DOCSLIB.ORG

Wynyard Crossing Assessment of Environmental Effects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wynyard Crossing Assessment of Environmental Effects Wynyard Crossing Assessment of Environmental Effects Application for Resource Consent 14 June 2019 CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 6 2.0 THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY DETAILS ........................................................ 10 3.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 12 3.1 Overview ................................................................................................12 3.2 Format of Assessment ...........................................................................13 3.3 Consultants and contributions ...............................................................14 4.0 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................. 15 4.1 History of connection between Wynyard Precinct and Viaduct Harbour Precinct ..................................................................................................15 4.2 Strategic Context....................................................................................21 5.0 THE PROPOSAL ................................................................................................ 26 5.1 Overview ................................................................................................26 5.2 Project Objectives and Requirements ....................................................27 5.3 Construction of the Temporary Crossing ...............................................27 5.4 Removal of the Existing Wynyard Crossing Bridge .................................29 5.5 Construction of the Proposed Wynyard Crossing Bridge .......................30 5.6 Design and operation of the Proposed Wynyard Crossing Bridge .........31 5.7 Waterspace use and occupation of the coastal marine area .................34 6.0 CONSENT DURATION ...................................................................................... 35 7.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS ................................................................................. 35 8.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................ 37 8.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................37 8.2 Landform & Visual setting ......................................................................37 8.3 Existing Uses and Access ........................................................................38 8.4 Ownership, occupation and lease agreements ......................................41 8.5 Navigation ..............................................................................................45 8.6 Cultural and Built heritage .....................................................................46 8.7 Natural environment..............................................................................47 8.8 Transport and traffic ..............................................................................51 8.9 Network Utilities and Infrastructure ......................................................52 9.0 CONSENT REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................. 53 9.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................53 9.2 Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) .............................................53 9.2.1 Proposal Summary .................................................................................54 9.2.2 Consents Required .................................................................................55 9.2.2.1 Permitted Activities ................................................................................55 9.2.2.2 Proposed New Bridge ............................................................................56 Assessment of Environmental Effects Wynyard Crossing 1 9.2.2.3 Demolition of the Existing Bridge ...........................................................59 9.2.2.4 Temporary Crossing ...............................................................................61 9.2.2.5 Designation ............................................................................................63 9.3 Plan Changes 14 and 15 .........................................................................63 9.4 National Environmental Standard - Soil .................................................64 9.5 Overall Consent Status/Bundling ...........................................................64 10.0 OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS ........................................ 66 10.1 New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (2010) ......................................66 10.2 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) ........67 10.3 Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 ........................................................67 10.4 Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) .............................................69 10.4.1 Chapter B Regional Policy Statement .....................................................69 10.4.2 AUP Objectives and Policies ...................................................................69 11.0 EVALUATION OF APPLICATION ........................................................................ 76 11.1 Evaluation ..............................................................................................76 11.1.1 Overview ................................................................................................76 11.1.2 Weighting of proposed plan changes: Auckland Council Unitary Plan ...77 11.1.3 Permitted baseline and existing environment .......................................77 11.2 ONGOING/PERMANENT EFFECTS ..........................................................77 11.3 Positive Effects .......................................................................................77 11.4 Character and Amenity ..........................................................................78 11.4.1 Evaluation character and amenity effects ..............................................78 11.5 Visual and Landscape .............................................................................81 11.5.1 Evaluation visual and landscape effects .................................................81 11.6 Transportation - Land and Maritime ......................................................86 11.7 Infrastructure .........................................................................................88 11.8 Cultural/Heritage ...................................................................................89 11.9 Noise ......................................................................................................89 11.10 Lighting ..................................................................................................90 11.11 Coastal Process and Ecology ..................................................................92 11.12 TEMPORARY/CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS ...............................................100 11.12.1 Overview ..............................................................................................100 11.13 Transport – Land and Maritime ...........................................................101 11.14 Noise and Vibration .............................................................................103 11.15 Lighting ................................................................................................105 11.16 Natural environment [coastal process, ecology and contamination] ..106 11.16.1 Contamination Management and Land and Seabed Disturbance ........106 11.16.2 Effects on Ecology ................................................................................108 11.16.3 Biosecurity matters ..............................................................................110 11.16.4 Coastal processes .................................................................................110 Assessment of Environmental Effects Wynyard Crossing 2 11.17 Summary of Evaluation ........................................................................111 12.0 CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 112 13.0 CONSULTATION AND FEEDBACK ................................................................... 113 14.0 OTHER MATTERS (SECTION 104(1)(C)) .......................................................... 113 14.1 Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 ...........................113 14.2 Other Strategic Plans ...........................................................................114 15.0 PART 2 MATTERS AND CONCLUSION ............................................................. 115 Assessment of Environmental Effects Wynyard Crossing 3 FIGURES AND TABLES Figure 1: Aerial Photo Showing Proposed Replacement Wynyard Crossing Bridge Figure 2: Aerial Photo of Locality 1940 Figure 3: Aerial Photo of Locality 1959 Figure 4: Aerial Photo of Locality 1996 Figure 5: Aerial Photo of Locality 2001 Figure 6 Aerial Photo of Locality 2010 Figure 7: Aerial Photo of Locality 2012 Figure 8: Aerial Photo of Locality 2107 Figure 9: Waterfront Plan Excerpt Figure 10: Key Urban Concepts Figure 11: Wynyard Quarter Key Connection Concept Figure 12: Aerial Photo Showing Location of Proposed Temporary Crossing Figure 13: Temporary Crossing Potential Sliding Operating Mechanism Figure 14: Proposed Construction Area (subject to change) Figure 15: Plan and Section of Proposed Bridge including Swing Arc Figure 16: Elevation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kaipatiki Local Board.20110510.Minutesattachments
    Item 18 Attachment D Prioritisation table of initiatives. The Kaipatiki Local Board is seeking funding for the initiatives in the following table for its 2011/12 Local Board Agreement (note: this is not a ranked list). Initiative Rationale Costs Enhancement of all local A number of existing local Unknown assets that serve a regional or parks and facilities within sub-regional function such as Kaipatiki provide for sub- netball, football etc and regional and regional provide support for the club activities. To ensure on-going that use the facilities levels of service are maintained and enhanced regional support for the costs of these facilities should be provided at a regional level. Improvements to the North The North Shore Events Unknown Shore Events Centre Centre requires climate including climate control and control for minimum sound proofing standards for the National Basketball League (for the NZ Breakers) and sound proofing to minimise adverse effects on neighbours. Improvements to the venue will provide opportunities to secure other events Urgently undertake the de- Ponds require urgent Onepoto c$70k silting of Onepoto, Link Drive, maintenance for the de- Chelsea Chelsea and Totaravale silting: Others Unknown stormwater ponds - offensive odours; - wildlife is dying and - the silt is causing problems for recreational users. Development of parking on The site purchase for Unknown vacant site of 450 Glenfield additional parking in Road Glenfield. Budget needs to be provided to remove the house and establish the parking. Site is in an unacceptable condition. Northcote Mainstreet Gateway Identified through the Town Unknown project Centre plan as a priority. Land has become available for the gateway and is needed for this centre identified for growth.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Cup Traffic and Transport Technical Report
    Report America’s Cup Traffic and Transport Technical Report for Resource Consent Application, Wynyard Hobson Prepared for Panuku Development Auckland and Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment Prepared by Beca Ltd (Beca) April 2018 America's Cup: Wynyard Hobson Traffic and Transport Technical Report Revision History Revision Nº Prepared By Description Date 1 Kara Hartshorne Draft Issue for Council Review 07/04/2018 2 Kara Hartshorne Issue for Legal Review 11/04/2018 3 Kara Hartshorne Final Issue 12/04/2018 Document Acceptance Action Name Signed Date Prepared by Kara Hartshorne 11/04/2018 Reviewed by Joe Phillips 12/04/2018 Approved by Joe Phillips 12/04/2018 on behalf of Beca Ltd © Beca 2018 (unless Beca has expressly agreed otherwise with the Client in writing). This report has been prepared by Beca on the specific instructions of our Client. It is solely for our Client’s use for the purpose for which it is intended in accordance with the agreed scope of work. Any use or reliance by any person contrary to the above, to which Beca has not given its prior written consent, is at that person's own risk. Beca // 12 April 2018 3233847 // NZ1-15046384-2 // i America's Cup: Wynyard Hobson Traffic and Transport Technical Report Executive Summary This report provides an assessment of the traffic and transport effects of the construction, operation and use of the America’s Cup Wynyard Hobson physical infrastructure1. This includes traffic and transport effects of: The Construction phase. The Operational phase, including the permanent stopping of part of Brigham Street.
    [Show full text]
  • Fairfax/NZME – Response to Questions Arising from the Conference
    1 PUBLIC VERSION NZME AND FAIRFAX RESPONSE TO COMMERCE COMMISSION QUESTIONS ARISING FROM THE CONFERENCE ON 6 AND 7 DECEMBER 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. During its recent Conference held on 6 and 7 December 2016, the Commissioners asked the parties to follow up on a number of points. This paper sets out the parties' responses on those questions, and also provides answers to some further follow-up questions that the parties have received since the Conference. 2. The main points that this response covers are as follows: (a) Inefficient duplication of commodity news (external plurality): The Commissioners asked the parties to produce examples of "commodity" news coverage as between the five main media organisations being similar ("digger hits bridge" was provided as an example of where all the major media organisations covered effectively the same point). Reducing that duplication will be efficiency enhancing and will not materially detract from the volume or quality of news coverage. (b) A wide variety of perspectives are covered within each publication (internal plurality): The editors provided the Commission with examples of how each publication covers a wide variety of perspectives, as that is what attracts the greatest audience. This is true both within and across each of the parties' publications. The Commission asked for examples, which are provided in this response, together with additional material about why those incentives do not change post-Merger. (c) Constitutional safeguards on editorial independence: The Commissioners asked about what existing structures protected editorial independence and balance and fairness in reporting. This was asked both in the context of a possible future sale of Fairfax's stake, and in the context of the protections available to those subject to negative reporting seeking fairness and balance.
    [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]
  • Project Brief
    Monthly Management Report Period: 1 – 31 July 2011 Prepared 16 August 2011 For: Board of Directors Auckland Waterfront Development Agency Limited Monthly Management Report to 31 July 2011 CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Chief Executive‟s Overview ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Board Approvals Required ......................................................................................... 1 2. GOVERNANCE 2.1 Chairman‟s Report ...................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Local Board Engagement Plan ................................................................................... 4 2.3 Statement of Intent 2011-2014.......................................................................................4 3. COMMUNICATIONS 3.1 Stakeholder Consultation ........................................................................................... 5 3.2 Media ......................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Update on Work-in-Progress ...................................................................................... 5 3.4 New Initiatives ............................................................................................................ 5 4. PLANNING & DESIGN 4.1 The Auckland Plan ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wynyard Quarter: Urban Design Framework 2007 Was Developed to Provide a Framework for the Development of Wynyard Precinct
    Wynyard Precinct: Urban Design Framework February 2014 Contents 1.0 Introduction – Realising Auckland’s Waterfront Potential 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Background 1.3 Purpose 1.4 Relationship to the Operative District Plan and Proposed Unitary Plan 1.5 Relationship to the Auckland Plan and Waterfront Plan 1.6 Relationship to the Sustainable Development Framework 1.7 Other Waterfront Auckland Guidelines and Rules 2.0 Vision 2.1 Vision for the Auckland waterfront 2.2 Vision for Wynyard Precinct 3.0 Urban Design Concepts 3.1 Concept 1 – The Waterfront Axis 3.2 Concept 2 – The Park Axis 3.3 Concept 3 – The Wharf Axis 3.4 Concept 4 – Waterfront Precincts 4.0 Urban Design Principles 4.1 Principle 1 – Enabling Sustainable Development 4.2 Principle 2 – Facilitating Sustainable Transport and Infrastructure 4.3 Principle 3 – Connecting Waterfront Precincts 4.4 Principle 4 – Providing Waterfront Access 4.5 Principle 5 – Establishing Diverse Public Spaces 4.6 Principle 6 – Promoting an Active and Working Waterfront 4.7 Principle 7 – Creating Appropriate Building Height, Scale, and Form 4.8 Principle 8 – Facilitating a Mix of Uses and Activities 5.0 Indicative Plan fig. 1 Wynyard Precinct aerial view looking south, 2010 5.1 Existing Site 5.2 UDF 2010 Height Plan 5.3 Indicative Height Plan – Permitted Height 6.0 UDF Refresh: Feasibility Study 6.1 Development Controls as per District Plan 6.2 Development as anticipated in the UDF 2007 6.3 Evolution since the District Plan and the UDF 6.4 Example of approach with more flexibility 6.4.1 Amendments to Sites 19/19A/20/20A 6.4.2 Amendments to Sites 19/19A/20/20A – Design Flexibility Study 6.4.3 Amendments to Sites 15/25 6.4.4 Amendments to Sites 27-31A, 34-38A 6.5 Revised Photo Montages 7.0 List of Figures Wynyard Precinct - Urban Design Framework February 2014 Page 3 1.0 Introduction Realising Auckland’s Waterfront Potential 1.1 Introduction Wynyard Precinct, previously known as the ‘Tank Farm’ and ‘Western Reclamation’ is located within the western portion of the wider Auckland City’s waterfront.
    [Show full text]
  • THE WATERFRONT PLAN AKL 2012 Tamaki – Kainga Nga Ika Me Nga Wheua Katoa! Auckland – Where the Fish Are So Succulent You Can Eat Them Bones and All!
    THE WATERFRONT PLAN AKL 2012 Tamaki – kainga nga ika me nga wheua katoa! Auckland – where the fish are so succulent you can eat them bones and all! This proverb alludes to the once abundant and sought after marine resources of Auckland’s waterfront. It signals Waterfront Auckland’s desire to create a sustainable waterfront providing for the current and future generations of Aucklanders. A place all Aucklanders can access the Waitemata Harbour for recreation, business or cultural practices. FOREWORD The waterfront has reignited Aucklander’s pride in their city. The pride and enthusiasm with which Aucklanders have embraced their new waterfront continues to amaze me. Although in its infancy, stage one of the redeveloped Wynyard Quarter and the expanse of Queens Wharf, attract people day after day, rain and shine. When Waterfront Auckland put forward its draft plans for the redevelopment of the whole waterfront last year we received hundreds of letters, emails and submissions. Most were hugely positive. “Just get on with it!” was the cry. Our job at Waterfront Auckland is to lead the momentum of the revitalisation, and of pride. Having listened to Aucklanders, we have refined our plans and here, we present a vision for how the waterfront could be redeveloped, how it can continue to create transformational change. We are living in an extraordinary time, perhaps unprecedented in recent history where opportunity is constrained and likely to remain so for some time to come. Our approach in these plans is to strike a balance that seizes opportunity while it is offering and continues to strive for a visionary outcome that our city and its people deserve.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Auckland
    H l t a rd S e R n N P fo v n N s A e e l r u l u o a ve o o rtsea t e e ve ra g Av or e v e n o e n P P B A na r l S d ter w e an r C a at a o d t a C l w K m C d ysw n ra h m G d S fford Bay A R o d S a R B r t r o t R t d t n e u en e e A l l inc S z l i S s B o l e V s e l u ce Bayswater v u n u c C e t e n M ra Ne v e n r e r W ls A r W d i P r la son A a e a a H e r Ave na b ll u H T e a l P l n o a P a a l n i e ce am a R g n m r s e m s i ti R A i A r a e it S r e r d e o d n a o u m r M a M a i d C R o a R W a MAP KEY d a g ur R arin akak at d S a St S Ng u u l l p p ve PostPost Office OfficeMAPPost KEY Office h h t A u o N u o Pl N c e i s e r ston a r A en g av B Post Office a a R Ti a ToiletsToiletsPost OfficeToilets z h z h a r a a e t a t rd t S Post Office d rt P a r P t a ath l o a R l R o B S c h N h N d d N a N i-SITEi-SitesToiletsi-Sites Visitori-Sites Information Centre 1 A d B Cnemoa D E F G H I e J Toilets in R Toilets a R Hi R v ng P A n d tau d C a K L e r n a w O i a Visitori-SitesMain InformationbusMain depots bus depots n ce r R Maini-Sites bus depots erra m r R i-SITES c Te A i-Sites o T D a rih b e A t e r a s i W E a W E a r R InterMainFerry City bus BusFerry depots Depots b Main bus depots b S Ferry S Main bus depots R d e ve y d Main Bus depots t t e A d c y A d d Cheltenham Beach ra b S rr Lake n e Lake lle R Explore T T A t FerryFerry Train line A l O TrainFerry line S d l Ferry S a u a uc RdJim Tit or x Ferry k ss i c fo d a f l ces h s i o a Acc e t e R n n Bay A o v R h r d ringa B n o t d atari e
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Transport Agency Additional Waitemata
    Attachment A New Zealand Transport Agency Additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing Preliminary Business Case Restrictions of this report This report has been prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) for the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) solely for the purposes stated herein and should not be relied upon for any other purpose. We accept no liability to any party should it be used for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared. This Report is strictly confidential and (save to the extent required by applicable law and/or regulation) must not be released to any third party without our express written consent which is at our sole discretion. To the fullest extent permitted by law, PwC accepts no duty of care to any third party in connection with the provision of this Report and/or any related information or explanation (together, the “Information”). Accordingly, regardless of the form of action, whether in contract, tort (including without limitation, negligence) or otherwise, and to the extent permitted by applicable law, PwC accepts no liability of any kind to any third party and disclaims all responsibility for the consequences of any third party acting or refraining to act in reliance on the Information. We have not independently verified the accuracy of information provided to us, and have not conducted any form of audit in respect of NZTA. Accordingly, we express no opinion on the reliability, accuracy, or completeness of the information provided to us and upon which we have relied. The statements and opinions expressed herein have been made in good faith, and on the basis that all information relied upon is true and accurate in all material respects, and not misleading by reason of omission or otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • Auckland Transport Alignment Project April 2018
    Auckland Transport Alignment Project April 2018 Foreword I welcome the advice provided by the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP). The ATAP package is a transformative transport programme. Investment in transport shapes our city’s development and is a key contributor to economic, social and environmental goals. The direction signalled in this update is shared by Government and Auckland Council and demonstrates our commitment to working together for a better Auckland. Auckland is facing unprecedented population growth, and over the next 30 years a million more people will call Auckland home. Growth brings opportunities but when combined with historic under- investment in infrastructure the strain on the Auckland transport system is unrelenting. Existing congestion on our roads costs New Zealand’s economy $1.3b annually. We need to do things differently to what has been done in the past. Auckland needs a transport system that provides genuine choice for people, enables access to opportunities, achieves safety, health and environmental outcomes and underpins economic development. Our aspiration must be to make sure Auckland is a world class city. Auckland’s success is important not just for Aucklanders, but for our country’s long-term growth and productivity. The Government and Auckland Council have agreed to a transformative and visionary plan. ATAP is a game-changer for Auckland commuters and the first-step in easing congestion and allowing Auckland to move freely. I believe this ATAP package marks a significant step in building a modern transport system in Auckland. ATAP accelerates delivery of Auckland’s rapid transit network, with the aim of unlocking urban development opportunities, encourages walking and cycling, and invests in public transport, commuter and freight rail and funds road improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Value of the Redeveloped Auckland Waterfront
    The economic value of the redeveloped Auckland Waterfront The economic value of the redeveloped Auckland Waterfront November 2010 1 The economic value of the redeveloped Auckland Waterfront PricewaterhouseCoopers 26 November 2010 188 Quay Street Private Bag 92162 Auckland 1142 New Zealand Telephone +64 9 355 8000 John Dalzell Facsimile +64 9 355 8001 Direct Phone +64 9 355 8600 Chief Executive Direct Fax +64 9 355 8024 Sea+City Projects Ltd www.pwc.com/nz Pier 21, 11 Westhaven Drive AUCKLAND Dear John The economic value of the redeveloped Auckland Waterfront In accordance with the terms of our engagement letter dated 27 August 2010, we attach our report on the economic value of the redeveloped Auckland waterfront. This report should be read in conjunction with the Restrictions in Appendix A. Our key findings and recommendations are contained in the Executive Summary in Section 1 of the Report. If you require any clarification or further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely PricewaterhouseCoopers Chris Taylor, Partner The economic value of the redeveloped Auckland Waterfront Table of Contents 1 Executive summary.............................................................................................................................................................................................................1 2 Background .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Michael John Foster
    Experience Cont. Michael John Foster Citizenship: New Zealand Education: Bachelor of Arts (Massey) Diploma of Town Planning (Auckland) Membership: Fellow, New Zealand Planning Institute Member, Planning Institute of Australia Member, Resource Management Law Association Member, RMA Streamlining & Simplifying Technical Advisory Group 2009 Chairman, Infrastructure Technical Advisory Group 2010 Competence: Strategic peer review, Project Management, environmental assessment, resource management planning, regional planning, airport planning, transportation planning, conceptual land development planning, development proposal formulation and urban growth strategies. Relevant Experience: In a career extending over 35 years Mike has more relevant experience in major infrastructure planning and projects than many people in New Zealand. From January 1985 until October 2001 Mike was Director of Planning for Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner Limited. He then set up a new Company operating as an independent planning consultant. His most relevant airport planning, major land use and strategic transportation experience is briefly defined below. AIRPORT PLANNING Board of Airline Representatives of New Zealand (BARNZ) (2010 - ongoing) Since 2010 Mike has been retained as specialist aviation adviser to BARNZ on a range of aviation planning related uses. (Client: BARNZ) Ashburton Airport Future Proofing (2004 – ongoing) Mike is retained as specialist aviation planning adviser to land and airspace designations to plan and protect for the future growth of Ashburton Airport. (Client: Ashburton District Council) Hawkes Bay Airport Expansion (2009 – 2010) Mike was retained as specialist aviation planning adviser to the airport company with respect to a proposed major runway extension. (Client: Hawkes Bay Regional Airport Ltd) Queenstown Airport Expansion (2006) Mike was retained as specialist aviation planning adviser to Queenstown Airport Corporation in the scoping phase of the planned long term review of RESA requirements and revision of the existing air noise boundary controls.
    [Show full text]