DOCSLIB.ORG

Before a Board of Inquiry East West Link Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Before a Board of Inquiry East West Link Project BEFORE A BOARD OF INQUIRY EAST WEST LINK PROJECT UNDER the Resource Management Act 1991 (the RMA) AND IN THE MATTER OF Notices of requirement for designation and resource consent applications by the NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY for the East West Link Project STATEMENT OF PRIMARY EVIDENCE OF DARREN WU ON BEHALF OF THE NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY Construction Traffic Impacts Dated: 12 April 2017 Barristers and Solicitors Auckland Solicitor Acting: Pat Mulligan Email: [email protected] Tel 64 9 358 2555 Fax 64 9 358 2055 PO Box 1433 DX CP24024 Auckland 1140 CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 1 2. INTRODUCTION 3 3. CODE OF CONDUCT 4 4. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 4 5. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND MY ROLE 4 6. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 5 7. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 8 8. ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION 10 9. RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS 19 10. CONCLUSION 30 BF\56808835\9 1. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 1.1 I have assessed the Construction Traffic Impacts from the Project based on the proposed construction activities as described in Section 7 of the AEE for the Project. I undertook my assessment on the assumption that a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) and Site Specific Traffic Management Plans (SSTMPs) would be produced. Overall I consider that the effects can be effectively managed to ensure safety and minimise disruption through the implementation of the management plans. 1.2 All temporary traffic management is governed by the Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM) and any proposed work must have an approved SSTMP from the relevant Road Controlling Authority. In my experience, these processes will require the contractor(s) to assess any potentially significant impacts and set out mitigation and management measures. 1.3 The assessment that was carried out has considered the effects on capacity of existing carriageways due to construction works, construction site accesses, public transport, pedestrians and cyclists and property accesses and parking. 1.4 For the purpose of my assessment, a proposed construction period of 2018 to 2025 was used for the assessment of traffic impacts, with a baseline environment set for 2018 which considered a road network after the opening of the Waterview tunnel connection. 1.5 The 2025 end of construction year assumes a road network before the Project has been complete. The two ends of the construction programme spectrum were used to assess the State Highway network impacts. 1.6 The analysis of the proposed work on State Highway 1 and 20 assumed that they did not occur at the same time. The assessment suggested that the impacts would be of greater significance if the work on State Highway 20 took place in the later years of the proposed construction programme. In my opinion, prioritising the SH20 works earlier in the programme would be beneficial. In both cases, whilst some transfer of vehicle route choice is predicted from the disrupted State Highway to the un-disrupted one, the effects on travel time by this was minimal. 1.7 Access to work sites will need to be reviewed and developed on a site by site basis as part of SSTMPs taking into account the potential mitigation measures identified. 1.8 There is no significant impact anticipated for public transport. The Project will make use of scheduled block-of-lines for rail for the construction of over-rail bridges. Some bus BF\56808835\9 | Page 1 routes are affected at Panama Road and Princes Street Interchange but all routes will be maintained. 1.9 The most significant impact on pedestrians and cyclists is the potential full or partial closure of the Waikaraka Walkway. In other areas, pedestrian and cycle movements must be provided with a safe route through or around the work area as required in CoPTTM. 1.10 Access to private properties will generally be maintained and individual property owners consulted to discuss specific impacts. 1.11 A Construction Traffic Management Plan Framework (CTMPF) was developed as part of this assessment. This document guides the philosophy that the Project will follow in the delivery of all temporary traffic management. It summarises key processes and considerations for an engaged contractor(s) to develop into a CTMP. 1.12 In addition, a number of proposed conditions were developed to set the requirement for a CTMP and the required content. Conditions were also developed to note important considerations for a contractor(s) when developing an SSTMP for any proposed work activity. 1.13 I have reviewed the submissions received that have raised concerns or issues with regarding construction traffic effects. The majority of submissions were specific in the issues that were raised. As a result I have proposed a number of possible amendments to the draft Construction Traffic conditions to address these. 1.14 In my opinion, other issues raised by submitters, such as site specific access issues, can be managed via the original or amended proposed draft conditions or through the processes and procedures as detailed in the CTMPF. 1.15 Overall, I do not consider the potential effects of the Project’s construction works on traffic to be significant. The Transport Agency has notable experience in successfully managing traffic effects through major road projects and this will be carried through to this Project. In addition, I believe that the proposed conditions, CTMP and approval processes for SSTMPs will require more detailed consideration of traffic management meaures that a contractor(s) will adopt to mitigate, manage and minimise effects once the construction methodology is developed in detail. With the proposed conditions and management plan framework in place, I consider that the effects of construction activities on traffic can be appropriately managed. BF\56808835\9 | Page 2 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 My full name is Darren Wu. I have a Bachelor of Engineering in Civil Engineering with Honours from the University of Canterbury (2006) and am a Member of the Transportation Group of IPENZ. 2.2 My role on the East West Link Project (the Project), is a technical specialist for the assessment of construction traffic impacts by the proposed construction staging. I am familiar with the transport environment in which this Project sits. 2.3 I currently hold the position of Associate at Beca Limited (Beca). I have 10 years’ experience in traffic engineering in Auckland, New Zealand with specific skills in the areas of understanding and mitigating operational impacts to a road network by construction staging. I hold a Level 2/3 STMS qualification from the NZ Transport Agency for temporary traffic management on New Zealand roads and have built my experience primarily through major capital projects in Auckland. 2.4 On the Victoria Park Tunnel Project, I was the principal traffic engineer in the temporary traffic management team and was responsible for all planning, temporary design and approvals of construction staging on the local road network as the cut and cover tunnel was built. For the Newmarket Viaduct replacement project, I led the development of two of the three full motorway closure traffic management strategies. In recent times, I have been largely serving as a traffic management advisor to support the assessment and planning of major construction events for the Western Ring Route (WRR) projects and also the Southern Corridor widening project on SH 1. 2.5 I have also had some exposure to this field of work in Australia where I have been managing a traffic staging design package for a seven kilometre section of rural Pacific Highway in northern New South Wales for the department of Roads and Maritime Services. 2.6 I have been engaged by the New Zealand Transport Agency (the Transport Agency) to undertake an assessment of the effects on traffic of the construction staging works for the Project (for which the Notices of Requirement (NORs) and resource consent applications have been lodged with the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). My evidence describes this assessment and its findings. BF\56808835\9 | Page 3 3. CODE OF CONDUCT 3.1 I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note and that I agree to comply with it. I confirm that I have considered all material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express, and that this evidence is within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person. 4. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 4.1 This evidence highlights the key points from Technical Report 10: Construction Traffic Impact Assessment, and Technical Report 10 Supplementary Assessment, which formed part of the Assessment of Effects on the Environment (AEE). With the exception of any updates noted in this evidence I confirm the content and accuracy of those reports. Together with my colleague Martin Peake, I also assessed the Great South Road intersection grade separated design. Technical Report 10 – Supplementary Assessment contains the results of that assessment. With the exception of any updates noted in this evidence I confirm the content and accuracy of those reports. 4.2 My evidence addresses the following matters: (a) Project description and my role in the Project; (b) Assessment methodology; (c) A description of the existing environment relevant to my assessment; (d) Assessment of effects and proposed mitigation; (e) Response to submissions; and (f) Overall conclusions 4.3 I have relied on the evidence of Mr Noel Nancekivell and Mr Andrew Murray. 5. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND MY ROLE 5.1 The Project has been described in Sections 6 and 7 of the AEE and the evidence of Mr Noel Nancekivell. 5.2 An outline of the proposed construction activities for the Project (Section 7 of the AEE) was carried out for the proposed design solution.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Waterview Connection Motorway
    Waterview Connection Information Sheet THE WATERVIEW CONNECTION MOTORWAY WHEN WILL THE WATERVIEW WHAT ARE THE TRAFFIC WHAT IS THE CONNECTION OPEN TO BENEFITS OF THE WATERVIEW TRAFFIC? WATERVIEW CONNECTION? Construction is on schedule for opening in early By bridging the gap between the Southwestern CONNECTION? 2017 as planned. and Northwestern motorways, the Waterview Connection will complete Auckland’s Western Being built is 5km of 6-lane motorway Ring Route. This is a 48km motorway link from to connect State Highways 20 (the Manukau in the south to Albany in the north that Southwestern Motorway) and 16 (the WHO WILL OPERATE will bypass central Auckland. Northwestern Motorway). THE MOTORWAY? Completing the Western Ring Route has been There will be three lanes southbound and prioritised as a Road of National Significance three lanes northbound between Maioro The Well-Connected Alliance, which is building because of the contribution it will make to New Street, where S.H.20 now ends, and the the Waterview Connection, will form an alliance Zealand’s future prosperity. It will provide Auckland Great North Road interchange on S.H.16. with international tunnel controls specialists SICE NZ Ltd (Sociedad Ibérica de Construcciones with a resilient and reliable motorway network by Half of the new motorway is underground in Eléctricas) to operate and maintain the motorway reducing the region’s dependence on the single twin tunnels 2.4km long and up to 30m below for the first 10 years of its life. A team from SICE spine comprising State Highway 1 and the Auckland the surface between the Alan Wood Reserve has worked with the Well-Connected Alliance Harbour Bridge for business to business trips, in Owairaka and Waterview.
    [Show full text]
  • St Lukes Interchange (St Lukes Interchange) to Be Shown As Road Purposes for the Project (St Lukes Interchange)
    6 Henderson Valley Road, Henderson, Auckland 0612 Private Bag 92250, Auckland 1142, New Zealand Ph 09 355 3553 Fax 09 355 3550 Notice of Requirement NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT FOR A DESIGNATION UNDER SECTION 168(2) OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 (RMA) TO: Auckland Council FROM: Auckland Transport 6 Henderson Valley Road Henderson Private Bag 92250 Auckland AUCKLAND TRANSPORT (an Auckland Council Controlled Organisation) as Requiring Authority under section 167 of the Resource Management Act 1991 gives notice of a requirement for a designation in the Auckland Council District Plan for works being the Waterview Connection SH16 St Lukes Interchange (St Lukes Interchange) to be shown as road purposes for the Project (St Lukes Interchange). 1. SUMMARY The St Lukes Interchange will generally comprise: Auckland Transport gives notice of a requirement for an alteration to “Designations D05- 08 and B08-04” in the Auckland Council District Plan (Isthmus Section) 2011 (“District Plan”) to widen St Lukes Road and Great North Road at the St Lukes Interchange. The purpose of Designation D05-08 is for regional road and the purpose of designation B08-04 is for public road network. The designations are identified on District Plan Maps D05 and D06 and in Appendix B of the Planning Maps, copies of which are contained in Appendix A this NoR. Under Section 176A(2)(b) of the RMA it is not intended to submit an Outline Plan of Works prior to construction as the details of the proposed works, as referred to in Section 176A(3), are addressed in this NOR. The proposed works are in keeping with the purpose of designations D05-08 and B08-04.
    [Show full text]
  • Newmarket Viaduct Protection Designation
    Newmarket Viaduct Protection Designation Notice of Requirement by Requiring Authority for Alteration of Designation D09-32 12 March 2015 Document name NZ Transport Agency NOR for Alteration to Designation D09-32 This report has been prepared for the benefit of the NZ Transport Agency (the Transport Agency). No liability is accepted by this company or any employee or sub-consultant of this company with respect to its use by any other person. This disclaimer shall apply notwithstanding that the report may be made available to other persons for an application for permission or approval or to fulfil a legal requirement. Quality Assurance Statement Prepared by: Cameron Wallace (Opus) Reviewed by: Jarrod Snowsill (Opus) Project Manager: Sarah Ho (NZTA) Approved for issue by: Paul Glucina (NZTA) 2 NZ Transport Agency NOR for Alteration to Designation D09-32 Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. NZTA Framework 5 3. Reason for the sAlteration 7 4. Description of the Existing Environment 12 5. Assessment of Alternatives 18 6. Consultation 25 7. Assessment of Environmental Effects 29 8. Notification 37 9. Statutory Assessment 39 10. Conclusion 47 11. Appendices Appendix 1 - Designation Plans Appendix 2 – Certificates of Title Appendix 3 – Designation Notation Appendix 4 – Transport Assessment Appendix 5 – Traffic Safety Assessment Appendix 6 – Vibration and Excavation Assessment Appendix 7 – Structural Assessment Appendix 8 – Wind Assessment Appendix 9 – Consultation Material Appendix 10 – Consultation Feedback Appendix 11 – Affected Parties NZ Transport Agency NOR for Alteration to Designation D09-32 Notice of Requirement for an Alteration to Designation under section 181 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) To: Auckland Council Private Bag 92300 Auckland 1141 From: NZ Transport Agency Private Bag 106602 Auckland 1143 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Facts and Issues: Towards a National Infrastructure Plan
    ISBN: 978-0-478-33080-9 (online) NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY Note to Reader The Minister for Infrastructure indicated in his recent speech to the ‘Building Nations’ Symposium that the National Infrastructure Plan “…will evolve through time. The first draft should be ready early next year. Areas not identified in the plan will not necessarily be excluded from future public investment. It will be updated regularly - and no doubt we will get better at doing it.” This document is a precursor to the Plan. It contains a sector-by-sector description of New Zealand’s existing infrastructure, information about planned investment and a description of current policy settings. We would now like to answer a number of questions: 1. Base information: Is the sectoral analysis contained here an accurate and informative description of the sector? If not, what changes are required to make it so? 2. Missing issues: Are there important infrastructure issues not mentioned in this document? 3. Decision-making: This document suggests that for projects to contribute to community/national welfare and economic growth, they must have expected benefits (measured comprehensively) that are greater than their estimated costs (also measured comprehensively) – see the decision-making principles in the ‘Policy Context’ chapter. As well as considering distributional or equity considerations, are there other considerations that should be taken into account and if so, what is the case for that? 4. Cross-sectoral issues: What cross-sectoral issues are faced by operators/users of infrastructure in each sector? This document identifies a number of cross sectoral issues. Are there other cross-sectoral issues that should be included in a National Infrastructure Plan? 5.
    [Show full text]
  • To View an Individual Route Map, Click on the Route Number
    Ngataringa Bayswater PROPOSED SERVICES Bay KEY SYMBOLS FREQUENT SERVICES LOCAL SERVICES PEAK PERIOD SERVICES Little Shoal Station or key connection point Birkenhead Bay Northwestern Northwest to Britomart via Crosstown 6a Crosstown 6 extension to 101 Pt Chevalier to Auckland University services Northwestern Motorway and Selwyn Village via Jervois Rd Northcote Cheltenham Rail Line Great North Rd To viewNorthcote an individualPoint route map, click on the route number (Passenger Service) Titirangi to Britomart via 106 Freemans Bay to Britomart Loop 209 Beach North Shore Northern Express routes New North Rd and Blockhouse Bay Stanley Waitemata service Train Station NX1, NX2 and NX3 138 Henderson to New Lynn via Mangere Town Centre to Ferries to Northcote, Point Harbour City LINK - Wynyard Quarter to Avondale Peninsula Wynyard Quarter via Favona, Auckland Harbour Birkenhead, West Harbour, North City Link 309X Bridge Beach Haven and Karangahape Rd via Queen St 187 Lynfield to New Lynn via Mangere Bridge, Queenstown Rd Ferries to West Harbour, Hobsonville Head Ferry Terminal Beach Haven and Stanley Bay (see City Centre map) Blockhouse Bay and Pah Rd (non stop Hobsonville Services in this Inner LINK - Inner loop via Parnell, Greenwoods Corner to Newmarket) Services to 191 New Lynn to Blockhouse Bay via North Shore - direction only Inner Link Newmarket, Karangahape Rd, Avondale Peninsula and Whitney St Panmure to Wynyard Quarter via Ferry to 701 Lunn Ave and Remuera Rd not part of this Ponsonby and Victoria Park 296 Bayswater Devonport Onehunga
    [Show full text]
  • Waitemata Harbour Crossing Study 2008 Study Summary Report
    ZOMAP l a n n i n g S o l u t i o n s CL t d Resource Management & Planning Consultants Waitemata Harbour Crossing Study 2008 Study Summary Report Waitemata Harbour Crossing Study 2008 STUDY SUMMARY REPORT April 2008 Sinclair Knight Merz 25 Teed Street PO Box 9806 Newmarket, Auckland New Zealand Tel: +64 9 913 8900 Fax: +64 9 913 8901 Web: www.skmconsulting.com COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Sinclair Knight Merz Limited. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Sinclair Knight Merz constitutes an infringement of copyright. LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Sinclair Knight Merz Limited’s Client, and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the agreement between Sinclair Knight Merz and its Client. Sinclair Knight Merz accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party. The SKM logo is a trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. © Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd, 2006 Waitemata Harbour Crossing Study 2008 Study Summary Report Contents 1. Executive Summary - 1 - 1.1 Report Purpose - 1 - 1.2 Evaluation Framework - 1 - 1.3 Study Phase 1 - 2 - 1.4 Study Phase 2 - 3 - 1.5 Study Conclusion - 7 - 2. Study Purpose and Process - 10 - 2.1 Study Purpose - 10 - 2.2 Study Process - 10 - 3. Project Objectives and Functionality Principles - 12 - 3.1 Project Objectives - 12 - 3.2 Functionality Principles - 12 - 4.
    [Show full text]
  • CRL Planning Strategic Evidence of Bryce Julyan
    Under the Resource Management Act 1991 In the matter of Notices of Requirement to enable the construction, operation and maintenance of the City Rail Link Between Auckland Transport Requiring Authority and Auckland Council Consent Authority Statement of Evidence of Bryce Michael Tom Julyan Qualifications and Experience 1. My full name is Bryce Michael Tom Julyan. I hold the degree of Bachelor of Town Planning from the University of Auckland, New Zealand. I obtained my degree in 1985. I have been a Full Member of the New Zealand Planning Institute (MNZPI) since 1990 and since 2008 have sat on the National Council (now the Board) of that organisation. I currently hold the position of Chair on the Board of the NZPI. 2. As well as my involvement with the NZPI, I also maintain my professional development through membership to the New Zealand Resource Management Law Association and Urban Design Forum. 3. My professional experience spans approximately 28 years in planning. I have extensive experience in leading the planning work on major transport infrastructure projects in New Zealand including undertaking assessments of effects, consulting with the public and stakeholders, and managing the preparation of planning documentation. Specifically, in relation to major transport infrastructure projects I have been involved in a planning leadership or advisory role on the following projects which have included consenting and/or compliance responsibilities: a. Victoria Park Tunnel b. Marsden Point Rail Link c. Newmarket Viaduct d. Waterview Connection e. Northern Busway 4. I have included further details of my experience in Attachment 1 to this evidence. 5. I am currently employed by Beca Limited, a company within the Beca Group (Beca), and have been with the company for 17 years.
    [Show full text]
  • 14Th Tunnelling 2011 Registration:X
    14th Australasian Tunnelling Conference 2011 Development of Underground Space 8 – 10 March 2011, Sky City, Auckland, New Zealand Gold Sponsors Registration Brochure Co-hosted by www.ausimm.com 14th Australasian Tunnelling Conference 2011 An Invitation Thank you to our Sponsors Dear Colleagues, On behalf of the Australasian Tunnelling Society, I invite you to attend the 14th Australian Tunnelling Conference to be held in Auckland, New Zealand, in March 2011. Gold Sponsors Tunnelling methods and equipment have undergone a quiet revolution during the first decade of the 21st Century. Tunnel boring machines of ever larger diameters, covering the full spectrum of soil and rock conditions, are appearing. In the mined tunnel arena, computer guided equipment including road headers and drilling and bolting machines are available as is robotic sprayed concrete equipment. All of the foregoing lead to increased productivity and reduced tunnelling costs. In the design offices, numerical modelling software has permitted improved predictions of soil and structure interaction, whilst computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software has facilitated assessment of a wide range of fire and ventilation scenarios for transportation tunnels. Simultaneously, the project procurement practices have continued to evolve. Silver Sponsors The Conference theme “Development in Underground Space” encompasses these advances through Keynote addresses each day and well varied session topics. Many recent case studies are also covered, providing insight into recent experiences and issues successfully addressed. A truly European flair will be enjoyed through the participation of Professor Giovanni Barla, Turin Polytechnic University, who is one of the Keynote speakers at the Conference. Giovanni never fails to infuse his audience with his enthusiasm and love for underground soil/rock mechanics and we look forward to his address.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering Walk Final with out Cover Re-Print.Indd
    Heritage Walks _ The Engineering Heritage of Auckland 5 The Auckland City Refuse Destructor 1905 Early Electricity Generation 1908 9 Wynyard Wharf 1922 3 13 Auckland Electric 1 Hobson Wharf The New Zealand National Maritime Museum Tramways Co. Ltd Princes Wharf 1937 1989 1899–1902 1921–24 12 7 2 The Viaduct 10 4 11 The Auckland Gasworks, Tepid Baths Lift Bridge The Auckland Harbour Bridge The Sky Tower Viaduct Harbour first supply to Auckland 1865 1914 1932 1955-59 1997 1998-99 Route A 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Route B 14 Old 15 Auckland High Court 13 The Old Synagogue 1 10 Albert Park 1942 Government 1865-7 1884-85 The Ferry Building House 1912 1856 16 Parnell Railway Bridge and Viaduct 5 The Dingwall Building 1935 1865-66 3 Chief Post Office 1911 The Britomart Transport Centre 7 The Ligar Canal, named 1852, improved 1860s, covered 1870s 6 8 Civic Theatre 1929 2001-2004 New Zealand 9 Guardian Trust The Auckland Town Hall Building 1911 1914 17 The Auckland Railway Station 1927-37 11 Albert Barracks Wall 2 Queens Wharf 1913 1846-7 4 The Dilworth Building 1926 12 University of Auckland Old Arts Building 1923-26 10 Route A, approx 2.5 hours r St 9 Route B, approx 2.5 hours Hame Brigham St Other features Jellicoe St 1 f r ha W Madden s 2 e St St rf Princ a 12 h 13 W s Beaumont START HERE een 11 Qu Pakenha m St St 1 son ob H St bert y St n St Gaunt St Al 2 e e Pakenh S ue ket Place H1 am Q Hals St 3 ar Customs M St Quay St 3 4 18 NORTH Sw 8 St anson S Fanshawe t 5 7 6 Wyn Shortla dham nd
    [Show full text]
  • Auckland's Urban Form
    A brief history of Auckland’s urban form April 2010 A brief history of Auckland’s urban form April 2010 Introduction 3 1840 – 1859: The inaugural years 5 1860 – 1879: Land wars and development of rail lines 7 1880 – 1899: Economic expansion 9 1900 – 1929: Turning into a city 11 1930 – 1949: Emergence of State housing provision 13 1950 – 1969: Major decisions 15 1970 – 1979: Continued outward growth 19 1980 – 1989: Intensifi cation through infi ll housing 21 1990 – 1999: Strategies for growth 22 2000 – 2009: The new millennium 25 Conclusion 26 References and further reading 27 Front cover, top image: North Shore, Auckland (circa 1860s) artist unknown, Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tamaki, gift of Marshall Seifert, 1991 This report was prepared by the Social and Economic Research and Monitoring team, Auckland Regional Council, April 2010 ISBN 978-1-877540-57-8 2 History of Auckland’s Urban Form Auckland region Built up area 2009 History of Auckland’s Urban Form 3 Introduction This report he main feature of human settlement in the Auckland region has been the development This report outlines the of a substantial urban area (the largest in development of Auckland’s New Zealand) in which approximately 90% urban form, from early colonial Tof the regional population live. This metropolitan area settlement to the modern Auckland is located on and around the central isthmus and metropolis. It attempts to capture occupies around 10% of the regional land mass. Home the context and key relevant to over 1.4 million people, Auckland is a vibrant centre drivers behind the growth in for trade, commerce, culture and employment.
    [Show full text]
  • ONEHUNGA Transform Onehunga
    ONEHUNGA Transform Onehunga High Level Project Plan – March 2017 ABBREVIATIONS AT Auckland Transport ATEED Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development Ltd CCO Council-controlled organisation the council Auckland Council HLPP High Level Project Plan HNZ Housing New Zealand LTP Long-term Plan Panuku Panuku Development Auckland AUP Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part) SOI Statement of Intent 2 PANUKU DEVELOPMENT AUCKLAND CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 5 3.7 Infrastructure 34 7.3.4 Manukau Harbour Forum 68 1.1 Mihi 8 3.7.1 Social infrastructure 34 7.3.5 Large Infrastructure Integration Group 68 1.2 Shaping spaces for Aucklanders to love 9 3.7.2 Physical infrastructure 34 7.3.6 Onehunga community champions 68 1.3 Panuku – who we are 10 3.7.3 Infrastructure projects 35 7.3.7 Baseline engagement 69 1.4 Why Onehunga? 12 7.3.8 Auckland Council family 69 4.0 PANUKU PRINCIPLES 39 1.5 Purpose of this High Level Project Plan 13 7.3.9 Place-led engagement 69 FOR TRANSFORM PROJECTS 1.6 Developing the Transform Onehunga story 14 7.4 Place-making for Onehunga 70 4.1 Panuku’s commitment 40 2.0 VISION THEMES FOR 17 4.2 Panuku principles for Transform projects 40 8.0 PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION 73 TRANSFORM ONEHUNGA 8.1 Development strategy 74 5.0 GOALS FOR TRANSFORM ONEHUNGA 43 8.1.1 Key infl uences 74 3.0 CONTEXT 21 6.0 STRATEGIC MOVES 47 8.1.2 Proposed delivery strategy 74 3.1 Background 22 6.1 Strategic Move: Build on existing strengths (RETAIN) 50 8.2 Town Centre Core 76 3.2 Mana Whenua 23 6.1.1 Potential projects and initiatives 51 8.3 Town Centre
    [Show full text]
  • 1967 No 8 Auckland Harbour Board (Reclamation
    1468 Auckland Harbour Board (Reclamation) 1967, No. B Empowering ANALYSIS 7. Authority to lease or license Title 8. Validation and empowering of cer­ 1. Short Title tain reclamation by the Onehunga 2. Interpretation Borough Council 3. Special Act 9. Local authority boundaries 4. Authority to reclaim 10. Cancellation of trusts and reserva­ 5. Authority to develop tions 6. Reclamation or development not to 11. Powers of District Land Registrar prejudice other powers and rights Schedules 1967, No_ 8-Local An Act to authorise the Auckland Harbour Board to reclaim from the sea certain tidal lands in the Waitemata and Manukau Harbours and to develop such reclaimed land and other lands for industrial, commercial, and other purposes [25 August 1967 BE IT ENACTED by the General Assembly of New Zea­ land in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1. Short Title-This Act may be cited as the Auckland Harbour Board (Reclamations) Empowering Act 1967 . .2. Interpretation-In this Act, unless the context other­ WIse reqUlres,- "Board" means the Auckland Harbour Board; "Local authority" means a local authority within the meaning of that term in the Public Works Act 1928. 3. Special Act-This Act shall be deemed to be a special Act within the meaning of the Harbours Act 1950. 1967, No. 8 Auckland Harbour Board (Reclamation) l469 Empowering 4. Authority to reclaim-( 1) Subject to the provisions of the Harbours Act 1950, and of this Act, but notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (3) of section 175 of the Harbours Act 1950, the Board may from time to time re­ claim from the sea the areas described in the First Schedule to this Act or any part or parts thereof save and except the area described in section B of Part IV of that schedule.
    [Show full text]