IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991

Transcription

1 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER of a Board of Inquiry appointed under s149j of the Resource Management Act 1991 to consider Notice of Requirements and applications for Resource Consent made by the New Zealand Transport Agency in relation to the East West Link roading proposal in Auckland. STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF ELISE NATALIE CADDIGAN ON BEHALF OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL BUILT HERITAGE

2 CONTENTS CLAUSE PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXPERIENCE CODE OF CONDUCT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL PARTS OF THE PROPOSAL ADDRESSED IN MY EVIDENCE METHODOLOGY OF ASSESSMENT RELEVANT EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSAL... 4 Effects on the Aotea Sea Scout hall... 6 Effects on the Manuka Tavern (former) Effects on Waikaraka park and Cemetery...12 Other Heritage MANAGEMENT OF EFFECTS CONCLUSION...18 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc

3 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXPERIENCE 1.1 My name is Elise Natalie Caddigan. I am a Built Heritage Specialist employed by Auckland Council (Council) to comment on the proposed East West Link (Proposal). I hold a Masters degree in Museum and Heritage Studies, a Postgraduate Diploma in History, and a Bachelor of Arts in History and Anthropology. I have been employed in the Council s Heritage Unit since In my role I provide specialist advice through the resource consent process to promote the protection and conservation management of Auckland s built heritage resources; I prepare historic heritage evaluations, using established policy, guidelines, and methodology for evaluating historic heritage under the Unitary Plan and I prepare data for plan changes, resource consent hearings, disputes and Environment Court appeals in the area of built heritage. I have worked in a number of museum and heritage organisations over the past eight years and have experience in all areas of collection management and the identification, research, and values assessment for heritage places. I am a member of ICOMOS New Zealand. 1.3 I have been involved in the project since June 2016 when I provided preliminary built heritage comments on some of the East West Link maps internally with the Council. Since September 2016, I have regularly attended Council project meetings and since December 2016 have attended New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)/East West Link Alliance meetings focused on historic and built heritage. 2. CODE OF CONDUCT 2.1 My qualifications as an expert are set out above. I confirm that I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct set out in the Environment Court's Practice Note I have complied with the Code of Conduct in preparing this evidence. Except where I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person, this evidence is within my area of expertise. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions expressed in this evidence. Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 1

4 3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3.1 My evidence is given in support of the Council's submission on the applications by the NZTA relating to the Proposal, specifically the Notice of Requirements to designate land and the resource consent applications to construct, operate and maintain the Proposal. 3.2 The key conclusions of my evidence are: (a) The Proposal s effects on built heritage are of a concerning scale, noting that many scheduled and unscheduled heritage places along the route are impacted. The protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use and development is a matter of national importance, and the adverse effects of the Proposal need to be considered in this frame. (b) The Aotea Sea Scout Hall, the Manukau Tavern (former) and Waikaraka Park and Cemetery are scheduled historic heritage places that will receive the most significant adverse effects from the Proposal. The mitigation currently proposed is inadequate in addressing these effects. (c) The Proposal's effects on the Aotea Sea Scout Hall is of particular concern, as the Proposal will likely result in the loss of the current use of the Building as a Scout Hall, and potentially result in the vacancy of the site. (d) The Proposal will result in moderate to major permanent adverse effects on built heritage. In many instances, the proposed road alignment leaves minimal scope for the mitigation of the loss of heritage values. The overall cumulative adverse effects of the Proposal serve to increase the isolation of heritage places situated at the edge of Te Hōpua ā Rangi and along the foreshore, and reduce the surrounding historic context and landscape of the locality. This causes the further degradation and disconnection of the historic Onehunga settlement and development pattern. Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 2

5 4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 4.1 The Proposal involves the construction, operation and maintenance of a new four lane arterial road from State Highway 20 (SH20) at Neilson Street Interchange in Onehunga, connecting to State Highway 1 (SH1) at Mount Wellington, as well as an upgrade to SH1 between the Mount Wellington Interchange and the Princes Street Interchange at Ōtāhuhu. New local road connections are provided at Galway Street, Captain Springs Road, the Ports Link Road, Hugo Johnston Drive and Great South Road. Cycle and pedestrian facilities are provided along the route. Grade separation of the through eastwest movements at the Great South Road intersection is included. 5. PARTS OF THE PROPOSAL ADDRESSED IN MY EVIDENCE 5.1 My evidence addresses the effects of the Proposal on scheduled and unscheduled built historic heritage sites and, in particular the Aotea Sea Scout Hall building, the Manukau Tavern (former) and the Waikaraka Park and Cemetery. 6. METHODOLOGY OF ASSESSMENT 6.1 I have based my methodology for assessment of the effects of the Proposal on built heritage on the same guides listed in the provided technical report The methodology I used to consider the effects of the Proposal on built heritage places comprised the examination of the Proposal plans and the identification of the scheduled and unscheduled built heritage places, and reviewing iterative versions of the maps, drawings and other visual documents provided throughout my involvement in the consultation process. I have reviewed the historic heritage evaluations/assessments and other relevant documents (where available) for those places scheduled in the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) (AUP(OIP)). I have also reviewed the Auckland Council Cultural Heritage Index and Pre-1944 Study Lists and survey data for both scheduled and unscheduled places. I have reviewed the available information (including the technical report and Assessment of 1 Refer to Technical Report 2 Built Heritage Assessment, November 2016, p. 9 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 3

6 Environmental Effects) and undertaken some targeted research to better ascertain the wider historic context of the project area and the significance of historic heritage places. 6.3 I have also considered the following briefs of evidence on behalf of NZTA relevant, or potentially relevant, to my evidence: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) Ms Andrea Rickard Statutory Planning; Mr Scott Wickman NZTA Principal Transport Planner; Mr Noel Nancekivell Design and Construction; Mr Gavin Lister Landscape and Visual; Ms Lynne Hancock Urban Design; Ms Lesley Hopkins Planning Effects and Conditions; Ms Amelia Linzey Social Impact; Ms Jane Matthews Built Heritage; and Dr Matthew Felgate Archaeology. 6.4 I have visited the salient areas of Sectors 1, 2 and 5 for built heritage (I have relied upon the provided built heritage technical report for its description of the existing environment, overall historical background and concur with the statement that there are no scheduled or listed built historic heritage places in Sectors 3 and 4). 7. RELEVANT EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSAL 7.1 My assessment has identified the following key relevant effects on built heritage, arising from the Proposal: (a) There will be moderate to major adverse effects on the Aotea Sea Scout Hall (1 Orpheus Drive, Onehunga) as a result of the proposed alignment. The effects include the cumulative isolation of the building from Te Hōpua ā Rangi and other aspects of its historical context and landscape; physical and visual impacts from the construction of the proposed ramps and embankments which will result in a loss of views to and from the building; and the potential loss of its current activity (as a Scout Hall) and its future ability to sustain a viable use postconstruction. Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 4

7 (b) Moderate adverse effects on the Manukau Tavern (former) building (6 Onehunga Harbour Road, Onehunga) will occur as a result of the busier and more complex trenched road arrangement in front of the Manukau Tavern (former) building. There will be adverse effects on the historical heritage values and further physical separation of the building and the wharf area. (c) There will be moderate adverse effects on Waikaraka Grounds and Cemetery as the Proposal changes the relationship and views between the place and the Māngere Inlet. The existing peaceful and contemplative quality of the area will be considerably reduced. The potential adverse effects on the stone walls of the park will be monitored through the Heritage Management Plan and conditions. (d) Unscheduled heritage affected by the Proposal includes the stone walls in proximity to the Aotea Sea Scout Hall, the remains of the coal wharf, the pre-1900 rail bridge and tunnel and residential buildings (31 Frank Grey Place, Ōtāhuhu and 69 Panama Road, Mount Wellington) that are not statutorily protected, but may fall within the Resource Management Act 1991 definition of historic heritage or have been previously identified by Council as places of interest within the project area. The rail bridge and tunnel and residential dwellings are unscheduled places that are proposed for demolition or relocation from their original site as part of the Proposal. This will result in a permanent loss of built heritage fabric from the local area which will contribute to the cumulative deterioration of the historic values of wider Onehunga and surrounds. (e) There will be a further loss of physical and historic context between the tuff ring, Te Hōpua ā Rangi, and built heritage, which diminishes the historic development pattern and overall readability of the area s heritage. (f) There are some historic heritage places scheduled in the AUP(OIP) that are within the identified sectors, but are not likely to be directly affected by the Proposal. Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 5

8 (g) The provided built heritage technical report outlines some neutral and positive heritage effects resulting from the construction of coastal paths and the anticipated increase in pedestrian traffic in the area. 2 I agree that increased pedestrian visibility of built heritage is a positive outcome that partially mitigates the overall adverse effects of the project. 7.2 Effects on the Aotea Sea Scout Hall (a) The Aotea Sea Scout Hall is scheduled in the AUP(OIP) as a category B place, ID The hall is identified as having exceptional local context value, considerable regional context value, considerable local historical, social and aesthetic values, and moderate local knowledge and physical attributes values. 3 The Hall is a widely recognised landmark building on the foreshore of the Manukau Harbour and remains as a reminder of the history of the area when Onehunga prospered and the shoreline was a focus of recreational boating and port activity. The building is distinctive for its landmark qualities and situation between the harbour and Te Hōpua ā Rangi; visually, it has been a part of the physical landscape for over one hundred years and is of considerable aesthetic value. Designed by noted architect John Park, the principal façade is located on the eastern elevation of the building and is recognised as a highly unusual and very visible example of architectural anthropomorphism. Currently, this unique character of the building is unobstructed and highly visible. The hall is one of a number of non-contiguous historic heritage sites located around the edge of Te Hōpua ā Rangi that form an important historic landscape in the locality; nearby structures including the stone walls and wharf remains enhance this early landscape. The context of the Hall is of exceptional value to the local community of Onehunga, and of considerable value to the region. 2 3 Refer to Technical Report 2 Built Heritage Assessment, November 2016, pp As outlined in the Auckland Council Historic Heritage Evaluation: Aotea Sea Scout Hall, September 2013 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 6

9 (b) The Proposal does not physically affect the Hall as the alignment passes approximately ten metres to the east of the extent of place for the Hall identified in the AUP(OIP). The identified extent of place for the Hall includes those areas contained within the certificate of title, including the coastal marine area. However, the AUP(OIP), and best practice for the protection of built heritage, also recognises that the setting of an historic heritage place includes elements of the surrounding context beyond the identified extent of place within which an historic heritage place is experienced. The setting of an historic heritage place includes the sea, sky, land, structures, features, backdrop, skyline and views to and from the place. It can also include landscapes, townscapes, streetscapes and relationships with other historic heritage places which contribute to the value of the place. 4 (c) I note that the conservation plan commissioned for the building by Transit New Zealand in 2007 states in its Summary of Conservation Recommendations that the heritage values of the setting 5 of the building be maintained and that no work should be undertaken that reduces the building s architectural value or aesthetic integrity. 6 General policy 10 of the document states that the setting of the Aotea Sea Scout Hall is retained and where possible enhanced to maintain heritage values of the building. 7 The views and vistas to and from the building are identified as a significant element in the heritage value of the building, and maintaining and enhancing the both the visibility to and from the building is critical. 8 (d) The project proposes a new road alignment adjacent to the Aotea Sea Scout Hall. Orpheus Drive and the existing footpath are retained at the current level; however the construction of the Neilson Street northbound on-ramp and the main East West Link route retaining walls are situated approximately 3.0 metres and a further 2.7 metres See Chapter D17 Historic Heritage Overlay, p. 3. Also refer to the definition of setting in the ICOMOS New Zealand Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value (ICOMOS New Zealand Charter 2010). Also refer to Policy 8 (B5.2.2, p. 3), Chapter B5 of the RPS. Also refer to 2.2 Historic Heritage Landscapes in NZTA s Guide to Assessing Historic Heritage Effects for State Highway Projects, March 2015, pp This word is italicised in the original document and may refer to the ICOMOS definition of the word Transit New Zealand (Northern Gateway Alliance), Aotea Sea Scouts building: Conservation Plan, 2007, p. 2 Transit New Zealand, Conservation Plan, p. 57 Ibid Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 7

10 (respectively) above the current ground level. 9 At an approximate combined height of 5.7 metres above ground level, the proposed ramps and embankments will considerably reduce the historic context, setting, and views to and from the Aotea Sea Scout Hall. The existing views to and from the hall (especially the principal façade) will be considerably impacted and the ability to view the unique eastern elevation will be limited by the reduction in open space in front of the building. Therefore, the project will result in significant adverse effects on the aesthetic and context values of the place and the degradation of the place s setting. The anticipated increase in traffic volume close to the building will also have an adverse effect. I acknowledge that the wider setting and context of the hall has previously been compromised by the construction of SH20, however there will be further permanent cumulative adverse effects from the Proposal through the further visual and physical isolation of the hall from Te Hōpua ā Rangi and the disconnect of the Hall from other historic heritage places. (e) The Aotea Sea Scout Hall must be vacated for the duration of the construction works at Neilson Street, resulting in the temporary relocation of the Sea Scouts activity. There is potential for further impact upon the historical and social values, as the Proposal is likely to result in the permanent relocation of the Sea Scouts activity postconstruction. I understand that loss of car parking, loss of access to Gloucester Park, and increased traffic and road safety issues are the main reasons why the Sea Scouts have indicated that they may not be able to return to the site once construction is completed. 10 This increases the potential for the building to remain unoccupied and at risk of vandalism and physical neglect. I am of the opinion that mitigation is required that will ensure an appropriate ongoing use of the Hall and therefore the long-term viability of this much valued historic building Refer to AEE-AL-102 and Figure 8-1 (and its description) on page 51 of the Built Heritage Technical report for retaining wall heights and a cross section of this area (note that a copy of this cross section was requested from NZTA but is yet to be received). AEE-AL-102 also shows retaining walls to a height of 8.0 metres in front of the Hall in this area. Refer to Attachment A and the following image on the NZTA website for visual aids of the proposed area View of new shared path along Orpheus Drive near Aotea Sea Scouts building Based on the document Aotea Sea Scouts East West Link design considerations, prepared by Stephen Lasham, 18 October 2016 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 8

11 (f) I agree with Ms Matthews that there is likely to be little impact on the Hall from the construction settlement, as the majority of the works are above ground. 11 Overall, I am satisfied that the Historic Heritage conditions are reasonably well crafted to ensure the identification, recording, monitoring and (potential) repair of built heritage places and features during the Proposal s duration. Historic Heritage condition HH.3 requires the preparation of a Heritage Management Plan (HMP) to identify procedures and practices to be adopted to protect and minimise effects on historic heritage sites where practicable. Historic Heritage condition HH.5 requires a pre and post construction building condition survey for the Hall (and surrounding stone walls) and has been updated to include visual monitoring throughout construction in the building s vicinity, and Historic Heritage condition HH.4 has been amended to include specific reference to using methods that minimise vibration effects to built heritage. (g) Historic Heritage condition HH.7 requires the updating of the conservation plan for the Aotea Sea Scout Hall and this will identify areas of the building that would benefit from maintenance and repair. Whilst this will inform the building s owner of its current condition and suggest potential areas of work and improvements, as stated in 7.3(h) and 8.1(c), I am of the opinion that a condition requiring the NZTA to undertake any repairs and maintenance identified in the conservation plan (and the instatement wastewater facilities) should be required as mitigation for the Proposal's adverse effects on heritage values and amenity. (h) I consider the current landscaping and design relief, as currently proposed, to be inadequate, and not commensurate with the impact on heritage values. There are limited opportunities for a landscape and design response to the Project's adverse effects on the heritage values and loss of amenity, which is why I suggest that a more practical and building-based approach to mitigation is necessary; requiring NZTA to install wastewater facilities and undertake building 11 Refer to the Statement Of Primary Evidence Of Jane Marie Matthews On Behalf Of The New Zealand Transport Agency Built Heritage, 12 April 2017, p. 16 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 9

12 maintenance works and repairs identified in the updated conservation plan (as outlined in the paragraph above). Despite the Project's lack of direct physical effects on the building, this would go some way to alleviate the potential for inoccupation of the building if it no longer meets the sea scouts needs (as a result of the change in the building s environment), and to ensure an appropriate future use. Whilst I acknowledge that the extension of the coastal walking and cycling path past the Hall is a beneficial outcome of the Proposal, and I agree with the insertion of condition LV.5A which includes provision for a more tailored design approach to the Hall s immediate vicinity, I believe that further mitigation, in terms of requiring NZTA to upgrade service facilities and undertake repairs and maintenance to the building, is necessary to ensure a better heritage outcome. 7.3 Effects on the Manukau Tavern (former) (a) The Manukau Tavern (former) is scheduled in the AUP(OIP) as a category B place, ID The place is identified as having exceptional regional historic value, considerable local social value and moderate local knowledge, physical attributes, aesthetic and context values. 12 The Manukau Tavern (former) has considerable significance to the locality as Onehunga s only remaining nineteenth century hotel in operation, having been in continuous use for its original purpose for more than 130 years. Designed by notable architect James Wrigley and erected opposite the Government wharf, the Manukau Tavern (former) has exceptional significance to the region for its direct association with people, places and organisations significant to the early settlement of Onehunga, and is representative of Onehunga s role as a notable west coast port in the colonial period. As with the Aotea Sea Scout Hall, the Manukau Tavern (former) is one of a number of non-contiguous historic heritage sites located around the edge of Te Hōpua ā Rangi that form an important historic landscape in the locality. 12 As outlined in the Auckland Council Historic Heritage Evaluation: Manukau Tavern (former), September 2013 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 10

13 (b) The Proposal does not physically affect the Manukau Tavern (former) as the East West Link is aligned to the south of the building in a trenched section. The identified extent of place for the Manukau Tavern (former) in the AUP(OIP) consists of the land which is occupied by the original building. However, as I have identified in paragraph 7.2(b) 13 of my evidence, the setting of a historic heritage place is important, and includes elements of the surrounding context beyond the identified extent of place within which an historic heritage place is experienced. The connection between the former tavern and the wharf has been identified as a significant element of the building s social history and historic landscape 14 ; retention of this physical and visual relationship is important to the heritage values of the place. (c) The Proposal will create dual carriageway east and west bound lanes in a trenched section of road directly in front of the Manukau Tavern (former). 15 I concur with Ms Matthews that this will result in a busier and more complex road arrangement in front of the building. This will disrupt the connection and relationship between the place and the wharf. The Manukau Tavern (former) building remains situated on its original site as a remnant of the cultural and historical landscape of early Onehunga, including connections with the wharf and tram line. It has a physical and visual connection with the water and other heritage places in the vicinity that will be severed by the trenched section of road and increased traffic volume. I understand that the land bridge over the trenched section of the East West Link has been increased from 25 to 70 metres in width to better support linkages between Onehunga Town Centre, the Landing [Manukau Tavern (former)] and the wharf. 16 Whist this is a positive design amendment, there will still be moderate adverse effects on the building as a result Refer to Chapter D17 Historic Heritage Overlay, p. 3. Also refer to the definition of setting in the ICOMOS New Zealand Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value (ICOMOS New Zealand Charter 2010). Also refer to Policy 8 (B5.2.2, p. 3), Chapter B5 of the RPS. Also refer to 2.2 Historic Heritage Landscapes in NZTA s Guide to Assessing Historic Heritage Effects for State Highway Projects, March 2015, pp Refer to sections 6.0 and 7.0 of Manukau Tavern (former), September 2013 Refer to AEE-LA-201 and the following images on the NZTA website for visual aids in this area: Artistic impression of new East West Link in trench (Onehunga) ; View of Neilson Street Interchange includes future lightrail/mass transit to the airport route and new Mangere pedestrian/cycling bridge (concept only) ; Artist s impression of cross section Onehunga wharf section Refer to the Statement Of Primary Evidence Of Jane Marie Matthews On Behalf Of The New Zealand Transport Agency Built Heritage, 12 April 2017, p. 4 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 11

14 of the Proposal; a visual connection will remain but the changes will further separate the building from its context and early landscape ties. (d) I understand that in his Urban Design evidence on behalf of Council, Mr McIndoe requests the extension of the land bridge to a width of 170 metres to provide a better spatial and conceptual connection between the Te Hōpua tuff ring and the harbour edge at Onehunga Wharf, and to reduce the adverse effects on amenity benefits on the Landing [Manukau Tavern (former)] and Onehunga Wharf area. 17 An increase in the width of the land bridge would facilitate a better connection between the Manukau Tavern (former) and the wharf, which would reduce the severance of the place from its historical context and result in a better heritage outcome for the scheduled building. For this reason I support the extension of the land bridge. (e) As stated in 7.2(f), potential adverse effects on the building as a result of the construction works can be adequately managed through the HMP and the Historic Heritage conditions. The inclusion of the building in G.5 of the Groundwater and Settlement conditions should ensure that any effects resulting from the trench are effectively monitored. However, little relief beyond the land bridge is proposed for the loss of heritage values of the Manukau Tavern (former) and I suggest that specific heritage interpretation is utilised in close proximity to the building to enhance public understanding of the place and setting. Where appropriate, design features on the land bridge should reflect and respond to the historic context of the building and reference the Manukau Tavern (former) s historical and social values, and relationship to the wharf and tram line Effects on Waikaraka Park and Cemetery (a) Waikaraka Park and Cemetery is scheduled in the AUP(OIP) as a category B place, ID The place is identified as having considerable local historic value and moderate local social, 17 Refer to the Statement Of Evidence Of Graeme Robert Mcindoe On Behalf Of Auckland Council Urban Design, 10 May 2017, pp Refer to 8.1(e) and 8.2(d) for further discussion Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 12

15 knowledge and physical attributes values. 19 Waikaraka Park and Cemetery has considerable significance to Onehunga for its historic associations as Onehunga s earliest public cemetery and its many layers of use as a public space throughout Onehunga s history. The cemetery at Waikaraka was set aside by Crown grant in 1881 to serve as a much needed public burial ground; many prominent figures in the history of Onehunga and Auckland are buried there. The place is also representative of the progressive, government funded works that took place during the Depression and thus exemplifies the aspirations of local relief work policies. Waikaraka is also associated with New Zealand s involvement in the Second World War as it was used by American and domestic soldiers for training and camps. The use of bluestone as a building material in the construction of the park buildings, walls and other facilities provides a distinctive character and is a key feature of the place. (b) The Proposal will enter the extent of place for Waikaraka Park and Cemetery identified in the AUP(OIP), with both the road and walkway proposed to infringe on the south eastern edge of the extent. 20 The identified extent of place for the Waikaraka Park and Cemetery is based on the certificate of title boundaries for the property with the inclusion of parts of the Manukau Foreshore East Walkway to protect the park s views to and from the Manukau harbour, as well as providing for the continuity of use between the park and the foreshore walkway. As referred to in 7.2(b) and 7.3(b) of my evidence, the setting of an historic heritage place is important, and includes elements of the surrounding context beyond the identified extent of place within which an historic heritage place is experienced. 21 The connection, views and stone walls between the park complex and the foreshore have been identified as important elements of the place s As outlined in the Auckland Council Historic Heritage Evaluation: Waikaraka Park, Cemetery, Rifle Range (former) and Speedway, September 2013 Refer to AEE-G-102 See Chapter D17 Historic Heritage Overlay, p. 3. Also refer to the definition of setting in the ICOMOS New Zealand Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value (ICOMOS New Zealand Charter 2010). Also refer to Policy 8 (B5.2.2, p. 3), Chapter B5 of the RPS. Also refer to 2.2 Historic Heritage Landscapes in NZTA s Guide to Assessing Historic Heritage Effects for State Highway Projects, March 2015, pp Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 13

16 historic landscape 22 ; retention of this physical and visual relationship is important to the heritage values of the place. (c) The road alignment has been designed to avoid direct impacts on Waikaraka Park and Cemetery by reclaiming part of the foreshore to the south of the park and constructing the East West Link on this. This alignment results in the construction of road within the historic heritage extent of place, however it also allows for the retention of the existing road, trees and stone walls at the south end of the cemetery. I understand that the alignment will create an embankment in excess of two metres high adjacent to the existing road which will obstruct the views currently available in this area. It will also introduce traffic noise in to the currently peaceful and contemplative space. The historical development, associations and use of the park and cemetery are reflected in its considerable historical and moderate social, knowledge and physical attributes values. The extent of place given for its statutory management is significant as it is explicit in detailing that the park and cemetery derive heritage values from the historic development, reclamation, and relationship with the foreshore and the views that are afforded towards the harbour at its southern edge. The Proposal will result in moderate adverse effects on the identified heritage values through the loss of the relationship of the place to the foreshore, the loss of views between the place and the harbour and a loss of the tranquil quality through the introduction of traffic and noise. As a result of the Proposal, it is likely that a postconstruction review of the historic heritage extent of place would revisit and potentially revise its boundaries. (d) The positioning of the Alfred Street pedestrian overbridge to the eastern side of Waikaraka Park and Cemetery is important as in this location it will not further detract from the relationship and visual appeal between the place to the foreshore. (e) I understand that as a result of Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga s submission, an additional point has been added to condition 22 Refer to sections 5.0, 7.0 and Speedway, September in Waikaraka Park, Cemetery, Rifle Range (former) and Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 14

17 LV.5A to provide for a screening treatment between the park and cemetery and the East West Link; the design details of which shall reflect the built and landscape features of the historic heritage extent of place (including the existing stone walls and Pohutukawa trees). I support this amendment. (f) The change to LV.5A, in conjunction with the opportunities provided by new coastal pathways and the Alfred Street overbridge will offer the benefit of experiencing the foreshore and park and cemetery space, albeit in a reduced historical landscape setting. Similar to 7.3(e), interpretation in this area is strongly recommended. 7.5 Other Heritage (a) Scheduled historic heritage places including (but not limited to) the wharf area, the Shaldrick residence, the caretaker s cottage, toilet blocks, ticket booth and stone walls (all within Waikaraka Park) and the Onehunga Woollen Mills (273 Neilson Street, Te Papapa) are not likely to be directly impacted by the Proposal, and potential impacts (such as damage caused by construction vibration) can be managed through the HMP and conditions. Some positive outcomes have been identified for these places such as the potential reduction in traffic along the northern edge of Waikaraka Park and Cemetery on Neilson Street and the southern end of Onehunga Mall, and the increase in shared paths to facilitate better public mobility around the foreshore area and through the heritage landscape. (b) The stone and concrete railway bridge and tunnel that was originally constructed in 1875 and rebuilt in 1915, and the dwellings at 31 Frank Grey Place, Ōtāhuhu and 69 Panama Road, Mount Wellington are unscheduled places that are proposed for demolition or relocation as part of the Proposal; the effects of which will further contribute to the loss of the historic and cultural context and landscape, and built heritage in the Onehunga area and surrounds. I note the recording and salvage of the railway bridge and tunnel is stipulated in Historic Heritage condition HH.4(e), and the addition of Historic Heritage condition HH.6 provides for the photographic recording of 31 Frank Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 15

18 Grey Place and 69 Panama Road prior to their demolition or relocation. As there is no way of fully mitigating the loss of these places, as performed elsewhere (such as the Sinton Road duplex and Clarks Lane cottage in Hobsonville) I support the materials from these places being salvaged and reused where appropriate as design and landscape features. 8. MANAGEMENT OF EFFECTS 8.1 In my opinion amendments to the Proposal and/or the NoR/resource consent conditions are required to ensure effects are appropriately mitigated and/or managed as follows: (a) In regard to HH.5(c) and (f) and HH.6 and HH.7 I maintain that reference to the Manager within these Historic Heritage conditions should be amended to include specific reference to the Auckland Council Heritage Unit Manager in addition to the regulatory function manager. (b) Amend the wording of HH.5(e) to reflect that of HH.5(c) so that the outcome of the survey shall also be provided to the Auckland Council Heritage Unit Manager following completion. (c) I also maintain that the connection of services (including wastewater) and general maintenance and repairs (in accordance with the updated conservation plan) should be undertaken on the Aotea Sea Scout Hall building. This and any new utilities/infrastructure to be connected to/through the Aotea Sea Scout Hall building should be undertaken in consultation with Auckland Council Heritage Unit. (d) I support the provision in the Urban Design, Landscape and Visual condition LV.5(viii) to provide for interpretive signage, especially in relation to built heritage. In reference to condition LV.5A(b)(v), and 7.3(e) and 7.4(f) in my evidence above, I request that such work (especially where relevant to scheduled places) is to be undertaken in consultation with the Auckland Council Heritage Unit. Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 16

19 (e) In reference to 7.3(e) of my evidence above, I cannot find specific design guidance (in the conditions or Draft Urban and Landscape Design Framework document beyond the design outcomes sought on p. 68) for the 70 metre wide land bridge in front on the Manukau Tavern (former). As this land bridge is considered to partially mitigate the adverse effects on the heritage site, I suggest that the design of, and features on the land bridge should reflect and respond to the historic context and landscape of the building and reference the Manukau Tavern (former) s historical and social values, and relationship to the wharf and tram line. This should include, but is not limited to, interpretation and signage acknowledging the history of the building and wider area, design treatment of the portals and trench walls, pavement treatment etc. This work is to be undertaken in consultation with the Auckland Council Heritage Unit. This should be included as an amendment to condition LV.5A. 8.2 In my opinion, these amendments are necessary because: (a) Specific amendments are sought in the wording of the conditions to ensure the on-going proactive involvement of, and robust and open dialogue between, Council s Heritage Unit and the New Zealand Transport Agency project team. I note that Ms Matthews suggests in her evidence that survey outcomes should be provided to Council s Heritage regulatory team. 23 (b) The additional works that I propose be undertaken by NZTA in relation to the Aotea Sea Scout Hall will contribute to the long-term viability and restoration of the building, and somewhat mitigate the adverse effects of the Project on the building's heritage and amenity values. (c) Council s Heritage Unit can offer resources and information for the improved interpretation and education about the historic Onehunga foreshore and harbour area which should be utilised in the preparation of such work. This is also to ensure that any signage is 23 Refer to the Statement Of Primary Evidence Of Jane Marie Matthews On Behalf Of The New Zealand Transport Agency Built Heritage, 12 April 2017, p. 24 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 17

20 formatted consistently with the wider Council programme of interpretive signage. (d) In relation to the Manukau Tavern (former), my proposed amendments to the conditions will somewhat mitigate the adverse effects of the Project on the building's heritage and amenity values, contribute to the important visual connection between the Manukau Tavern (former) and the wharf, and enhance the public understanding of the building and its historic context. (e) Although not requested within the scope of built heritage, I concur with other technical experts who seek relief through the undergrounding of the transmission lines in close proximity of the Aotea Sea Scout Hall building. This would contribute to the restoration of the setting of the place. 9. CONCLUSION 9.1 The Proposal will have moderate to major adverse effects on built heritage (scheduled and unscheduled) that is directly and indirectly impacted by the Project. There will be considerable adverse effects on heritage values that cannot be fully mitigated and a cumulative increase in the permanent isolation and destruction of Onehunga s historic and cultural landscape. The potential for increased public appreciation and education of the heritage of the locality is a positive output of the Project. Elise Natalie Caddigan 10 May 2017 Elise Caddigan _ Built Heritage _ FINAL v 2.doc - page 18

21