Will Bernard get it right?

 

From Auckland Council:

NZ Herald story on Ports of Auckland incorrect – first steps to reclamation will not start in April

 

A story in today’s NZ Herald claims incorrectly that ‘Ports of Auckland will start work in April on the first step to reclaim more of the Waitemata Harbour after the Auckland Council yesterday voted in favour of more generous rules allowing expansion over the seabed.’

This statement is not correct for two reasons:

1. The work to begin in April will be a piled structure, not reclamation (as reported in media over the last couple of weeks). This work is not ‘the first step’ to reclaim more land; it is a wharf structure which is entirely reversible. Any reclamation work would be a separate process subject to resource consent. 

 

2. The vote by Council yesterday has no connection to the work to begin next month. This work received consent in December last year. The decision yesterday relates to council’s current view on the unitary plan rules, which won’t be agreed until mid-next year – ie the rules that would apply if the ports were to make an application for reclamation.

 

Auckland Council has requested a correction from the NZ Herald.

—-ends—–

 

Full statement on yesterday’s Auckland Development Committee vote is here:

PORT OF AUCKLAND UPDATE: DISCRETIONARY RULE ON RECLAMATION REMAINS

 

Actual Council position going into mediation with the Unitary Plan Hearings Panel:

EVIDENCE TO UNITARY PLAN PANEL MEDIATION FOR PORT OF AUCKLAND

Specifically this:

Policies
The policies are as listed in the General Coastal Marine zone for the CMA in the precinct in addition to those specified below.
The general policies 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10 and 11 for the centres and mixed use zones and the General Business and Business Park zone apply to land within the precinct in addition to those specified below.
The City Centre zone policies 5 – 9, 11, 16 – 17, 19, 21 and – 23 apply to land within the precinct in addition to those specified below.

10. Provide for further reclamation to be undertaken, only if:
a. there is no practicable alternative
b. it will provide a significant regional benefit
c. it is the most appropriate form of development
d. potential adverse effects will be avoided, remedied or mitigated.

11. Provide for minor reclamation that is carried out as part of rehabilitation or remedial works of an existing reclamation or CMA structure, while avoiding, remedying or mitigating any adverse effects on the environment.

12. Avoid further reclamation within the precinct until the results of a study on the future operation and development of the port clearly identifies whether and when further reclamation is required to enable that future operation

 

I will mull this over the weekend as it seems someone was tardy with the actual situation (a Councillor) while pondering the need to explain the Unitary Plan processes again!