application for resource consents: restoration work at ... · 3.4.3 seawall construction and other...

Application for Resource Consents:

Restoration Work at Sites 2, 6 and 7 (Coastal Route)

Report prepared for:

New Zealand Transport Agency and KiwiRail Holdings Ltd

Report prepared by:

North Canterbury Transport Infrastructure Recovery (NCTIR)

Date:

15 February 2017

i

Application for Resource Consents: Restoration Work at Sites 2, 6 and 7 (Coastal Route)

Table of contents

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purpose of this report 1 1.3 Applicant 1 1.4 Brief overview of the activities 1 1.5 Applications for resource consents 2 1.6 Consent duration 3 1.7 Other approvals required 3 1.8 Scope and structure of this AEE 4

2 Order in Council (2016) 5 2.1 Overview 5 2.2 Scope and definitions 5

2.2.1 The Agency 5 2.2.2 Coastal route 5 2.2.3 Restoration work 7

2.3 Controlled activity status and non-notification 7 2.4 Content of this application 7 2.5 Timeframes 8 2.6 Stakeholder consultation 8 2.7 Conditions of consent 8

3 Broad description of restoration works 9 3.1 Overview 9 3.2 Concept drawings 9 3.3 Site activities 9

3.3.1 Site 2 9 3.3.2 Site 6 10 3.3.3 Site 7 12

3.4 General matters and construction methodology (applying to all sites) 13 3.4.1 Sluicing and scaling 13 3.4.2 Temporary access 13 3.4.3 Seawall construction and other coastal protection works 13 3.4.4 Stormwater management and culvert works 14 3.4.5 Discharges to water and air 14 3.4.6 Construction hours of work 14 3.4.7 Plant and machinery 15 3.4.8 Hazardous substances storage and distribution 15 3.4.9 Erosion and sediment control 15 3.4.10 Construction Environmental Management Plan 15

4 Broad description of the site 16 4.1 Kaikōura coast: geophysical setting 16 4.2 Existing transport infrastructure on the coastal route 16 4.3 Social and economic environment 17 4.4 Conservation estate and reserves 17 4.5 Contaminated land 17 4.6 Coastal processes 17 4.7 Ecology 18

4.7.1 Site 2 18 4.7.2 Sites 6 and 7 18

ii

Application for Resource Consents: Restoration Work at Sites 2, 6 and 7 (Coastal Route)

4.7.3 New Zealand Fur Seals 19 4.8 Landscape and visual values 19 4.9 Archaeology values 20 4.10 Cultural values 20

5 Desktop assessment of the potential effects of the activity 22 5.1 Positive effects 22 5.2 General construction effects 22 5.3 Effects on coastal processes 22 5.4 Effects on water quality 23 5.5 Effects on ecology 23

5.5.1 Site 2 23 5.5.2 Sites 6 and 7 23 5.5.3 New Zealand fur seals 24

5.6 Effects on landscape and visual values 25 5.7 Effects on archaeology 25 5.8 Effects on cultural values 25 5.9 Conditions of consents 26

6 Consultation 27

7 Conclusion 28

Appendix A: Consent application forms

Appendix B: Drawings

Appendix C: Specialist reports

Appendix D: Resource consent conditions

1

Application for Resource Consents: Restoration Work at Slips 2, 6 and 7 (Coastal Route)

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

On 14 November 2016, a magnitude 7.8 earthquake with an epicentre located northeast of Culverden, and subsequent aftershocks, caused significant damage to land, buildings, and infrastructure across the upper South Island and lower North Island.

In the Kaikōura area, significant damage occurred to the Main North Line (MNL) and State Highway 1 (SH1) and related infrastructure, respectively managed by KiwiRail Holdings Ltd (KiwiRail) and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZ Transport Agency). The damage has resulted in access being severed across large sections of these networks.

In response, the New Zealand Government passed a suite of special legislation to enable the restoration and recovery of the area. This includes the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016 (OIC), which among other matters, modifies the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) to ensure that resource consents for restoration works are granted in an efficient and expedient manner.

1.2 Purpose of this report

This report supports applications for resource consents, under the RMA as modified by the OIC, for restoration work on the coastal route at the locations known as Sites 2, 6 and 7 north of Kaikoura (see Figure 1 overleaf for location details).

Clause 7 of the OIC modifies Section 88 the RMA (‘making an application’) by limiting the information requirements to broad details and desktop assessments. This report contains the information required by Clause 7 of the OIC. Further details on the OIC and related process are discussed in Section 2 of this report.

1.3 Applicant

Under the OIC, and referenced throughout this document, the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail are collectively referred to as ‘the Agency’. However, for the purposes of making resource consent applications, each organisation needs to make separate applications relevant to the scope of works in question.

The works subject to the current applications (at Sites 2, 6 and 7) are predominantly (although not exclusively) for the purposes of restoring SH1, and therefore the applicant in this case is the NZ Transport Agency. While the NZ Transport Agency is the applicant, works that are for restoring the MNL as they relate to these same sites, are included in the application.

This report has been prepared by the North Canterbury Transport Infrastructure Recovery Alliance (NCTIR). NCTIR is the delivering agency tasked with restoring the transport infrastructure on behalf of the Agency. NCTIR is comprised of the NZ Transport Agency, KiwiRail, Fulton Hogan, Downer, Higgins and HEB Construction.

1.4 Brief overview of the activities

This application seeks to authorise ‘restoration work’1 at three sites along the coastal route, known as Site 2, Site 6 and Site 7. These sites are subject to significant slope failures and rockfall hazard which necessitates the relocation of SH1 in a seaward direction from its pre-earthquake alignment. The MNL needs to relocate in a seaward direction at Site 7 only.

1 ‘Restoration work’ is defined in the OIC and further discussed in Section 2.2.3 of this report.

2


Restoration works at these sites need to commence as a matter of urgency to restore road and rail access at the sites and through to the wider transportation networks.

The broad location of Sites 2, 6 and 7 is illustrated in Figure 1 below. Further location details, including the geographic extent of the sites, is illustrated on the drawings in Appendix B.

Figure 1 Location of Sites 2, 6 and 7

1.5 Applications for resource consents

Table 1 overleaf identifies the resource consents sought by the NZ Transport Agency for the package of works at Sites 2, 6 and 7. A broad description of the restoration work for which resource consents is sought is contained in Section 3 of this report.

Sites 6 and 7

Site 2

3


Table 1 Resource consents sought by the NZ Transport Agency at Sites 2, 6 and 7

Activities Activity status

Consent authorities

Duration sought

Section 9 Land Use

Restoration works on land that is not expressly allowed by a national environmental standard, district or regional rule, or which contravenes a national environmental standard or district or regional rule.

Controlled non-notified

KDC, CRC District consent: unlimited

Regional consent: 35 years

Section 12 Coastal Permit

Restoration works in the coastal marine area that is not expressly allowed by a national environmental standard or regional rule, or contravenes a national environmental standard or regional rule.


CRC 35 years

Section 13 Land Use River Beds

Restoration works in the beds of rivers or lakes that is not expressly allowed by a national environmental standard or regional rule, or contravenes a national environmental standard or regional rule.


CRC 35 years

Section 14 Water Permit

Restoration works involving the taking, use, damming, or diversion of water that is not expressly allowed by a national environmental standard or regional rule, or contravenes a national environmental standard or regional rule.


CRC 35 years

Section 15 Discharge Permit

Restoration works involving the discharge of contaminants to land, water and air that is not expressly allowed by a national environmental standard or regional rule, or contravenes a national environmental standard or regional rule.


CRC 35 years

For the avoidance of doubt, these applications are limited to restoration work at Sites 2, 6 and 7 and are being advanced due to the critical and urgent nature of the works at these sites. In the near future further packages of applications will be made for restoration work elsewhere on the coastal route.

1.6 Consent duration

As identified in Table 1 above, for the matters under the jurisdiction of Kaikōura District Council, an unlimited duration is sought pursuant to Section 123 of the RMA. For the matters under the jurisdiction of Canterbury Regional Council, a duration of 35 years is sought.

1.7 Other approvals required

Separate applications are being made to the Department of Conservation as follows:

Conservation Act 1987 And Reserves Act 1977: concession to undertake restoration works on conservation estate and reserves;

Marine Mammals Protection Act 1978: permit to hold or take marine mammals;

4


Freshwater Fishery Regulations 1983: approval to undertake restoration works in freshwater;

Ohau New Zealand Fur Seal Sanctuary (Restrictions) Notice 2014: approval to enter sanctuary to undertake restoration works;

Wildlife Act 1953: concession for restoration works in wildlife sanctuary, wildlife refuge, or wildlife management reserve.

An archaeological authority is being sought under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 from Heritage New Zealand. This will be a global authority applying to the entirety of the coastal route (as defined in the OIC) and will include a detailed management plan.

All the above approvals are subject to processes modified under the OIC.

The ability to alter the existing designations held by KiwiRail and the NZ Transport Agency is provided for under Clause 17 of the OIC. A notice to alter designations, as required, will be prepared at a later date once the full alignment of SH1 and the MNL throughout the coastal route has been confirmed. Clause 16 of the OIC states that Section 176A of the RMA does not apply to any restoration works, therefore an Outline Plan is not required.

1.8 Scope and structure of this AEE

The remaining sections of this report are aligned to the requirements of the OIC and address the following:

Section 2: Details on the specific legislation relevant to the coastal route restoration work

Section 3: Broad description of the works that will take place along the sections of the coastal route at Sites 2, 6 and 7;

Section 4: Broad description of the environment on the coastal route and at the subject sites;

Section 5: A desktop assessment of the potential effects of the restoration work and proposed consent conditions;

Section 6: A summary of the consultation undertaken; and

Section 7: Conclusions.

5


2 Order in Council (2016)

2.1 Overview

The Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Act 2016 (Recovery Act) commenced 13 December 2016 for the purpose of assisting earthquake-affected areas and its councils and communities to respond to, and recover from, the impacts of the Hurunui/Kaikōura earthquakes. The Recovery Act provides for economic recovery, the planning, rebuilding and recovery of affected communities and persons including; repair and rebuilding, safety enhancements and improvements of land, infrastructure and other property, facilitating coordinated efforts for recovery, restoration and improvement of community wellbeing and facilitating the restoration of the environment.

Section 7 of the Recovery Act provides for the Governor-General to grant exemptions from, modify or extend any provisions listed in Schedule 2, including the RMA, by Order in Council. The Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016 (OIC) was enacted on the 20 December 2016 and Part 2 relates to modifications to the RMA. Modifications set by the OIC under Part 2 are to enable a truncated process for seeking approvals under sections 9, 12, 13, 14 or 15 of the RMA. This truncated process is necessary to enable the planning, rebuilding and recovery sought by the Recovery Act. Details of the OIC relevant to this application are described in the following sections.

2.2 Scope and definitions

2.2.1 The Agency

In accordance with the OIC, the agency means the NZ Transport Agency and/or KiwiRail. As stated in Section 1.3, applications will be made by the respective organisations as appropriate to the scope of works in question.

2.2.2 Coastal route

The OIC applies to the ‘coastal route’, which is defined in the OIC as:

(a) means—

(i) State Highway 1, between Clarence River and the Oaro rail overbridge; and

(ii) the railway line known as the Main North Line, between 125 km MNL (south of Phoebe Station) and 330 km MNL (north of Tunnel 24); and

(b) includes all land, infrastructure, and other property adjacent to or associated with the coastal route described in paragraph (a)

The coastal route is illustrated in Figure 2 overleaf.

6


Figure 2 ‘Coastal route’ as defined by the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016

Coastal route – State Highway 1 (road)

Coastal route – Main North Line (rail)

Clarence River

Oaro

330 km MNL

125 km MNL

7


2.2.3 Restoration work

The OIC uses the term “restoration work” to describe the activities desirable and necessary to restore the coastal route. Restoration work is defined in the OIC as:

(a) means any activity that, because of or in connection with the Hurunui/Kaikōura earthquakes, is necessary or desirable to undertake to, without undue delay, restore the coastal route and enable it to be used fully, effectively, and safely; and

(b) includes any activity necessary or desirable for—

(i) the repair and rebuilding of the coastal route; and

(ii) safety enhancements to, and improvements to the resilience of, the coastal route.

All works subject to these applications are consistent with the above definition.

2.3 Controlled activity status and non-notification

Clause 6 of the OIC sets out the status of any resource consent application for restoration works under the OIC. Any work done by, or on behalf of, the Agency is to be classified as a controlled activity for the purposes of section 87A(2) of the RMA. Controlled activity status means the consent authorities must grant applications for the restoration work.

The applications subject to this report are being made pursuant to Clause 11 of the OIC. This clause states that for applications made before 31 March 2017 they:

Must not be publicly notified or limited notified; and

Must be granted subject to specified conditions (see Section 2.5 below).

In relation to reclaimed land as restoration work, Clause 13 of the OIC sets out that, in relation to land to be reclaimed, any activity on that land is to be dealt with as though the whole of the land to be reclaimed is already land that is part of the territorial authority’s district. Clause 13(3) enables any application for the reclamation of land to also be classified as a controlled activity rather than being classified under Section 87B(1) of the RMA.

2.4 Content of this application

Clause 7 of the OIC modifies section 88 of the RMA and provides for a limited scope of what is required in a consent application. An application for restoration work must include:

(a) a broad description of the work: [Section 3 of this report]

(b) a broad description of the site at which the work is to occur, including a map of the corresponding area: [Section 4]

(c) a desktop assessment of the potential effects of the work: [Section 5]

(d) any conditions that the agency proposes for the consent: [Section 5]

(e) a description of any consultation undertaken in relation to the work. [Section 7]

Each of these items are addressed in the sections of this report as identified above.

8


2.5 Timeframes

Under Clause 11 of the OIC, the following process applies after lodgement:

1. Within 3 working days2 the consent authority may notify the Agency of any recommended amendments to conditions;

2. Within 3 working days of Step 1, the Agency must notify the consent authority whether they accept or reject the consent authority amendments;

3. Within 3 working days of Step 2, the consent authority must issue the consents with the conditions accepted by the Agency (where Step 2 has not been undertaken the final decision shall be issued within 7 working days of lodgement).

Restoration work that is currently being done as emergency work under Section 330 or 330B of the RMA must also be covered in an application for resource consent in accordance with Section 7 and 12 of the OIC.

2.6 Stakeholder consultation

Clause 11 of the OIC does not require the Agency or consent authority to seek input or comment from any stakeholders during the pre or post lodgement processes. Section 7 of this report however provides a summary of the consultation undertaken by the Agency to-date to provide an overview of ongoing engagement on the project.

2.7 Conditions of consent

Clause 11(4) of the OIC specifies that the resource consent must be granted on the conditions set out in Schedule 1 of the OIC, but subject to any amendments through the process identified in Section 2.5 above. The Schedule 1 conditions are included in Appendix D of this report.

2 The definition of working day under Clause 2 of the OIC includes Saturdays and Sundays.

9


3 Broad description of restoration works

3.1 Overview

In general terms the restoration works at Sites 2, 6 and 7 involve shifting the alignment of SH1 in a seaward direction (i.e. further away from slips, slope failures and rockfall hazards) to improve safety and resilience. The geotechnical and design work undertaken to date has concluded that re-establishing the highway on its existing alignment in these areas poses significant safety and resilience risks, is impractical to achieve in the short to medium terms, and has significant cost implications (both capital and ongoing operational costs). Throughout these sites the MNL will largely stay on its existing alignment, except that at Site 7 the MNL will also shift seaward from its present position to increase the distance from large slips.

The works are generally located landward of Mean High Water Springs (MHWS), which has shifted in a seaward direction as a result of uplift following the earthquakes. Notwithstanding, the works are otherwise located in close proximity to, and sometimes within, the Coastal Marine Area (CMA) and involve varying degrees of reclamation and occupation along their length. The coastal extent of the new alignment is likely to be protected by a vertical seawall.

3.2 Concept drawings

High-level concept drawings are contained in Appendix B. For each site a plan view and longitudinal section is provided. General details and typical sections are provided for structural and other features that may be present throughout the length of the sites. The location and scale of some of these features has yet to be finalised but will be confirmed as design progresses in parallel with the consenting and construction processes.

3.3 Site activities

The broad details of activities at each site are discussed below. The construction methodology and general matters are discussed in Section 3.4.

3.3.1 Site 2

Site 2 is located just to the north of Blue Duck Valley Road. In this area the entire hillside above the existing road corridor is highly unstable and significant damage has occurred to the retaining walls which support and protect the road. The major slip at the northern extent of the site is extensive and it is considered not possible to further treat or mitigate the existing rockfall and debris flow hazard. The northern section of Site 2 is shown in Figure 3 overleaf.

10


Figure 3 Northern section of Site 2 showing primary slip site on right

Forming the new alignment further towards the shoreline will allow the existing road to be formed into a catch bench for rockfall and debris flows along the site, to provide increased protection to the rail corridor. This catch bench will likely include an earth bund on the seaward side of the existing road where slope stability permits.

The works at Site 2 will establish approximately 1 km of new road. At the southern end a large bluff (known locally as ‘Pinnacle Rock’) will need to be removed (likely to be via blasting) to allow the highway to grade down to near the existing foreshore. Rock from this bluff will likely be suitable as seawall protection. The highway will then broadly maintain this elevation and connect into the existing road platform at the northern end of the site.

A mass-block (or similar) vertical seawall with a height ranging between approximately 2 and 10 m (on average around 5m) will be established along the full coastal extent of the new highway alignment at Site 2.

Two new bridges are also proposed. The first bridge will be located where the road grades down towards the foreshore at the southern end. No watercourses are crossed here. This bridge will be approximately 50 m length, with 1-2 piers and two piles at each pier. The second is over Irongate Stream and will be a single span bridge of approximately 30 m. Working platforms to install the Irongate Bridge will be constructed near the abutments. From there, piling will take place and the bridge platform placed on top. Finally, backfill of the bridge abutments will occur and these bridge abutments will be tied into the seawall. At Irongate Stream works are likely to be undertaken from the banks to minimise works in the active stream bed. However, temporary stream diversions and works in the river bed may be required.

3.3.2 Site 6

The slip generated at Site 6 (Ohau Point) as a result of the earthquake is the most significant on the coastal route. Large-scale sluicing and scaling activities have already been undertaken here, however the southern portion of the site remains highly unstable and still contains large volumes of loose material. Site 6 is illustrated in Figures 4 and 5 overleaf.

11


Figure 4 Extensive slip and slope failure at Site 6 (Ohau Point)

Figure 5 View north through the southern end of Ohau Point

The restoration works will involve clearing the existing road bench (with remote-controlled plant) to enable a catch bench to be established for rockfall mitigation. Where practicable, this material will be carted away from the road bench, however some side-casting is also likely to be required to make-safe. The catch bench is likely to feature an earth/rock bund on the seaward extent of the former road platform, and a fence on top of the bund. Netting of the slopes above the existing road alignment, and other rockfall catch and attenuation structures, will likely be required.

12


With the above features in place, works will be able to commence in the area below the existing road. Approximately 700 m of new road will be established around Site 6 (Ohau Point), horizontally offset up to 10 m seaward of the existing alignment. Vertically the new highway platform will be located below the existing road alignment and approximately 15 m above post-quake MHWS.

The entire length will need to be protected on its seaward extent by a mass-block (or similar) seawall of up to 10m height. Temporary works will be required in the foreshore area to enable construction of the road platform and seawall.

3.3.3 Site 7

Site 7 adjoins the northern extent of Site 6. At this location there is a large and active slip, considered to be an unacceptable risk for the MNL and SH1 located at its base. Site 7 is shown in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6 Large slips at Site 7

At this location both the MNL (where it emerges from the tunnel through Ohau Point) and the highway will be shifted seaward by up to 15 m from their existing alignment along a length of approximately 800 m. A catch bench, in the form of an earth bund and fence, will be established at the base of the slip (on the current road and rail alignment) to mitigate against future rockfall and debris flow hazard.

The existing culvert for Ohau Stream will be extended using two pre-cast box culverts. . Approvals will be obtained under the Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983 in relation to provision for fish passage. One culvert will take the primary flow of the stream and provide continued access to Ohau Stream for seals, the second will serve as a pedestrian underpass to provide access to the Ohau Stream walk as well as stream overflow during flooding events. The primary culvert will be positioned below natural streambed level, and filled with rock to provide a natural floor. The pedestrian culvert, and the access to it, will be positioned to discourage seal access.

13


During culvert installation, the stream flows will be diverted to one side of the stream, to allow positioning of the first culvert in the dry, then the stream flows will be diverted through the new culvert to allow installation of the second culvert also in the dry. Amenities such as parking may be provided on the seaward side of the corridor for visitors to the Ohau Point Fur Seal Sanctuary.

3.4 General matters and construction methodology (applying to all sites)

3.4.1 Sluicing and scaling

At all sites the large slips have been subject to sluicing and scaling activity since mid-December 2016. These have been undertaken pursuant to the emergency provisions of the RMA.

Sluicing is a method for removing smaller debris from slip faces and surrounding slopes in order to allow access for larger scale stabilisation works. Sluicing involves collecting water in monsoon buckets (in this case from the ocean) suspended underneath a helicopter and dropping this water on the area to be stabilised. The water flushes debris from the slope.

Scaling is the physical removal of debris from slip faces and slopes. This is generally done by technicians on abseil and involves the manual clearance of debris by hand or through the use of mechanical mechanisms (e.g. jacking or prying).

Sluicing and scaling potentially result in slope material and water entering and/or discharge to the CMA. Sluicing and scaling will likely need to continue on the slopes above Sites 2, 6 and 7 throughout the construction period and beyond.

3.4.2 Temporary access

Works are required at each site to construct temporary access / haul roads for construction plant and machinery. These works will be confined to the footprint of the permanent work.

Initially these works will involve clearing/scraping the land surface along the road corridor back to either bedrock or a stable/even surface. Any large rocks and cobbles will be pushed to the seaward extent of the works footprint to provide temporary protection to the works area and assist with erosion and sediment control. The large rock will also be re-used as the toe protection for the to-be-constructed seawall.

Fill will be imported to establish the road platform, which will be gradually built up and compacted in layers of approximately 500mm. Fill will be sourced from existing slip material throughout the coastal route.

Limited and controlled public access along the temporary road platforms may be possible prior to completion of the works, utilising controlled methods such as via escort. Temporary traffic management measures will also be required during this time to allow construction activities to continue as the works are completed.

3.4.3 Seawall construction and other coastal protection works

The design philosophy for all coastal protection works is to:

Limit encroachment of protection structures seaward of the post-earthquake MHWS where practicable;

Provide erosion protection to the road and rail corridor to withstand a 100 year joint probability extreme wave and storm surge event inclusive of an additional 0.55 m sea level rise as a result of climate change;

14


To limit overtopping discharge to the corridor to less than 1 l/s/m during a 50 year wave and surge event inclusive of 0.51 m sea level rise;

Retain existing beach form, including beach cobbles, gravels and sand seaward of proposed erosion protection structures;

Consider the potential for an additional 0.52 m sea level rise (i.e. a total of 1.03 m sea level rise from present day levels) and the requirement for how adaptation responses could be accommodated; and

Maintain or enhance public access to the CMA at selected areas along the route.

At Sites 2, 6 and 7 the protection method will be a vertical seawall, located above MHWS. Construction will commence by creating a running platform landward of the seawall edge, followed by levelling of the seawall base area. This is likely to be through breaking rock and infill. This ensures the base is essentially level, allowing for the pre-cast modular section of seawall to be positioned. The base of the seawall will be concrete cast in-situ, with anchors installed into the rock below. This will be done from the landward side and using the 5m construction zone seaward of the wall. As the wall is constructed, it will be progressively backfilled using reinforced fill.

3.4.4 Stormwater management and culvert works

The concept for stormwater management throughout the extent of the transport corridor is to largely replicate the existing situation. The road carriageway will be cambered to allow for drainage from the centreline, which will then drain to the sea through regularly spaced drainage pipes and holes, which will be placed approximately 50 m apart. This drainage system will also capture run-off from the rail corridor. Stormwater from rockfall catchment areas will also be captured and drained using this system. The inlets will be grilled to allow for water capture and drainage while preventing large rocks and debris from entering the drainage pipes.

Where there is land available, sediment basins will be constructed, to act as both a rockfall capture mechanism and a stormwater detention pond. Water captured here will undergo treatment through settling, before discharging via pipes.

3.4.5 Discharges to water and air

All construction activities that involve the disturbance of land, river beds and foreshore has the potential to result in a discharge of sediment to water (including coastal water). This is particularly the case when undertaking work on the foreshore and seabed such as construction and reclamation.

Earthworks activities including the transport of material, and the resulting creation of areas of exposed soil has the potential to create a discharge of dust. It is expected that these types of discharges will occur as a result of the proposed remediation work.

To the extent possible discharges will be minimised throughout the construction period using the management approaches described in the following sections. There will be long-term discharges to land and water from the stormwater management system.

3.4.6 Construction hours of work

Due to the urgency of the project, the construction works are likely to be undertaken without the restriction of hours of operation and 7 days a week.

15


3.4.7 Plant and machinery

A range of heavy plant and machinery, including excavators, graders, bulldozers, loaders and truck and trailer units will be used throughout the sites. There is likely to be some vehicle storage required along the route which will generally be contained within the works area. Temporary stockpiles of material for use as part of the construction activities is also likely.

3.4.8 Hazardous substances storage and distribution

Hazardous substances such as fuel, hydraulic fluids and lubricants will need to be stored and distributed as part of the construction works. Fuel will be stored securely in bunded mobile tankers outside any area where a spill may enter water. Other hazardous substances will also be stored in a facility that prevents leaks from coming into contact with soil or water. Any refuelling will take place outside of the coastal marine area, and outside of a location where a spill may enter coastal or freshwater. Spill kits and procedures will accompany any refuelling site.

3.4.9 Erosion and sediment control

An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be prepared to address the potential erosion and sediment measures required during the proposed earthworks and coastal works. The proposed materials and methodologies will be designed to meet the relevant project requirements, and where possible, the requirements of NZ Transport Agency’s Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for State Highway Infrastructure (September 2014).

3.4.10 Construction Environmental Management Plan

A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared for the works. The CEMP will form the overarching management document supported by a number of work procedures to manage potential construction effects. The CEMP will address all the requirements in the conditions of consent (Appendix D) including:

fill management;

construction method;

dust control;

dewatering;

blasting;

hazardous substances use, handling and storage, including of explosives;

environmental emergency response, including:

oil and fuel spills;

failure of protection works or earthworks;

spill management;

refuelling and maintenance of vehicles and equipment;

waste management;

site environmental communication;

severe weather events; and

environmental training and awareness.

Revision of the CEMP as appropriate will continue as the detailed design and construction methodology for the works are developed.

16


4 Broad description of the site

4.1 Kaikōura coast: geophysical setting

The whole of the coastal route lies within a dynamic environment that is subject to a range of natural events, including earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, coastal accretion and erosion.

With respect to earthquake, the Kaikōura area straddles the converging Australian and Pacific Plates and as a result the area has a number of large fault systems, including; the Alpine, Awatere, Clarence, and Hope Faults3. As a result of the recent Kaikōura earthquake sequence, coastal uplift has occurred along much of the coastal route. GNS Science initial estimates indicate that the coast has risen between 0.5m and 2m, from the area about 20km south of Kaikōura to Cape Campbell in the north4. The Kaikoura earthquake has resulted in uplift along the coast with the location of MHWS effectively moving seaward.

At Ohau Point, the seaward movement of MHWS ranges between 10 to 40 m, with the average change in the order of 20 m. To the north of Ohau Point, MHWS moved more significantly, ranging from around 20 to 100 m with an average change of around 30 m.

Between the Conway and Clarence Rivers the coastline is characterised by predominantly steep slopes and cliffs, combined with rough gravel beaches and limestone rocky outcrops5. Slope failures are widespread along the coastline and have been exacerbated by the earthquakes, resulting in a number of large primary and secondary slips. Small to medium-sized rivers and watercourses drain the foothills, which north of Kaikōura extend back to the Seaward Kaikōura Range.

4.2 Existing transport infrastructure on the coastal route

SH1 between Picton and Christchurch is classified as a National Strategic High Volume State Highway and has traffic volumes of between 2,500 to 4,000 vehicles per day for most of the route, with approximately 16-20% of traffic being heavy commercial vehicles such as freight trucks6. The coastal route section of SH1 is also a tourist route for motorists and cyclists, and a local purpose route servicing the forestry and agriculture sectors. The coastal route is a key transport linkage, locally, regionally and nationally.

Along the SH1 coastal route there is the highway, two sets of twin tunnels (Paratitahi and Raramai) at 11 km and 14 km south of Kaikōura respectively, and a number of bridges and culverts crossing rivers and streams.

The MNL is the only north-south railway between Picton and Christchurch, serving the freight industry and also facilitating the scenic tourist journey called the ‘Coastal Pacific’. The coastal section of the MNL is around 200km of track, including 24 tunnels and a number of bridges, including a viaduct across the Okarahia River. Damage to SH1 and MNL is extensive across the full extent of the coastal route, especially where the networks are in close proximity to the CMA and coastal cliffs and slopes. In other areas, uplift has caused bridges to become separated from the piles and foundations.

The road and rail corridor and the immediately adjacent areas are generally highly modified to provide for the protection and stability of the road and rail transport networks. The

3 Rattenbury, M.S, Townsend D.B, Johnston, M.R., 2006, Geology of the Kaikōura Area, Institute of Geological & Nuclear Science 1:250 000 Geological Map 13 (GNS, 2006) 4 http://info.geonet.org.nz/display/quake/2016/11/17/Coastal+Uplift%3A+How+has+the+Kaikoura+Coastline+Changed 5 GNS 2006 6 James, Andrew (2016) SH1 Picton to Christchurch (Ashley River Bridge) Strategic Case. NZ Transport Agency

17


transport infrastructure present along the route includes seawalls, coastal protection structures, bridges, tunnels, embankments, rockfall protection structures and carriageways.

4.3 Social and economic environment

The main townships that the coastal route passes through are Kaikōura, Ward, Seddon, and Blenheim. The coastal route traverses a number of small communities, singular baches, small bach communities, small businesses including (but not limited to) fishers, food outlets, cafes and guest accommodation. The journey (driving or travelling by rail) along the coastal road is itself part of the tourism experience valued in this area.

Recreational activities along the route outside of the main townships include; fishing, walking tracks, scenic lookouts, picnic spots, camping, and waters sports such as kayaking, surfing, swimming, and diving. Various serviced and non-serviced/informal camping areas are located along the coast. These mostly exist to the north of Kaikōura between Hapuku and Kekerengu, and are largely located between the road / rail corridor and the sea.

Tourism is a key industry in the region due to the scenic landscapes, marine ecology and recreational activities on offer. Key tourist and business activities that are located on or adjacent to the coastal route (outside of the main townships) include restaurants, motels, airport, golf course, cave tours, accommodation providers, crayfish sales, river rafting activities, and other activities.

Recreational and commercial fishing is carried out along the Kaikōura coast section of the coastal route with a range of regulations and limits in place, which are managed through the Ministry of Primary Industries.

There are no dwellings or businesses within the extent of works affected by Sites 2, 6 and 7.

4.4 Conservation estate and reserves

Along, and adjacent to, the coastal route there are a range of Department of Conservation (DOC) administered protected areas, reserves and conservation land. As canvassed in section 1 of this application, a concession will be obtained for any works required in those areas.

More specifically, Ohau Point New Zealand Fur Seal Sanctuary is located within the footprint of works proposed at Site 6.

4.5 Contaminated land

There are no known sites of contamination within the proposed areas of work. The potential sources of contamination on SH1 would be vehicles using the road, vehicles parked in layby areas, and the associated use of fuels. This use is not considered to result in an elevated occurrence of contaminants, over and above the extent typically found on a highway and no further assessment of contaminated land has been addressed in this documentation.

4.6 Coastal processes

The coastal processes desk-top assessed is described in the report annexed in Appendix C of this report. A summary of the information contained in that report is presented below.

The coast is characterised by the steep Kaikōura Ranges that extend along the coast from Te Ikawhataroa Point to just north of Okiwi Bay. A narrow shelf of eroded rock reef platform is present, before depths reach 10 m below Chart Datum. The seabed slopes gently along the continental shelf from the 10 m to 130 m contour before rapidly reaching depths of more than 3 km along the Hikurangai Trench. Rivers flow to the sea from either steep valleys, or

18


from alluvial fans. The main sediment source for these coasts are from erosion from the reef, shore platform and backshore deposits and this is supplemented by coarse sediments from streams and landslides from the catchment. The area is recognised as having high wave energy, creating a balance between sedimentation and dispersal.

As canvassed earlier in this report, the earthquake has resulted in uplift along the coast. At Ohau Point the seaward movement of MHWS ranges between 10 to 40 m, with the average change in the order of 20 m. The movement was more significant to the north of Ohau Point, where MHWS moved between 20 to 100 m with an average change of around 30 m.

In areas where uplift of the rock platform has occurred, the wave energy will be reduced as the coastal processes effectively moving seaward. However, it is likely that this movement is limited to the rock mass, and the softer sediments on the seabed offshore are unlikely to have been uplifted to the same degree. If they have been, the wave processes would erode the seabed in the shallower areas, reducing levels to pre-earthquake conditions.

The earthquake has also created significant increases to the volume of sediment supplied to the coast, with the coarser faction likely to remain on the upper beach shelf and finer sediment transported offshore.

4.7 Ecology

Two ecological desktop assessments are included in Appendix C of this report. These address the terrestrial and marine ecology values of the sites, and the specific values of New Zealand fur seals (Arctocephalus forsteri). The following sections provide a summary of these reports.

4.7.1 Site 2

The area between pre- and post- earthquake MHWS now contains no life, as it receives seawater through tidal flows or through sea spray. There are limited living organisms within the mid to low shoreline, because this area was previously sub-tidal and was inhabited by organisms that cannot tolerate exposure at low tide. The now intertidal rock pools support a limited range of ecology, including microalgae and invertebrates. The breadth of species present in the area will change over time as the species recolonize this area, which is likely to happen over several years. The sites do not provide habitat for any threatened or at risk coastal avifauna species.

Irongate Stream passes under the road and rail in this location. Various native fish species, including species classified as threatened and at risk, have been recorded here, prior to the earthquakes.

The current (post-earthquake) values of this location have been greatly impacted by the coastal uplift and consequential changes to marine conditions. Therefore, the current ecological system is of low ecological value in its current state, but the intertidal zone is expected to recover in the long term, through recolonisation.

4.7.2 Sites 6 and 7

Site 6 is located at the Ohau Point fur seal colony, with slips at either side of the central point of the colony. Site 7 is located north of Ohau Point. Both sites have undergone coastal uplift, changing the topography of the rocky coast and rockpools here, with an estimate of 3 m uplift evident. The entire intertidal zone is currently empty of life except for some crabs. The new (post-earthquake) high tide line is estimated to be 40 m from the side of the road carriageway. Spotted shags have been observed on a large rock stack in the area. Other species including little blue penguins have been seen in this area on occasion. The slips are

19


likely to have impacted on nesting areas for these birds, and other species. A number of threatened and at risk species are recorded as occurring in the area before the earthquakes.

The post-earthquake values of this area have been greatly impacted by the coastal uplift and changes to the tidal topography. However, the new intertidal zone will recover in the long term, through recolonisation. The rock stack continues to provide nesting habitat for the spotted shag however nesting habitats for little blue penguins is likely to have been impacted by the earthquake. Therefore, in its current state, the area is considered to have low ecological values.

4.7.3 New Zealand Fur Seals

The terrain at Site 2 is not ideal for fur seal breeding although there are suitable haul-out rocks towards the northern end of the site. There is no known breeding colony and generally very low numbers of seals found in the vicinity of site 2.

At Site 6, the Ohau New Zealand Fur Seal Sanctuary is protected under the Kaikoura (Te Tai o Marokure) Marine Management Act 2014. Prior to the quake, it was the largest fur seal breeding colony on the east coast of the South Island. The original Ohau point breeding colony comprised of complex terrain including complex rocky terrain with crevices, caves, shade and pools. Post-earthquake, in parts there is little space available between the toe of slip 6 and the MHWS.

The seal habitat between and on either side of the main slips mostly remain intact. There are seals to the north and south of the original colony but not in as high numbers as at the base of original colony. While the seals were potentially more spread out due to having more space available from the uplift, density did not appear to be greatly reduced. More females appear to have settled through the central sections of the colony which, despite being altered, still provides the best habitat. The Ohau Stream, previously used by seal pups as a nursery, has been impacted by the earthquakes.

Based on a visual estimate on 16 December 2016 that there could be between 1500 and 2000 pups present in the Ohau Point seal colony.

4.8 Landscape and visual values

The landscape and visual values are described in the report in Appendix C. The information below is summary only.

On both a district and regional scale the coastline north of Hapuku was identified as an Outstanding Natural Landscape (ONL). The foothills and mountains that form the backdrop to this coastal area are part of the important ‘mountains to sea sequence’ found in close proximity in this part of the Canterbury Region. The Kaikoura coastline, where the bush clad and mountainous slopes meet a rocky shore, is dramatic.

This visual connection between the coast and the mountains in close proximity is a unique characteristic of this landscape. State Highway One and the main railway line, which connect the Canterbury and Marlborough Regions, wrap around this coast and are major scenic routes.

This coastal character area, located between the Clarence and Hapuku Rivers, contains a very characteristic rocky foreshore with numerous headlands, platforms and points, including Paparoa and Ohau Points. These headlands and points create small enclosing intimate bays, including Waipapa, Okiwi and Half Moon Bay. The shoreline provides an important habitat for seals and seabirds. The bush-clad slopes to the west drop steeply towards the sea with the highway/ railway corridor cut into the base of the hills above the sea cliffs. Natural character values range from moderate to very high.

20


4.9 Archaeology values

An archaeological assessment is included in Appendix C of this report. Below is a brief summary of that report. Please also note that a separate process is being undertaken with Heritage New Zealand to obtain an archaeological authority for all work potentially disturbing an archaeological site (recorded or unknown).

There are two recorded archaeological sites (P31/14 and P31/13) recorded near Site 2 in the vicinity of Blue Duck Creek and Irongate Stream. P31/13 refers to an occupied cave located at the base of a rocky outcrop on the eastern side of the highway. P31/14 refers to a number of burial caves located on the hill slope where the main road rises eastwards out of the bay. The site record form also refers to reports of a burial cave containing at least three crouched burials somewhere on the saddle between Blue Duck Creek and Puhipuhi. The sites are indicative of the types of sites found in this part of the Kaikoura Coast. The P31/14 caves were largely destroyed by the road and rail cuttings which revealed them. The caves, along with another cave further up the slope, suggest that the hill face east of Blue Duck Creek appears to have been used as a burial ground.

Although there is no specific information available on who was buried in the caves or when, the fact that these are cave burials and that they may have been crouched burials supports the view that they are pre-European Maori in origin, likely associated with activity between the 15th and 17th centuries.

Both sites have been damaged by the earthquake, with Slip 2 specifically located over the recorded location of P31/14. This area is not safe to enter and slip repair works are currently occurring to remove loose material and make the location safe. Recent examinations of the other site, P31/13, indicated that the occupied cave is now covered in rock fall and no longer accessible, although the lower cave is still intact. Remote scanning technology is being employed to examine the cave system and assess the structural stability of the area around the cave for possible archaeological investigation.

There are no recorded archaeological sites at Slips 6 and 7 (Ohau Point). However, there is a site of cultural significance at Ōhau Point, being Ōhau Cemetery Reserve. This is located along the road reserve near the slip. This urupa is first depicted in the 1906 survey plan SO 775. It was formally surveyed in 2009 on SO 425516 as being between the railway and road formation on the south side of the Ōhau Stream. This location will not be disturbed by the proposed activities.

4.10 Cultural values

A Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) has been prepared by Mahaanui Kurataiao for the area north of Kaikōura township and is included in Appendix C of this report. Below is a brief summary of the values discussed in the CIA.

Wāhi ingoa (placenames) on the landscape illustrate the Māori relationship with landscape. There are in excess of 60 wāhi ingoa throughout the northern area.

Ara tawhito, or a network of trails, is present throughout Te Waipounamu (South Island). These represent historic travel and trade corridors. The Kaikōura coast provided the main coastal corridor, with other trails providing access inland. These trails are responsible for access to the coastal marine and forest areas, and support the history of settlement and population movements in the area.

The Kaikōura coastline is rich in mahinga kai, and is of importance to the Ngāi Tahu way of life, being an important social and economic activity. Resources in the area include various plant species, freshwater fish and kai manu (birds). The earthquakes have already impacted these resources.

21


As part of these works, Te Runanga o Kaikōura have mapped Culturally Sensitive Zones, intended to assist with the resource management process. These Culturally Sensitive Zones include the areas within the works sites at Sites 2, 6 and 7. Site 2 is within the Rakautara Pa complex identified on Map 3 of the CIA. Site 6 is included in the Ohau Point – Wahi Taonga and Wahi Tapu area identified on Map 4.

22


5 Desktop assessment of the potential effects of the activity

The following sections provide a summary of the potential effects of the restoration works based on the relevant desktop assessments appended as Appendix C to this report.

5.1 Positive effects

The proposed works at Sites 2, 6 and 7 will restore vehicle and rail access along this section of the coastal route. Currently only limited access is available from the south (Kaikōura township) and the north (Seddon). There are a number of residents in the area of Site 2 who remain isolated following the earthquake on 14 November 2016. These parties are currently required to travel on foot through a rail tunnel to gain access beyond their property. Reinstating vehicle access over the extent of SH1 and the MNL is essential to further enable the recovery of the local economy, and the wider regional and national economies which rely on the transportation of goods along SH1 and the rail network. These works also form part of the wider restoration works proposed along the full extent of the coastal route.

5.2 General construction effects

The conditions in Schedule 1 of the OIC (see Appendix D of this report) contain comprehensive measures to manage and minimise a number of effects associated with construction, including those associated with:

Earthworks;

Erosion and sediment control;

Dust management;

Contaminated land;

Works in watercourses;

Streamworks;

Stormwater discharges;

Coastal works;

Operation of construction machinery and maintenance;

Construction noise

Ecology; and

Reclamation

These conditions will apply to the relevant resource consents sought by this application.

5.3 Effects on coastal processes

Generally, the impact of the proposed works on coastal processes are considered minor, due to the proposed design being set back (landward) of the present MHWS location (and generally around the MHWS location prior to the earthquake) and the use of a sloping and relatively permeable rock armour toe fronted by a cobble remnant beach. The proposed rock armour toe and remnant beach will perform very similarly to the previous coastal edge and no significant change to wave processes is expected at Sites 2 and 7. Wave reflection rates are likely to be in the order of 20 to 40% which are similar to the reflection rates of natural beach slopes.

At Site 6 the vertical seawall founded on the existing rock shelf will replace the steep rock face currently present. Prior to the earthquake the existing rock face would have resulted in wave reflection. The proposed wall will result in increased wave reflection during storm wave conditions at the upper stages of the tide (approaching 95%). During lower tide levels it is likely that the rock reef will continue to prevent significant wave impact on the seawall.

23


The difference in reflection rate of a sloping natural slope and a vertical wall is relatively small (in the order of 15%). It is likely that this relatively small change will not create a marked difference in the current coastal processes. As the narrow reef platform largely comprises large rock boulders with no significant quantities of sand, the reflected waves are unlikely to affect sediment transport patterns.

Overall the proposed works are considered to have a minor effect on coastal processes in the area.

5.4 Effects on water quality

The construction works are likely to result in sediment run-off to land where it may enter water, including coastal water, through the proposed construction earthworks. The works are likely to be undertaken in and around the foreshore, and as such may have an effect on coastal waters. To minimise these potential effects, sediment control measures will be put in place in accordance with the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.

5.5 Effects on ecology

5.5.1 Site 2

Due to the impacts of the coastal uplift associated with the earthquake, this area is currently of low ecological value due it now being largely devoid of intertidal biota. Thus, based on a low ecological value and moderate magnitude of effect, the overall level of effect on the coastal ecology associated with the proposed reclamation is considered to be very low.

Any further sluicing works required for removing smaller debris from slip faces and surrounding slopes in order to allow access for larger scale stabilisation works may result in sedimentation of Irongate Stream. It is recommended that the Project Freshwater Ecologist is consulted in order to develop methods to minimise the effects of further sluicing and sedimentation on Irongate Stream, covered by the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.

A new bridge will be constructed over Irongate Stream, which may include temporary diversion and dewatering of the waterway during bridge construction. The works associated with construction of a new bridge to span Irongate Stream is considered to be of low magnitude of effects, if best practice erosion and sediment control is in place, and only limited in-stream works are required.

In regards to freshwater, the ecological value of Irongate Stream is considered to be high. This is due to it providing habitat for a relatively high diversity of freshwater fish, including a number of Threatened or At Risk species. Based on a high ecological value and low magnitude of effect, the overall level of effect associated with the proposed bridge build is considered to be moderate.

5.5.2 Sites 6 and 7

It is considered that the magnitude of the ecological effects associated with the project description and construction method described above will be high in the context of the wider Kaikōura coastline. This is in part due to the loss of an area of more complex nature, as well as the potential loss of the rock stacks utilised by spotted shag, terns and gulls. These species may be impacted by the works; however the majority of this activity will occur outside of the breeding season when the birds are more mobile. Due to the impacts of the coastal uplift associated with the earthquake, this intertidal area largely devoid of intertidal biota. Thus, based on a low-moderate ecological value and high magnitude of effect, the overall level of effect on the coastal ecology associated with the proposed reclamation is considered to be low.

24


Any further sluicing works required for removing smaller debris from slip faces and surrounding slopes in order to allow access for larger scale stabilisation works may result in sedimentation of Ohau Stream. It is recommended that the Project Freshwater Ecologist is consulted in order to develop methods to minimise the effects of further sluicing and sedimentation on Ohau Stream, covered by the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.

It is understood that the proposed culverting of Ohau Stream will replace (and extend) the existing culvert, at approximately the same location. Repair works may involve realignment of Ohau Stream and creation of two sediment basins: one above the upstream end of the culvert (upstream of the rail road); and another between the rail road and state highway. The inclusion of these sediment basins may alter the natural hydrology patterns of Ohau Stream and potentially impact on habitat connectivity (i.e. passage) for freshwater fishes and other aquatic fauna. Extending the length of the existing culvert may also result in loss or major alteration to the habitat for Threatened and At Risk fish species. However, the extent of the works is understood to be limited, and repair of the culvert is considered to be of low magnitude of effects, if and with best practice erosion and sediment control measures in place, fish passage is maintained, and with input from the Project Freshwater Ecologist into the culvert design.

The ecological values of Ohau Stream are considered to be of high ecological value. However, at the location of the existing road culvert, the ecological values of Ohau Stream are considered to be low, particularly given that the connection to the ocean may have been disrupted due to coastal uplift. It is likely that a surface or sub-surface connection will naturally be reinstated with time. Ohau Stream provided habitat for a number of Threatened or At Risk freshwater fish species prior to the earthquake. It is likely that these species still occur in the stream.

Thus, based on a low ecological value and low magnitude of effect, the overall level of effect associated with the proposed bridge build is considered to be very low.

5.5.3 New Zealand fur seals

The proposed works at Site 2 will result in the loss of an area of seal haulout habitat. Due to the low number of seals using this area, and the abundance of similar habitat elsewhere along the coast, this area was determined to be of relatively low value for seals. Loss of this section of haulout area through reclamation will have negligible effect on seal population and seal behaviour.

The magnitude of the effect at Site 6 on fur seals is considered to be very high due to disturbance effects and loss of habitat (including breeding habitat). Based on very high seal values and very high magnitude of effect, the overall level of effect associated with the proposal is considered to be very high. A seal management programme will be implemented to manage and minimise the potential adverse effects on the seals present in the area of works. In addition, a variety of seal management practices are proposed, including mitigation activities such as trialling seal management approaches to assess effectiveness, fencing the seaward side of the construction site to prevent seal access, and actively moving seals out of the construction footprint, to safe areas. These management techniques are considered to lower the risk of adverse effects on seals, it is unlikely they will be implemented across the entire extent of Site 6 due to health and safety risks present at the toe of the slip. Overall, the proposed management measures are considered to appropriately mitigate the potential effects on the local seal population, as far as possible.

At Site 7, in comparison to site 6, there will be more breeding habitat left between MHWS and the reclamation foot print at site 7. Thus, there is the reduced likelihood of the effects identified above, and therefore a lesser magnitude of effect.

25


5.6 Effects on landscape and visual values

The proposed realignments of the transport corridor at Sites 2, 6 and 7 will primarily affect the active coastal interface component of the coastal environment. In places, the interface between the land and sea will become truncated and heavily modified through the loss of rocky shore platforms, in particular around the headlands south and north of Ohau Stream. Through the relocation of the corridor in an easterly direction, views towards the sea will become more open within bays for vehicles travelling on SH1 and passengers on the MNL, depending on the detailed design of the seawall.

The proposed realignment will adversely affect the natural character of the active coastal interface and the CMA within the localised areas of reclamation.

The values and qualities that underpin the ONL will change as the sequence from bush-clad slopes to the open sea will undergo substantial change in vicinity of the three slips. The defining rocky shore platforms around the headlands and the associated wildlife occupying these areas, will be further modified in comparison with the existing highway alignment, which is predominantly cut into the base of the coastal hill slopes. However, due to the localised extent in the context of the wider Kaikōura coastline and the impact of the existing landslip areas/ scarring of coastal slopes, it is not considered that the overall ONL identification would be compromised.

5.7 Effects on archaeology

The proposed design of the new road alignment around Slip 2 identifies removal of the rock promontory down to road level, to provide access to the remaining slip sites and for the coastal route.

Contractors are currently operating under an accidental archaeological discovery protocol with instructions to report any occurrences of bone or evidence of caves. It is recommended that any in situ burials or intact caves be archaeologically investigated under an Archaeological Authority in order to recover as much archaeological information as it safe to do so.

Should the cave at the locally known Pinnacle Rock be safe for access, then the project archaeologist recommends that a limited archaeological investigation is carried out on the cave floor to determine whether archaeological deposits exist. This is anticipated to include an excavated trench in the cave floor in order to document the stratigraphy and confirm any presence of buried archaeological deposits. As such, an emergency authority should be sought for these Pinnacle Rock works. The cave is expected to be destroyed during the removal works, however the cave floor will be buried in rubble and any remaining archaeological deposits are expected to be preserved.

The condition of the sites is compromised and this should be seen as having a bearing on the wider archaeological values of this particular section of the coastal route.

5.8 Effects on cultural values

Earthworks, stockpiling and disposal of soils are likely to impact on areas of cultural and archaeological significance. Cultural monitoring, adherence to an Accidental Discovery Protocol, and the compliance with the conditions of the archaeological authority (as approved by Heritage New Zealand) will assist with the management of these effects. Where possible disposal into the marine area will be minimised.

26


5.9 Conditions of consents

Clause 11(4) of the OIC states that a resource consent for the restoration work must be granted on the conditions set out in Schedule 1 of the OIC. Schedule 1 is contained in Appendix D of this report.

27


6 Consultation

Consultation has been undertaken specifically in regards to the concept design included in this application for sites 2, 6 and 7 with key stakeholders through the Restoration Liaison Group (RLG). The preliminary drawings and information on the proposed works was tabled at the RLG meeting of 10 February, and no major concerns were identified. The RLG meets fortnightly, and the representatives consulted on sites 2, 6 and 7 included:

Kaikoura District Council;

Environment Canterbury;

Marlborough District Council;

Hurunui District Council;

Department of Conservation;

Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga;

Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu;

Ngati Kuri – Te Runanga o Kaikoura; and

Kaikoura Marine Guardians.

The group also includes invited representatives from any of the following whose rohe in which restoration work is being undertaken within:

Te Ngai Tuahuriri

Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō

Ngāti Koata

Ngāti Kuia

Ngāti Rarua

Ngāti Tama ki te Tau Ihu Ngāti Toa Rangatira

Rangitāne o Wairau

Te Āti Awa o Te Waka-a Māui

The purpose of the RLG is to facilitate communication between key stakeholders and to help inform the design, management and monitoring of all transport infrastructure construction works. The RLG members’ advice and insight will help to achieve the best possible social, economic, environmental and cultural outcomes for the restoration project and the Canterbury and Marlborough regions.

28


7 Conclusion

This application seeks resource consents for restoration works required at Sites 2, 6 and 7 along the coastal route north of Kaikōura. The works are necessary to, without undue delay, restore the coastal route and enable it to be used fully, effectively and safely. At these sites, the significant slope failures and rockfall hazard necessitate the relocation of SH1 in a seaward direction from its pre-earthquake alignments, and relocation of the MNL seaward at Site 7.

A broad description of the works and a desktop assessment of the potential effects of the works has been provided in this report in accordance with the OIC. Clause 11 of the OIC requires that the consents sought be granted with the conditions set out in Appendix D of this report.

Prepared By Sarah Bevin / Daniel Murray Planner / NCTIR Planning and Approvals Manager

Reviewed By Manea Sweeney NCTIR Environmental Manager

Authorised for NCTIR by

Duncan Gibb NCTIR Project Director

Authorised for KiwiRail by

Rebecca Beals RMA Team Leader

Authorised for NZ Transport Agency by

Michael Blyleven Canterbury Transport Planning Manager

Appendix A: Consent application forms

Appendix B: Drawings

Appendix C: Technical reports

Coastal process

Ecology

Seal management

Landscape

Archaeology

Cultural Impact Assessment

Appendix D: Resource consent conditions

As per Schedule 1 of the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery (Coastal Route and Other Matters) Order 2016

application for resource consents: restoration work at ... · 3.4.3 seawall construction and other...

Documents