TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD OF INQUIRY Ara Tūhono - Pūhoi to Wellsford Road of National Significance: Pūhoi to Warkworth Section Proposal HEARING at NORTHRIDGE COUNTRY LODGE, SILVERDALE, AUCKLAND on 09 April 2014 BOARD OF INQUIRY: The Honourable John Priestley CNZM QC (Chairperson) David Chandler (Board Member) Michael Parsonson (Board Member) Bronwyn Hunt (Board Member) Alan Withy (Board Member) Page 250 APPEARANCES <ANDREW BELL, resworn [10.12 am] ...................................................... 253 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLIAMS [10.13 am] ........... 254 5 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LANNING [11.14 am] ............. 278 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VELLA [11.50 am] .................. 288 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR THALLER [12.48 pm]............. 312 <RE-EXAMINATION BY MS BROSNAHAN [12.53 pm] .............. 315 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW [12.57 pm] ....................................... 317 10 <ROGER WILLIAMS, affirmed [2.20 pm] ................................................ 338 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BROSNAHAN [3.52 pm] ........ 366 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DILLON [4.05 pm] .................. 372 <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VELLA [4.08 pm] .................... 373 15 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.28 pm] ......................................... 383 <CAMERON PITCHES, affirmed [4.30 pm] ............................................. 383 Northridge Country Lodge, Auckland 09.04.14 Page 251 [10.05 am] CHAIRPERSON: Counsel, before we re-swear the witness and continue where we left off yesterday, there are two matters which we want to 5 inform you about. The first is an inquiry or request which may have been relayed to you, Ms Brosnahan, from the Board member Mr Withy, but I am just going to ask Mr Withy to explain what it is he has requested you to do and then you can respond, and also why. 10 MR WITHY: It was definitely a request rather than a direction but if by the close of business tomorrow we were able to have a word document of the latest set of conditions proposed by NZTA, including the various concessions that have been made by witnesses and which are acceptable to NZTA, that would give us the long weekend just to see 15 the conditions in totality and as they are at that moment, if that is possible, it would be helpful. MS BROSNAHAN: Certainly, sir, we can certainly give you the set at close of business tomorrow. There are a number of discussions still going on 20 so we won’t put those ones in but the ones that are agreed between all parties, certainly, sir. CHAIRPERSON: So that timeline doesn’t cause you any difficulty? 25 MS BROSNAHAN: No, it’s an ongoing process for us so of course we can. CHAIRPERSON: Because the Board are hugely aware, once a hearing starts, the hearings take on a dynamic and a life of their own and counsel in particular who are having to sort of brief and rebrief and juggle 30 witnesses and think about things are often quite stretched for time, so we don’t want to put any counsel in this room under sort of pressure. But are you comfortable with that timeline? MS BROSNAHAN: Thank you, sir, yes, one of my colleagues is actually in 35 charge of the conditions so it takes the pressure off me, sir. CHAIRPERSON: So this is my mantra about juniors having their use. MS BROSNAHAN: Especially when he is my boss. 40 CHAIRPERSON: Now, is there anyone here representing DOC, Ms Crossen, you can just - - - MS GLASSIE: (INDISTINCT 3.13) 45 CHAIRPERSON: You can just listen and note for this. I will get the Board member, Mr Chandler, to add to this if I miss anything out but one of Northridge Country Lodge, Auckland 09.04.14 Page 252 the issues which has clearly been raised is the issue of kauri dieback, and that is one issue which we will have to think very carefully about, particularly in respect to the Perry Road neighbourhood, but generally along the whole route of the proposed highway. And, of course, 5 terrestrial changes and the current NZTA proposal to put this eco viaduct over a kauri grove are matters of acute environmental interest. But we have reason to believe and this is getting into the physiology, if I can put it that way. and the cause of kauri dieback. We have reason to 10 believe that one of the vectors of kauri dieback are wild pigs and it could well be that substantial stands of kauri, including the one on Perry Road are populated by wild pig. Now, I have resisted the temptation, Ms Brosnahan, to make a direction that NZTA go out and catch two wild pig and subject them to forensic analysis but I think it 15 would be helpful if some of the witnesses which are going to be addressing this issue were aware of that the fact that the Board is interested in this and if we could have some further explanation about the methods by which kauri dieback are carried and whether, indeed, our supposition is correct or fanciful that wild pig can be carriers and, if 20 so, what can be done about it. [10.10 am] But we do believe that in the Waitakere Ranges, for instance, on the 25 western side of Auckland that wild pig infestations are one of the issues which has to be done. So whether this needs eradication or what but it might not just be the tyres of vehicles and the boots of construction workers which carry it. Mr Chandler, have I covered that adequately? 30 MR CHANDLER: Yes, thank you, sir. CHAIRPERSON: And for the representative for DOC, I mean your counsel made it very clear that kauri dieback was an issue that they were concerned about and it may well be that the DOC team has got cross- 35 examination on this already prepared but if they haven’t and it’s fallen through some departmental gap, you are on notice now that we want it to be properly explored. So can you convey that to Ms Crossen as soon as you can? 40 MS GLASSIE: Yes, sir. CHAIRPERSON: Or whoever her senior is. MS GLASSIE: I will do, thank you. 45 CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Northridge Country Lodge, Auckland 09.04.14 Page 253 MS BROSNAHAN: And certainly, sir, the ecologists have been talking about this and are very close to agreement on it. Dr Waipara may appear before you, he is one of the experts from the Council and experts in New Zealand on kauri dieback, and we understand it goes even smaller 5 than the pig. The snail is also a problem so one of the proposed conditions is to keep snail out of the kauri because they also can populate the kauri dieback disease. So the concern is totally understood by the Agency. 10 CHAIRPERSON: Well, it may well be, I mean this Board I don’t think is going to have power eradicate kauri dieback in the mid north but the best we can do is to mitigate the risk as much as we can. MS BROSNAHAN: Certainly, sir. 15 CHAIRPERSON: All right, that is helpful. All right, can we swear in the witnesses, nothing else counsel want to raise before we continue? Swear in the witness please. 20 <ANDREW BELL, resworn [10.12 am] CHAIRPERSON: And just so I don’t get this wrong, Mr Williams wants to cross-examine and then you, Ms Vella, is that right? Is anyone else wanting to cross-examine this witness? 25 MR LANNING: Yes, sir, I am for Auckland Transport. CHAIRPERSON: You do. 30 MR LANNING: You granted me leave. CHAIRPERSON: That’s right, well, you will go in front. Yes, I did, thank you for bringing that to our attention. You will go in front of Ms Vella, of course. In theory you should go first but do you mind deferring to 35 Mr Williams? MR LANNING: No, I am happy to fit in. CHAIRPERSON: Because you are entitled to pull rank. 40 MR LANNING: I am happy to fit in with whatever. CHAIRPERSON: All right. Okay, Mr Williams and remembering my cogent words to you yesterday about the difference between submissions and 45 cross-examination, off you go. MR WILLIAMS: I am sure you will remind me again, sir. Northridge Country Lodge, Auckland 09.04.14 Page 254 CHAIRPERSON: Only if you stray, Mr Williams. <CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLIAMS [10.13 am] 5 MR WILLIAMS: The base case includes improvements to Hill Street intersection. When did you advise the client to delay Hill Street until after the completion of the project? 10 MR BELL: I didn’t advice the client to delay Hill Street. In my Traffic and Transportation Report there is a section, if you give me two seconds I’ll find it. On page 9, section 2.3.2, it says, “The upgrade plans for Hill Street/Elizabeth Street intersection are currently subject to further investigation by the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland 15 Transport. Depending on the outcomes of that investigation it is possible that construction of the Hill Street/Elizabeth Street intersection improvements could begin the near future 12 to 24 months. The current planned layout of Hill Street/Elizabeth Street intersection improvements are designed to cater for forecast traffic demand without 20 considering the project. When the project is constructed the distribution of traffic using Hill Street intersection will change therefore it is necessary to review the planned layout of Hill Street intersection and ensure that, as far as practical, the intersection design is future proofed for the changes anticipated with the development of 25 the project”. So in essence what that was saying was, as Mr Parker talked about previously, the previous Hill Street scheme that had been consented, has a notice of requirement, was developed before the motorway was 30 thought about.