. Therefore 6.1.3a) will be given effect to.

46 Integrated Transport Assessment by Stantec in Appendix 4 47 Ibid

115 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

In addition the site is well located in proximity to the North Island Main Trunk Railway at Horotiu should that be used for a commuter rail service in the future.

b) Walking and cycling facilities are integrated with development;

Existing walking and cycling facilities include the Te Awa shared path that runs along the Waikato River adjacent to the site as set out in the ITA of Appendix 4 it is proposed to upgrade and improve the connectivity of the River Ride path as part of this plan change. There are also footpaths around the Hutchinson Road/Te Rapa Road intersection and a combination of off- road shared facilties and on-road marked cycle lanes for cyclists. The Waikato Expressway cycle path is a combination of a specifically-built and sealed cycle path running alongside the Expressway, and some of the local road networks48.

Walking and cycling access within the plan change area will be provided by a network of onsite local and collector roads. The Framework Plan49 shows that the development will provide direct connectivity to the Te Awa River path and for on-site leisure paths to be created using open space networks.

These facilities will be implemented through the plan change provisions which include the Te Awa Lakes Structure Plan that is to be included in the ODP. The Structure Plan includes the main walking and cycling network and subsequent development must be compliant with it. Subsequent resource consents for Concept Development Consents (CDC’s) in the Major Facilities Zone Land Development Plans (LDP’s) in the Medium Density Residential zone and resource consents in the Business 6 zone require ITA’s to be provided and they in turn require walking and cycling to be taken into account. Therefore, the proposed plan change provisions will give effect to item 6.1.3b).

c) The different transport modes are well connected;

The discussion under items a) and b) above also apply to c). They demonstrate that the Te Awa Lakes masterplan (and consequently the Structure Plan and subsequent resource consents) will ensure walking, cycling, motor vehicles and public transport will be well-connected via a simple network of collector and minor roads with bus stops, shared paths and some separate walking/cycling connections.

d) Industry is located where there is good access to strategic transport networks and road, rail or freight hubs;

The Te Awa Lakes plan change does not include industry. The plan change does not have any impact on existing industries in the locality or future industries in the Te Rapa North or Horotiu Strategic Industrial Nodes which will continue to have good access to the strategic transport network comprising the Waikato Expressway and the North Island Main Trunk railway. The ITA demonstrates that the effects of traffic generated from Te Awa Lakes can be readily mitigated, as provided for in the Plan Change rules.

e) Development maintains and enhances the safe, efficient and effective use of existing infrastructure and can be integrated with future infrastructure needs where these can be determined;

48 Ibid, 49 Ibid,

116 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

The ITA demonstrates that the existing roading network will be safely, efficiently and effectively used and that Te Awa Lakes is not dependent on the delivery of any wider transport infrastructure within Hamilton. It concludes that Te Awa Lakes supports the Transportation Objectives and Policies of the ODP and that the transportation and traffic effects can be mitigated50. The connectivity of Te Awa Lakes and its ability to provide efficient connectivity by a range of transport modes is discussed in subsections a), b) and c) above.

f) Development does not add to existing road safety risks and where possible should reduce such risks;

The ITA addresses the road safety risks of driver distraction for drivers on the Waikato Expressway due to the Te Awa Lakes development, and the Adventure Park in particular. It concludes that development itself will form part of the visual landscape along with features such as the Te Rapa Dairy Factory and the BP Service Station, and will develop over time, meaning it will have little impact. The Adventure Park is similar to other attractions near state highways, such as the White Water Park at Manukau adjacent to State Highway 1. Visibility can be beneficial for navigating as drivers can see their destination well in advance. Regardless, a new plan rule requiring screening is included in the Major Facilities Zone provisions.

Consideration has also been given to the safety aspects of that part of Te Rapa Road from Hutchinson Road South to Ruffell Road that is currently a semi rural environment. The road reflects that environment in terms of walking, cycling and lighting standard. However, the plan change itself is not sufficient to justify full urbanization of Te Rapa Road at this time51.

g) Development does not unnecessarily prevent likely future network infrastructure improvements and upgrades;

Te Awa Lakes does not have any impact on any identifiable future network infrastructure improvements and upgrades.

h) Development patterns support the use of rail or sea for freight movement;

Te Awa Lakes does not have any impact on freight movement by rail or sea.

i) Provisions support the travel demand management components of the Regional Land Transport Plan;

Principle 5 (section 3 of the Regional Land Transport Plan) requires travel demand to be managed through connection of travel modes and provision of travel choices supported through a whole network approach that recognizes the different characteristics of rural and urban locations. Te Awa Lakes supports travel choices and integration of land use and transport planning through delivery of a connected network as set out above in a), b), c) and e). Travel demand management plans are recommended in the ITA and implemented through the rules in the plan changes

j) Development recognizes the transport hierarchy and manages effects on the function of transport infrastructure;

Te Awa Lakes recognizes the transport hierarchy by guiding any direct connection to arterial roads. All access is to Hutchinson Road, with a secondary slip lane access from Te Rapa Road. Effects on the function of transport infrastructure will be mitigated by the upgrade of two

50 Ibid, 51 Ibid,

117 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

intersections; Hutchinson Road/Te Rapa Road and McKee Street/ Te Rapa Road. In addition, Hutchinson Road will be upgraded to a minor arterial standard.

As set out in the ITA these mitigation measures are appropriate to manage the effects on the function of transport infrastructure.

Waikato Tainui Environmental Plan Assessment

The Waikato Tainui Environmental Plan (“WTEP”) is a comprehensive document encompassing both processes and desired outcomes for Waikato – Tainui. As set out in Section 4.8.3.1 of this report it is one of the documents that provides the planning framework within which to assess this plan change.

The WTEP confirms that Waikato – Tainui Te Kauhanganui Incorporated (WTTKI) is the Iwi Authority for Waikato – Tainui. The Iwi Authority is to be consulted on plan changes in accordance with section 32 of the RMA. The plan notes that WTTKI may delegate its functions to other entities, including other Waikato – Tainui entities.

Section B of the WTEP addresses consultation and engagement with Waikato – Tainui. It emphasises the need for RMA applicants to form a relationship with Waikato – Tainui or Kaitiaki during the initial stages of resource development. It also sets out a suggested engagement process, appropriately scaled to the size of the development.

In the case of Te Awa Lakes early advice was obtained from the Waikato Raupatu River Trust on who should be consulted and what process should be followed. This led to the engagement of a facilitator (Norman Hill) and the formation of a TWWG comprised of invited representatives of:

• Turangawaewae Marae • Te Ao Te Whenua • Ngati Wairere • Waikato Raupatu River Trust

A presentation describing the proposed development was given to attendees at an inception meeting on 3 May 2017. Given the Te Awa Lakes development incorporates an initial plan change process and subsequent resource consents, the TWWG is intended to be engaged with through the life of the project. This approach is consistent with the principles of Section B of the WTEP and Perry’s have committed to the process.

Section C of the WTEP includes the vision, issues, strategies, policies and methods. The vision of the iwi is summarised as “To grow a prosperous, healthy, vibrant, innovative and culturally strong iwi”. The health and well-being of the environment is inseparable from the health and well-being of tangata whenua. Therefore, environmental management and enhancement is the cornerstone of the WTEP.

The objective of collaboration and consistency with Whakatupuranga 2050 is to be supported by adhering to the engagement process described above.

Section 11 of the WTEP incorporates the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River. These provisions are also included in the RPS and an assessment against them is included in Section 7.5 of this report. The assessment is not repeated and it concludes a high degree of consistency with the Vision and Strategy, to the extent that the plan change is relevant.

118 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Section 14 of the WTEP refers to customary activities, with the objective of protecting and enhancing the ability to undertake customary activities, including along the margins of waterways. The plan change has no impact on most of these activities, however it enhances access to the margin of the Waikato River, so in that respect is consistent.

Section 15 is Natural Heritage and Biodiversity. The objective is to support the full range of Waikato ecosystem types throughout the Waikato – Tainui rohe. Given the limited ecological values of the site there are no significant ecological effects of the plan change. However, there are opportunities for ecological restoration and enhancement as described in the Ecological Assessment in Appendix 9.

Section 15 refers to valuable historical items, highly prized sites and sites of significance. The key objectives of this section are to ensure that protocols are in place to manage potential accidental discoveries. Perry’s has engaged an archaeologist and a report on archaeological effects has been prepared (Appendix 10). An archaeological authority from Heritage New Zealand will be needed and it is proposed to develop a suitable accidental discovery protocol as part of that process. That process would include engagement with tangata whenua. This will ensure consistency with the WTEP.

Similarly, the engagement process with tangata whenua and the involvement of the project archaeologist will confirm whether there are any sites of significance. The archaeological report confirms that the site is part of an extensive area of river edge pre-European occupation and gardening. Any sites identified will be subject to appropriate management and protection.

Integrated catchment management is an objective in several chapters of the WTEP. This plan change includes an integrated approach to stormwater management and includes a stormwater strategy based on best practice low impact urban design, the natural processes of stormwater treatment in wetlands and enhancement of water quality discharges to the river. Therefore, it is consistent with these approaches.

In terms of land use, objective 25.11 refers to development principles that enhance the environment. In the case of this plan change the environment will be enhanced as the closed sand quarry is converted to a high quality urban environment incorporating best practice urban design principles.

119 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

8.0 Conclusion

Perry’s have identified an opportunity to create a new Gateway to the city and establish a regionally significant recreational and tourism destination, supported by new residential and business uses, on its land in Te Rapa. The site is strategically located to fulfil its function for these purposes. It is an innovative, environmentally considerate and efficient use of a former sand quarry site with significant development constraints.

This plan change is designed to promote and enable the unique tourist and recreational attraction for the City and wider region, integrated with the River and onsite water bodies, together with a new mixed use residential community. All contributing to a quickly growing regional economy.

The land’s current Industrial zoning fails to take into account the site’s significance as the gateway to the City, or the regionally significant opportunity stemming from its location on the Waikato River.

The current zoning provides no options to realise the opportunities to establish the land as a tourism and recreation destination, or the opportunity for a comprehensively designed and serviced greenfield site to meet the city’s housing needs, or the opportunity to significantly contribute to the city’s future economy.

A comprehensive masterplanning exercise has been undertaken with the help of a team of experts to establish the best fit for the site and ensure the best possible environment, social, and economic outcomes possible.

Extensive work and research has been undertaken in producing this plan change request which is supported by a range of technical assessments and fits into the existing strategic and policy framework of the ODP.

It does not lead to wide-ranging changes or any inconsistencies within the ODP but has been designed to integrate into the ODP easily. It satisfies the ‘alternative land release’ criteria for industrial land allocations in the RPS and therefore does not conflict with the RPS.

In addition, it is consistent with the other higher order planning instruments, including other aspects of the RPS, the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River, the Waikato – Tainui Environmental Plan and the National Policy Statements for Urban Development Capacity and Freshwater Management. It also fits well with the objectives of the emerging Hamilton to Auckland Corridor Plan.

The NPS – Urban Development Capacity is particularly significant as it post-dates the RPS and the ODP and places greater weight than those documents on the delivery of serviced land for urban development. The site is suited to accelerated development because it is already serviced with appropriate infrastructure.

Having evaluated the alternatives in accordance with section 32 of the RMA this plan change is considered the most appropriate planning response, consistent with the higher order policy documents and meets the relevant statutory criteria.

120 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

References

Future Proof Growth Strategy and Implementation Plan, 2009

Future Proof Business Land Reconciliation, Ken Tremaine, Future Proof Implementation Adviser, November 2010

Future Proof Monitoring Report, Michelle White and the Future Proof Technical Implementation Group, 2015

Vista, Hamilton City Urban Design Guide

Hamilton Urban Growth Strategy, Hamilton City Council 2010

Hamilton Housing Accord, 17 December 2016

Hamilton City River Plan, October 2014

Upper North Island Industrial Land Demand, Berl Economics, February 2015

Future Proof Economic Evaluation Update, Property Economics, May 2017

Riverside Reserves Operative Management Plan, Hamilton City Council, July 2008

Future Proof Strategy, Planning for Growth, November 2017

‘Reverse Sensitivity – the Common Law Giveth and the RMA Taketh Away’; Bruce Pardy and Janine Kew, 1999 (3NZSEL 93, 93)

Fonterra Limited, Te Rapa Reconsenting, Resource Consent Applications and Assessment of Environmental Effects; Mitchell Daysh, 16 December 2016

www.qualityplanning.org.nz/planningtools/industryguidancenotes

Guide to the Management of Effects on noise sensitive land use near to the state highway network; NZTA, September 2015 (version 1.0)

121 Bloxam Burnett & Olliver | Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change | 21 August 2019

Schedule One: Amendments to Operative Hamilton City District Plan

Schedule One: Amendments to Operative Hamilton City District Plan Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 1: Urban Design Figures prepared by Boffa Miskell

Appendix 1: Urban Design Figures prepared by Boffa Miskell Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 2: Urban Design Statement prepared by Boffa Miskell

Appendix 2: Urban Design Statement prepared by Boffa Miskell Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 3: Subcatchment Integrated Catchment Management Plan prepared by Bloxam Burnett & Olliver and including the Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Stormwater Solutions/CKL

Appendix 3: Subcatchment Integrated Catchment Management Plan prepared by Bloxam Burnett & Olliver and including the Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Stormwater Solutions/CKL Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 4: Integrated Transportation Assessment prepared by Stantec

Appendix 4: Integrated Transportation Assessment prepared by Stantec Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 5: Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment prepared by Boffa Miskell

Appendix 5: Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment prepared by Boffa Miskell Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 6: Assessment of Economic Effects prepared by RCG Ltd

Appendix 6: Assessment of Economic Effects prepared by RCG Ltd Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 7: Acoustic Report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics

Appendix 7: Acoustic Report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 8: Geotechnical Summary Report prepared by CMW Geosciences

Appendix 8: Geotechnical Summary Report prepared by CMW Geosciences Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 9: Assessment of Ecological Effects prepared by Kessels Ecology

Appendix 9: Assessment of Ecological Effects prepared by Kessels Ecology Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 10: Archaeological Assessment prepared by Dr Caroline Phillips

Appendix 10: Archaeological Assessment prepared by Dr Caroline Phillips Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 11: Environmental Site Investigation prepared by Coffey Services (NZ) Ltd

Appendix 11: Environmental Site Investigation prepared by Coffey Services (NZ) Ltd Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 12: Certificates of Title

Appendix 12: Certificates of Title Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 13: Copies of existing Resource Consents

Appendix 13: Copies of existing Resource Consents Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 14: Consultation Notes

Appendix 14: Consultation Notes Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 15: Report on Tangata Whenua Consultation prepared by Boffa Miskell and Cultural Impact Assessment

Appendix 15: Report on Tangata Whenua Consultation prepared by Boffa Miskell and Cultural Impact Assessment Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 16: Lighting and Glare Assessment prepared by LDP Ltd

Appendix 16: Lighting and Glare Assessment prepared by LDP Ltd Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 17: Updated Odour Assessment prepared by Pattle Delamore Partners

Appendix 17: Updated Odour Assessment prepared by Pattle Delamore Partners Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 18: Water Quality Technical Review by NIWA

Appendix 18: Water Quality Technical Review by NIWA Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 19: Industrial Development Viability Assessment prepared by Essentia Consulting Group Ltd

Appendix 19: Industrial Development Viability Assessment prepared by Essentia Consulting Group Ltd Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 20: Economic assessment prepared by Market Economics

Appendix 20: Economic assessment prepared by Market Economics Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 21: Te Awa Lakes; Response to BERL Report prepared by Castalia Strategic Advisors

Appendix 21: Te Awa Lakes; Response to BERL Report prepared by Castalia Strategic Advisors Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 22: Lake Water Quality Assessment and Design Approach prepared by River Lake Ltd

Appendix 22: Lake Water Quality Assessment and Design Approach prepared by River Lake Ltd Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 23: Alligator Weed Management Report prepared by Better Biosecurity Ltd

Appendix 23: Alligator Weed Management Report prepared by Better Biosecurity Ltd Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change

Appendix 24: Update to Stormwater Infrastructure Assessment prepared by Aurecon

Appendix 24: Update to Stormwater Infrastructure Assessment prepared by Aurecon Proposed Plan Change No 2 Te Awa Lakes | Updated Request for Plan Change