1

City Infrastructure Ruakura Variation Evidence

Ruakura Variation Evidence by Andrew Richard Parsons on behalf of the City Infrastructure Unit.

1. Introduction

1.1. Introduction and Qualifications

My name is Andrew Richard Parsons. My qualifications and experience are as follows:

I hold a Master of Management Studies (first class honours), a Postgraduate Diploma in Strategic Management (Distinction), a Bachelors Degree in Civil Engineering (first class honours), and a New Zealand Certificate in Engineering (Civil).

I have over 25 years experience in Local Government infrastructure planning, delivery and operations. My experience has been gained whilst working for Hamilton City Council (HCC) on large growth related projects or new infrastructure projects and, through the provision of water and transport related engineering input into Structure Plans, subdivision and land use consent applications and operational management of the Three Waters business. Relevant activities I am or have been involved in include:

Representing Hamilton City Council on a range of groups and issues, including:

o Presenting evidence on City Infrastructure matters before the Board of Inquiry in relation to the Ruakura Plan Change in 2014;

o Review and assessment of TGH’s recent resource consent applications (and objections) for the Inland Port and Logistics area;

o On-going negotiations with TGH and CPL regarding the provision of strategic infrastructure necessary to support an integrated and sustainable development within the Ruakura growth cell;

o Future Proof Technical Implementation Group – working with the NZ Transport Agency, Waikato Regional Council and neighbouring authorities on the coordination and integration of sub-regional land use and transport planning issues;

o Waikato Expressway Partnership Group – participated in this forum during the development and delivery of the Waikato Expressway projects as they affected the movement of goods and people into and around the Hamilton City boundary;

o Dealing with the city growth, relating to any structure planning and associated network infrastructure including and working with the New Zealand Transport Agency and District Councils;

o Preparation of the growth elements and operational requirements for the 10 Year Plan and Annual Plans, including prioritisation, sequencing and funding advice;

o Managing Hamilton City Council’s capital programme for major water, wastewater, stormwater and transportation projects, including multi-party funding agreements and liaison with the NZ Transport Agency regarding Financial Assistance; and,

o The Hamilton City Council representative for strategic transport projects such as options assessment and RMA processes for the Te Rapa Bypass, Wairere Drive (Ring Road),

2

Resolution Drive and Southern Links projects, including the incorporation of the bulk water and wastewater interceptors.

In my position as the City Development Unit Manager for Hamilton City Council, I am responsible for planning, managing the development of and delivering the growth-related infrastructure for transportation and the “three waters”, comprising water supply, stormwater management and wastewater collection, treatment and disposal. This includes assessing the overall funding requirements and opportunities for development related infrastructure as well as project, programme planning and delivery for Hamilton City Council provided infrastructure.

I confirm that I have read and am familiar with the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses in the Environment Court, Practice Note (2014), and agree to comply with that Code of Conduct. This evidence is within my area of expertise. I state where I have relied on the statements of evidence of others for my assessment. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from my opinions.

1.2. Purpose and scope of evidence

The purpose of this statement of evidence is to demonstrate that Hamilton City Council’s strategic approach to planning and providing infrastructure as set out in section 3.7 of the proposed Ruakura Variation is appropriate, effective and contributes to integrated and sustainable growth within the City, and particularly within the Ruakura Structure Plan area.

My evidence will cover:

• the need for the identification of strategic infrastructure in respect to providing expected infrastructure outcomes for the growth cell, and certainty for plan users;

• the retention of particular objectives and policies to deliver those outcomes;

• the benefit of retaining the Land Development Plan regime established by the BOI to enable integrated delivery of land development and infrastructure;

• retention of key features of the Board of Inquiry decision that are specific to Ruakura and continue

• extending key features of the BOI decision to relate to the rest of the structure plan area (e.g. LDP areas and spine road construction triggers).

I conclude in my evidence that the Council’s approach to integrated planning for infrastructure reflected in the proposed variation is more likely to achieve Hamilton’s objectives for the Structure Plan and is more consistent with the Board of Inquiry decision, than the relief sought in the submissions of others including Tainui Group Holdings and Chedworth Properties Limited.

2. Infrastructure Planning

Council has developed its Long Term Infrastructure Strategy (2015 – 2045) which identifies significant infrastructure issues and practical options for managing those issues, including growth related matters across the City. The Infrastructure Strategy looks to a 30 year horizon, informing the first 10 years of Council’s 10 Year Plan, and 20 years beyond.

Integrated Catchment Management Plans

The introduction of Integrated Catchment Management Plans and Water Impact Assessments within the Proposed District Plan is consistent with a nationally emerging approach to Three Waters demand management. The Proposed District Plan is the most appropriate mechanism for

3

implementing catchment based planning and Water Impact Assessments due to the linkage with structure planning processes, relevance to development activities, and the ability to set and enforce appropriate conditions. The use of Integrated Catchment Management Plans and Water Impact Assessments promotes the effective use of public and private water sensitive techniques by enabling the assessment of applicable techniques on both a catchment and site specific basis respectively.

2.1. 10 Year Plan and Annual Plan

Hamilton’s strategic planning and review processes are generally in response to legislative requirements. The RMA (s79) sets a requirement for Councils to review the contents of their District Plans at least every ten years. The LGA (s93) requires Councils to prepare 10 Year Plans every three years and include a 10 year funding plan. There are prescribed special consultative processes for the development and significant variations of these plans and programmes. Annual Plan processes generally do not result in significant changes to activities and programmes, but are used for reprioritisation of expenditure in response to community requests and changes in the economic or political environment.

The 2015-25 10 Year Plan sets out Council’s responses to meet its aim of delivering a balanced and affordable ten year work programme, while at the same time seeking to meet increasing community and growth expectations. The 10 Year Plan has separate sections covering the Provision of Infrastructure and Services, Water Management and Transportation and includes the spatial priority for Council’s infrastructure investment in Greenfield development over the 2015-2025 period. The Water and Transport sections each cover the policy and planning context, how the activity contributes to Hamilton’s outcomes, defined levels of service and works programmes, and capital expenditure forecasts.

2.2. Infrastructure Planning for Hamilton City

The operation and function of the transportation networks and Three Waters infrastructure, is critical to where and how people live within the City.

The City Infrastructure Group within Hamilton City Council;

o designs and project manages all strategic infrastructure projects in the City for existing and future growth; and

o manages Transportation and Three Waters infrastructure.

Unlike other territorial authorities who operate Council Controlled Organisations, Hamilton City Council manages all of these activities in-house. Within the City Infrastructure Group, the City Development Unit manages the planning and delivery of the City’s infrastructure networks, and ensures that each of the three waters networks are managed in such a way that public health and property, cultural and environmental values are protected.

2.3. Strategic Transport Network Management

Figure 1 illustrates how Council plans, delivers and operates its transportation network.

4

Figure 1 – Transportation Network Management

As described above, Council’s aspirations and key principles for the strategic transport network are described in Access Hamilton. The Integrated Transport Plan provides the framework to identify and prioritise packages of projects across five sectors in the City. Co-ordination of the activities and packages is achieved through the development of a funding plan which identifies local funding (from the 10 Year Plan) and national funding (from the National Land Transport Programme). The delivery of the Access Hamilton outcomes is through the seven action plans, managed by the City Infrastructure Unit.

2.4. Three Waters Infrastructure Management

Hamilton City Council recognises that water should be managed in the context of the hydrological cycle (as a whole), therefore water, wastewater and stormwater is integrated and managed together under the banner of Three Waters Infrastructure.

For Council, Three Waters Management is underpinned by the Sub-regional Three Waters strategy, which builds on and provides direction to the Future Proof strategy, and in turn the Hamilton Urban Growth Strategy. The Sub-regional Three Waters strategy identifies a range of goals and responses through the development of action plans. Activity Management Plans are in place for each of the Three Waters, together with an Infrastructure Plan for each which sets the framework upon which infrastructure improvement initiatives and activities are delivered.

Funding of Three Waters infrastructure activities is wholly through Council’s 10 Year Plan and Annual Plan programme or private development agreements.

The delivery of Council’s Three Waters services in an integrated way by the City Development Unit optimises robust planning, prioritising and development of this core infrastructure.

2.5. Funding of Infrastructure

As described earlier, Council manages and facilitates growth through its 10 Year Plan which identifies and sequences the capital projects to be funded by Council during the life of the 10 Year Plan. Council is currently operating under the operative 2015-2025 10 Year Plan.

Council’s funding and financial policies, including its revenue and financing policy, and its development contributions policy, establish the main revenue sources for Funded Projects as set out in the 10 Year Plan. Council cannot incur significant capital or development operating

5

expenditure in respect of growth related projects unless they are projects that are funded in the 10 Year Plan.

A Private Development Agreement is currently being negotiated between TGH, CPL and Council for the funding and delivery of strategic water, wastewater and transport infrastructure associated with the Ruakura Structure Plan area.

Council is providing for its financial commitment to Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure in the 2016/17 draft Annual Plan (scheduled for consideration and adoption by Council on 30th June 2016). These funding commitments relate to Council’s commitment in the draft Private Developer Agreement which in conjunction with developer led commitments will ensure delivery of the Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure.

For the reasons outlined above it is important that any changes which potentially affect Council’s growth strategy and city wide transportation and Three Waters infrastructure are carefully considered and managed in an integrated manner that meets Council’s legislative requirements.

3. Ruakura Variation Specific Issues

The Board of Inquiry decision confirmed the suitability of residential development, Inland Port, Logistics area, knowledge area, industrial parks, and open space/stormwater network within the variation as it related to the CPL/TGH plan change application. The Variation will imbed the BOI strategic infrastructure framework in the Proposed District Plan. In doing so the Variation provides the necessary wider context around the sustainable and integrated delivery of strategically significant infrastructure with land use, which was missing from the BOI decision on the plan change. Specifically, the Variation;

i. defines the term Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure, which includes critical three waters and transport infrastructure required to support the structure plan area,

ii. confirms an appropriately defined and connected transport hierarchy to support traffic volumes within the Structure Plan Area and integrates this with the wider City network,

iii. confirms that strategic wastewater infrastructure shall locate in the Spine Road corridor,

iv. indicates a preferred location for the necessary Ruakura Reservoir within the Ag Research Campus, with associated bulk water main connections and trunk main distribution networks. Its final location is to be determined by a Notice of Requirement process in the next 12-18 months subject to this Variation and Council approval of the draft 2016/17 Annual Plan.

v. confirms the BOI stormwater network through an ICMP or Water Impact Assessment and delivers this network via the open space areas,

vi. extends the LDP area framework for the remaining structure plan area, and provides for the entire construction of the Spine Road and associated Ruakura Strategic infrastructure to support the LDP areas.

vii. Provides clarity for Figures 2-15A (Transport) and 2-15B (Three Waters) to reflect the Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure components.

3.1. Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure

Two submitters (TGH – 48 & CPL - 33) have queried the inclusion of Water, Wastewater and Transport Structure Plan Components in section 3.7.1. The description of strategic infrastructure

6

components is also applied in other structure plan chapters in the PDP. Section 3.7.1 is intended to provide context to the definition of Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure, and a description of the expected infrastructure outcomes to be delivered through the development of the structure plan.

Importantly the BOI decision only reflected the strategic infrastructure necessary to service the plan change area; including the wastewater network, the water reservoir and associated mains, the arterial and collector transport network, and a network of stormwater facilities co-located with open space areas, including swales and linear wetlands.

The Variation extends the BOI strategic infrastructure principles further to provide for integrated and sustainable servicing of the remainder of the structure plan area. The proposed Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure Section 3.7.1 defines the necessary infrastructure components, and Council’s expectations regarding the delivery of the transport network and three waters network to service the area.

The objective and policy framework which follows section 3.7.1 supports a two pronged approach;

i) by locking in the delivery of strategic infrastructure through conditions on resource consents, and

ii) formalising an appropriate funding agreement to ensure the delivery of strategic infrastructure by the respective parties.

The recent LDP applications serve as a good example of why it is important to anchor Council’s expectations for the delivery of strategic infrastructure in the Variation.

The delivery of Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure is expected to be addressed in each Land Development Plan application. Having a clear definition of Council’s expectations has proven to be essential in recent LDP applications. Resource consent were sought for the medium density residential development in Area J and Inland Port and Logistics development in Areas A/C/F/G without the necessary strategic infrastructure in place to service them. Moreover, infrastructure assessments provided with the applications concluded there is no infrastructure capacity within the existing network, with a protracted Private Developer Agreement negotiation to agree the provision of strategic infrastructure.

Council has now imposed conditions on those resource consents to ensure development within the growth cell will be supported by the simultaneous development of strategic three waters and transport infrastructure. As well as land use consent conditions, separate private development agreements have also been necessary to extend and connect those developments to strategic infrastructure, which lock in commitments between the parties to deliver the infrastructure.

While recent negotiations with the submitters indicates they are more agreeable to retaining the key Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure components within section 3.7, no agreed amendments have been tabled at the time of drafting this evidence. Some amendments have been made to section 3.7 which are supported by City Infrastructure and are reflected in Mr Kivell’s evidence. In essence Council maintains it is the developer’s responsibility to provide Ruakura strategic infrastructure through LDP applications.

3.2. Transport Hierarchy

The Structure Plan area is bounded by the Waikato Expressway – Hamilton Section to the east, with two major arterial connections from the Expressway back to the City (Greenhill Link Road in the north, and re-aligned Ruakura Road in the south). The Waikato Expressway and its two

7

connections are subject to NZTA designations. The delivery of the two Waikato Expressway connections is subject to third party agreements with the relevant landowners (Chedworth Properties Ltd and Waikato Tainui).

The BOI decision defined an appropriate arterial road hierarchy based on traffic volumes predicted to be generated by the plan change activities. The variation confirms the BOI transport hierarchy in part, and re-defines the southern section of the Spine Road and re-aligned Ruakura Road as a Major Arterial. The reason for refining the hierarchy from Minor to Major Arterial has arisen from Council better defining the future primary gateway into the City from the Ruakura Interchange with the Waikato Expressway, along Ruakura Road West, over the ECMTR up to Fifth Avenue (major arterial). The major arterial will then connect to Fifth Avenue and Boundary Road, Council’s existing ‘Cross City Connector’, as shown in Variation Figure 2-15A Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure – Transport attached as Appendix 1 to my evidence.

While the Spine Road is an essential north/south transport route in the Structure Plan, it is also a critical corridor within which the Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure will be located. This includes the strategic wastewater pipe and the trunk distribution water mains that extend north and south to service the structure plan development. Securing access to this corridor (to be vested through the PDA) is essential for Council to manage the development of Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure and transport connections within the structure plan.

Negotiations with two of the submitters (CPL/TGH) have resulted in the proposed refinements to chapter 3.7 to provide additional clarification on the descriptions of the transport components, which City Infrastructure support.

Other matters raised by submitters regarding the transport network are addressed in Section 4 –below.

3.3. Wastewater

A gravity wastewater line will be extended from the existing location of the Far Eastern Interceptor at the Wairere/Crosby/Pardoa roundabout. Developers have commenced the extension of this line within Pardoa Boulevard, towards the Spine Road. The line will then head south to the East Coast Main Trunk Railway. It is Council’s expectation that the development community will construct the wastewater pipe and connect to it through LDP applications.

Since the notification of the Variation, Council has confirmed the Far Eastern Interceptor will terminate within the Ruakura Structure Plan area and not extend to service the Peacocke Growth Cell (as was originally proposed in the variation). Sections 3.7.1.10 (c) & (d) have been amended to reflect this change.

Council in its submission (32.15) sought to include a new Rule 3.7.3.4.2(a) to clarify Council’s intent that the wastewater line (as Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure) shall be extended the full extent of the LDP area boundary as follows:

3.7.3.4.2 Wastewater

(a) The wastewater network shall be extended along the Spine Road corridor to the full extent of the Land Development Plan Area boundary in accordance with Figure 2-15B – Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure Three Waters in Appendix 2.

While this has been opposed by TGH/CPL (as their original submission sought to remove this provision), this approach is consistent with the construction of the full extent of the Spine Road

8

within the LDP area boundary, and seeks to achieve the comprehensive delivery of the strategic wastewater network within the Spine Road corridor to its boundary with the adjacent LDP area.

A Private Developer Agreement is being negotiated for the construction of the wastewater network through the Spine Road corridor to service the entire Structure Plan area.

There are no outstanding wastewater matters to be addressed through the submissions.

3.4. Water

Section 3.7.1.10 of the variation describes the servicing of the structure plan from a single reservoir. A Private Developer Agreement has recently been signed committing the construction of the Ruakura Reservoir and bulk water mains by Council, subject to available funding in Council’s 10 Year Plan.

It is Council’s expectation that LDP applications will deliver the supporting trunk water network through the vested Spine Road corridor.

Submissions seeking the removal of reference to Water Impact Assessments at section 3.7.3.2.2 are supported as it is duplicated in the Information Requirements section 1.2.2.25 of the Plan for resource consents.

In its submission point 32.34 Council sought to delete reference to Water Impact Assessment criteria (iii) & (x) interim development and temporary connections. These provisions if retained send an unhelpful message that interim or temporary servicing may be available, when technical reports submitted with recent LDP applications indicate there is no interim or temporary servicing available.

In recent negotiations over the LDP applications for Area A, discussions of a temporary water supply connection has been held. Council views this matter as a strictly financial and construction timing matter. It is therefore considered inappropriate that it be addressed through a resource consent application, and instead Council proposes to negotiate any temporary or interim servicing solution on a case by case basis using the Private Developer Agreement framework. Council therefore considers clauses 1.2.2.25(o)(iii) and (x) should be struck out.

There are no outstanding water matters to be addressed through the submissions.

3.5. Stormwater

A draft integrated catchment management plan was prepared by Tainui Group Holdings to support the Ruakura plan change. At a high level, three waters assessments provided through the BOI process have informed the stormwater management approach for the Variation area. These assessments were expanded on in the recently consented LDP application for Chedworth Properties Ltd (residential development in Area J), and Ruakura Ltd (Tainui Group Holding’s Inland Port and Logistics development in Areas A/C/F).

It is not Council’s intention to change the status quo set down by the BOI decision relating to stormwater management through the variation. The BOI decision and variation provide for the approval of a Water Impact Assessment in absence of an ICMP to be assessed at the time of LDP applications. Although not ideal, this approach was taken for the two recently approved LDP applications. The developers (CPL/TGH) have engaged the appropriate specialists to deliver acceptable solutions for three waters management in the catchments in absence of an ICMP at this time.

9

Further analysis of the three catchments within the Variation area will be undertaken when the Kirikiriroa, Mangaonua and Hamilton East (Urban) ICMPs are developed within Council’s programme over the next 2-4 years.

In the interim:

• the management of stormwater within the Variation area will be assessed at the LDP Application stage through the requirement of a comprehensive water impact assessment, and consideration of the suite of Ruakura specific three waters assessment criteria in section 1.2.2.25 of the Plan, and

• beyond the Variation area stormwater continues to be managed on the basis that those areas outside the Ruakura Structure Plan will not be urbanised in the short to medium term, and that the current land use activities in those areas will remain largely as they are at present,

• amendments have been made to Rule 3.7.3.4.3 (see below) to include reference to an approved water impact assessment and to maintain the discharge point locations as shown on Figure 2-15B,

• any urban development planned outside the Structure Plan area will require review and revision of any approved ICMP to ensure any cumulative effects are understood, that infrastructure requirements are reassessed and that the catchment will continue to be managed sustainably.

I agree with the following amendments sought by submitters to Rule 3.7.3.4.3:

3.7.3.4.3 Stormwater Network

a) All stormwater management infrastructure shall be in accordance with an approved ICMP where available, or with an approved Water Impact Assessment solutions. In particular,

In absence of an approved a relevant ICMP, stormwater management infrastructure shall be subject to specific catchment management planning through a Water Impact Assessment and reflect be consistent with the recommended preferred stormwater discharge points on Figure 2-15B.

Submission D80.003 opposed Rule 3.7.1.9 and sought to ensure that there is no use of streams for stormwater drainage associated with the Ruakura Structure Plan. City Infrastructure does not support this submission. The BOI decision results in a stormwater management network that includes a combination of existing and new drains/streams, wetland devices, and linear wetland/swales for the purpose of stormwater conveyance, attenuation and treatment. The Variation is consistent with the BOI stormwater network and enables assessment of the proposed stormwater management on an LDP basis, which will be considered against the agreed Native fish and Lizard ecological management plan for the structure plan area.

There are no outstanding stormwater matters to be addressed through the submissions.

3.6. LDP Area Framework and Spine Road Construction Triggers

A number of submissions sought to remove the land development plan framework and Spine Road construction trigger. Mr Kivell will give planning evidence regarding Council’s position on the LDP Framework, and Mr Gray will give evidence on the relevance of the proposed Spine Road triggers. Specifically Rules 3.7.3.3 (d) and (e) require the following:

10

d) Construction of the relevant Spine Road sections is required prior to any activities other than access and utility infrastructure taking place in Land Development Plan areas.

e) Spine Road construction trigger

The Spine Road (central) shall be extended south from Greenhill Link Road as LDP applications are lodged for Areas I, L, M and K to the boundary of the Medium Density Residential Zone. The full extent of the Spine Road within each LDP area will be constructed as part of the LDP application.

The Spine Road (central) shall be extended south as LDP applications are lodged for Areas T and S. The full extent of the Spine Road within each LDP area will be constructed as part of the LDP application.

• Development shall not commence in LDP Area G until the Spine Road is constructed along the full extent of LDP Area T.

• Development shall not commence in LDP Area R until the Spine Road is constructed along the full extent of LDP Area S.

• The Spine Road (south) shall be extended south from the general residential zone boundary to Ruakura Road West and be subject to the following sequencing constraints:

Development shall not commence in LDP Areas D, F or P until such time as the Spine Road (south) is constructed.

The construction of the full extent of the Spine Road was not able to be considered during the BOI process as the plan change area excluded a significant part of the Spine Road.

The intent of this Rule is to secure the progressive development of the Spine Road as LDP applications are made.

Council considers the use of the LDP area framework, inclusion of parts of the Spine Road corridor within each LDP boundary; and the introduction of a Spine Road Construction trigger provides for the progressive construction of the Spine Road along the full extent of the boundary of the LDP area by the developer to be the most appropriate management framework.

The PDA sets out terms and conditions that the land for the Spine Road corridor will transfer to Council (unless vested prior through LDP applications). It is intended that Council will have ownership of the corridor as soon as it can be practically achieved (and ultimate control) which is critical for the location of Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure.

4. Other Matters

4.1. Transport connectivity for Percival/Ryburn Residents

New Policy 3.7.2.4d (iv) & (v)

In response to 18.08 et al, and as discussed in the evidence of Mr Gray and Mr Kivell, I agree there is a need to maintain north-south connectivity for Percival/Ryburn Rd residents across the ECMTR until an appropriate connection via the Spine Road is operational. Further it is appropriate to safeguard the existing low-level of use of Percival/Ryburn Rd into the future from Port related traffic.

The addition of the 2 new polices below (in italics) capture this intent:

11

3.7.2.4d Road stopping procedures for parts of Ruakura Road and Percival Road will be required under the Local Government Act to enable the expansion of the Inland Port. The principles to be adhered to, for any alternative access proposal, include (to the extent possible):

i. A route which provides for travel in the general direction of Hillcrest and Silverdale without significant detours in terms of distance, travel times or connectivity;

ii. A route which enables use of alternative modes of transport (particularly walking and cycling); and

iii. A route which avoids severance effects for the Percival / Ryburn Road community.

iv. A route which maintains north-south connectivity for all modes across the East Coast Main Trunk railway line for Percival Road and Ryburn Road properties until an appropriate connection via the Spine Road is operational.

v. A route that avoids direct connection to industrial or logistics properties from Percival Road or Ryburn Road.

New Rule 3.7.3.3 (f)

In response to 18.08 et al, and as discussed in the evidence of Mr Gray and Mr Kivell, I also agree it is appropriate to safeguard the existing low-level of use of Percival/Ryburn Rd into the future from Port related traffic. The addition of the new rule 3.7.3.3(f) below (in italics) captures this intent:

(f) North South Connectivity – Percival Road and Ryburn Road

North-south connectivity for all modes across the East Coast Main Trunk railway line shall be maintained for Percival Road and Ryburn Road properties until an appropriate connection via the Spine Road is operational. There shall be no direct connection to industrial or logistics properties from Percival Road or Ryburn Road.

4.2. Grade Separated Facilities

Submissions have sought to delete any reference to grade separated pedestrian and cycling facilities on arterial roads in Policies 3.7.2.4.(b) & (e).

It is Council’s expectation that dedicated pedestrian and cycling facilities are appropriately provided for on arterial routes. There is a network of arterial roads in the structure plan that may be constructed by others, and it is important that appropriate facilities are provided, but Council agrees they may not necessarily be grade separated, and this matter can be considered at the detailed engineering design. I recommend the following amendments to the policies:

Policy 3.7.2.4b

The transport network supports efficient passenger transport and walking and cycling, including dedicated grade separated facilities on arterial routes.

12

Policy 3.7.2.4e

Opportunities for improved safety, accessibility, connectivity and efficiency within the transportation network are provided including dedicated grade separated facilities on arterial routes.

4.3. Medium Density Residential Staging Rule

I agree with the submission (CPL) to strike out Rule 3.7.3.3.4(b) relating to the transport connection to the Wairere/Crosby Road roundabout. This connection has now been constructed and is operational. The rule is no longer applicable.

4.4. Amendments to Figures

Indicative roads on figures

Two submissions (CPL/TGH) have sought to refer to transport and three waters infrastructure as ‘indicative’ on the Figures 2-15A and 2-15B. Refinements have been made to the figures to differentiate between “Proposed” infrastructure which shall be developed in accordance with the structure plan layout (e.g. Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure which must be located in the Spine Road) and “Indicative” infrastructure (e.g. collector roads and trunk mains, the location of which can be confirmed during the LDP assessment).

Percival Road/Spine Road connection

Submission 18.08 (et.al Percival/Ryburn Cluster) seek a more direct transport route from Percival Rd to the Spine Road in the future when the Inland Port is constructed and Ruakura Road is closed. I agree that this is appropriate and has been recommended in Council’s submission on the Structure Plan and is now shown on the amended Figure 2-15A – Transport.

5. Conclusion

The Variation imbeds the Board of Inquiry strategic infrastructure framework in the Proposed District Plan. It also provides the necessary wider context around the sustainable and integrated delivery of strategically significant infrastructure with land use, which was missing from the BOI decision.

In summary it is City Infrastructure’s position that the Variation;

• appropriately defines and contextualises the Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure (Three Waters and Transportation),

• necessarily extends the LDP area framework for the remaining structure plan area, to enable the development of Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure,

• provides the necessary objectives, policies and rule framework to deliver the Ruakura Strategic Infrastructure when Land Development Plan areas are consented.

On behalf of the City Infrastructure Unit, I recommend the proposed variation and the recommendations reflected in Mr Kivell’s s.42A report are supported.

LegendRuakura Structure Plan AreaCity BoundaryRailway LineRuakura Strategic Transport NetworkRoadsSubject To Road StoppingIndicative Collector RoadCollector RoadMajor Arterial RoadMinor Arterial RoadWaikato Expressway

Document Path: L:\GIS\1 Working\Information Services\GIS\MXD\Figure 2-15 A Ruakura Strategic Transport Infrastructure.mxd

Wairere Drive

Cross-City Connection

Spine Road (South)

Spine Road (Central)

SpineRoad(North)

Greenhill Link Road

Ruakura Road (Urban)

Ruakura Road West

Fifth Avenue Extension

Waikato Expressway Designation

WaikatoDistrict

East Coast Main Trunk Railway

SH 26

Silverdale Road

LegendRuakura Structure Plan AreaCity Boundary

Indicative Reservoir Location

Reservoir Existing

TypeProposed Water BulkmainProposed Water Distribution TrunkmainsWater Bulkmain Existing

Wastewater Interceptor DissolveDescriptio

Proposed Wastewater TrunkmainExisting Wastewater Interceptor Railway LineStormwater Discharge Point

Document Path: L:\GIS\1 Working\Information Services\GIS\MXD\Figure 2-15 B Ruakura Strategic 3-Waters Infrastructure Water Plan.mxd

Wairere Drive

Hamilton EastCatchment

KirikiriroaCatchment

FairfieldReservoir

HillcrestReservoir

RuakuraReservoir

MangaonuaCatchment

WaikatoDistrict

East Coast Main Trunk Railway

Ruakura Road

SH 26

Silverdale Road