1 Assessment of Alternatives The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate runway options against a range of environmental criteria. The first step is to formulate evaluation criteria necessary to understand the environmental effects of each of the identified runway options. Each of the options is then to be scored against the specific landscape evaluation criteria, which have been determined by Isthmus. Determine Evaluation Criteria Apply scoring methodology Score each option against each evaluation criterion Runway Options Ten runway options have been developed by the Airport for evaluation against the values identified in the environmental baseline reporting. Each of the options are detailed below: Option Number Drawing Reference Option 1 SK400 Northern Option: Total length of 3,410-metres comprising Runway End Safety Areas ( RESA ) and an operational runway length (defined in the designation as being equivalent to the Takeoff Run Available ( TORA ) of 3,110-metres. Eastern extent necessitates reclamation of Pukaki Creek (approximately 8 hectares). Western extent terminates approximately 500-metres from Manukau Harbour edge (western boundary). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 2 SK401 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535-metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 31 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 360 metres east of George Bolt Memorial Drive. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 3 SK402 Northern Option: Total length 3,283-metres comprising Assessment of Options Isthmus
2 RESA and an overall TORA of 2,983-metres. Full, land-based option. No reclamation needed. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 4 SK403 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535-metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 60 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 30-metres west of George Bolt Memorial Drive. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 5 SK404 Northern Option: Total length 3,410-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110-metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 11 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 250-metres from Pukaki Creek edge (eastern boundary). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 6 SK405 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535-metres. Eastern extent necessitates reclamation of Pukaki Creek (approximately 0.1 hectares). Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 19 hectares). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 7 SK406 Northern Option: Total length of 3,410-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110-metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 40 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 750-metres from Pukaki Creek edge (eastern boundary). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 8 SK407 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535-metres. Eastern extent necessitates reclamation of Pukaki Creek (approximately 8 hectares). Western extent terminates 10-metres from the Manukau Harbour edge. Assessment of Options Isthmus
3 Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Option 9 SK408 Southern Option: Total length of 3,410-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110-metres. Manukau Harbour reclamation (approximately 250 hectares). Assumes a separation distance of 1,035m. Option 10 SK409 Southern Option: Total length of 3,410-metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110-metres. Manukau Harbour reclamation (approximately 715 hectares). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022m. Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criterion Effects on natural character (Extent of effects on physical and experiential aspects of natural character, relative to existing degree of natural character) Effects on landscape qualities (Extent of effects on biophysical, perceptual and associative aspects of the overall landscape relative to the existing landscape qualities) effects (Extent of effects on visual amenity having regard to visibility and nature of Reason why criterion identified Natural character should be assessed separately because it is an important section 6 matter. Natural character incorporates both physical and experiential aspects such as those matters listed in NZCPS Policy 13 (2). To put it another way, natural character includes natural science aspects ( actual naturalness) and the appearance or experience of naturalness. It is a composite phenomenon that requires an overall assessment. Therefore, while it is useful to refer to particular aspects, it is sound to have a single overall score rather than break it into components. matters are specifically included in RMA 4 th Schedule. In this instance landscape is principally a section 7 matter, the main exception being that the fossil forest raises s6(b) matters for some options. incorporates biophysical, aesthetic and associative factors. As with natural character, it is a composite phenomenon that requires an overall assessment. Therefore, while it is useful to refer to sub-factors, it is sound to have a single overall score rather than break it into components. matters are specifically included in RMA 4 th Schedule and are usually treated as separate matters. effects fall under amenity values as a section 7 matter. Assessment of Options Isthmus
4 viewing audiences, and the extent to which the proposal is in keeping (or discordant) with the existing visual amenity) Differences between the options will be a function of differences in prominence and visibility. Comments: While scores for natural character and landscape are often similar, it is important to score them separately because they are treated as different concepts in the RMA. In this instance they will also fall principally into section 6 and 7 matters respectively. (The exception is the fossil forest identified as an outstanding natural feature which raises s6(b) matters for those options that would affect that area). Similarly, visual and landscape matters are generally treated separately in RMA matters. Both natural character and landscape are composite phenomenon comprising varied and disparate factors. Because the relative importance of factors varies depending on context, it is not sound to treat them as sub-criteria that can be applied in a formulaic manner. Rather, an overall assessment is required. Each cell in the assessment table summarises the main factors for each of the criteria as follows: Natural character encompasses effects on biophysical and perceptual/experiential aspects of natural character. encompasses the three main types of factor: biophysical, aesthetic and associative. effects are a function of visibility & audience, and degree of prominence (accepting that the different options are essentially the same activity). The approach described above dovetails with the baseline assessment which described the existing natural character in terms of its biophysical and experiential attributes, and the existing landscape in terms of its biophysical, aesthetic and associative aspects. The reasons summarised in the table can be related to the baseline report. Scoring Methodology All options will be scored using a three to one comparative scoring system as shown below. Half scores, such as 1.5 or -2.5, are also acceptable, resulting in an overall total range of 13 scores. Assessment of Options Isthmus
5 3 Significant Positive Effect 2.5 Moderate Positive Effect 2 1.5 Minor Positive Effect 1 0.5 Neutral or Less than Minor Positive or Adverse Effect 0-0.5-1 Minor adverse effect -1.5-2 Moderate Adverse Effect -2.5-3 Significant Adverse Effect Comments on scoring Natural character, landscape and visual effects (and other environmental effects) will inevitably be adverse (or at best neutral), so can only be scored within a 3-point range (0 to -3) or neutral, minor, moderate, significant. Note on Designated Northern Runway Auckland Airport's existing Designation, included in the operative Auckland Council District Plan: Manukau section (Designation 231) and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (Designation 1100), authorises the construction of a "northern runway" ("Designated Northern Runway"). The Designation identifies the proposed location of a northern runway and requires that the Designated Northern Runway be developed within the area marked. The Designation restricts the operational length of the Designated Northern Runway to 2150m. The Airport's latest planning has identified that the Designated Northern Runway is no longer adequate because a longer runway and a larger separation distance between the Designated Northern Runway and the Existing Runway is required. As a result, Auckland Airport is considering its options for a new second runway ("Proposed Second Runway"). Because the Designation already authorises the construction of a northern runway, that Designated Northern Runway forms part of the existing environment at Auckland Airport. However, for the purposes of this Assessment of Options, the Designated Northern Runway was not taken into account as part of the existing environment. Assessment of Options Isthmus
Option Assessment Criteria Natural character Totals Option Score -0.5 0 0-0.5 1 Reason Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Relatively small reclamation which would impact Tautauroa Creek a relatively minor tributary arm of Pukaki Creek. No impact on Manukau Harbour Confined mostly to land, and in keeping with character of airport environs. Some relatively minor effects on Pukaki Creek. Relatively low visibility and unremarkable appearance in context of airport environs. Set back from the harbour, Sleeved by less sensitive activities. Score -1.5-2.0-1.0-4.5 Reason Moderate reclamation of tidal mudflats Manukau Harbour. Intrusion of runway into natural character of bay. Geometric landform projecting beyond shoreline would dominate bay. Impact on fossil forest. However, effects would be contained within bay. Runway will be visually discordant in bay, but low visibility beyond airport users. effects contained within bay. Score 0 0 0 0 Reason While close to shoreline, the runway does not encroach into harbour at either end. Effects limited to minor experiential aspects Confined to land. Will be in keeping with character of airport environs. Relatively low visibility and unremarkable appearance in context of airport environs. Sleeved by less sensitive activities. Score -2.0-2.5-2.0-6.5 Reason Moderately large reclamation of Manukau Harbour tidal mudflats. Intrusion of runway into natural character of harbour. Would extend effects beyond bay into area of harbour with higher natural character. Geometric landform projecting beyond shoreline would become prominent and obtrusive feature on this part of the harbour. Impact on fossil forest. Effects would extend beyond bay. Runway will be discordant feature in harbour, with moderate visibility over-and-above airport users. This option would be less sleeved by Existing Runway and would be visible from wider parts of the harbour.
7 Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Option 8 Score -1.5-2.0-0.5-4 Reason Relatively small reclamation of Manukau Harbour tidal mudflats, and intrusion of runway into natural character of bay. Geometric landform projecting beyond shoreline would dominate bay. Impact on fossil forest. However, effects would be contained within bay. Runway will be visually discordant in bay, but low visibility beyond airport users. effects contained within bay. Score -1.5-2.0-0.5-4 Reason Very small encroachment into margin of Tautauroa Creek, a minor tributary of Pukaki Creek. Small to moderate reclamation of Manukau Harbour tidal mudflats, and intrusion natural character of bay. Geometric landform projecting beyond shoreline would dominate bay. Impact on fossil forest. However, effects would be contained within bay. Runway will be visually discordant in bay, but low visibility beyond airport users. effects contained within bay. Score -2.5-2.0-1.0-5.5 Reason Moderately large reclamation of Manukau Harbour tidal mudflats. Intrusion of runway into natural character of harbour. Would extend effects beyond bay into area of harbour with higher natural character. Geometric landform projecting beyond shoreline would become prominent and obtrusive feature on this part of the harbour. Impact on fossil forest. Effects would extend beyond bay. Runway will be discordant feature in harbour, with moderate visibility over-and-above airport users. This option would be less sleeved by Existing Runway and would be visible from wider parts of the harbour. A little less prominent than Option 4. Score -0.5-0.5 0-1 Reason Relatively small reclamation which would impact Tautauroa Creek a relatively minor tributary arm of Pukaki Creek. Only minor effect on experiential aspects at Manukau Harbour Confined mostly to land, and in keeping with character of airport environs. Some relatively minor effects on Pukaki Creek and Manukau shoreline Relatively low visibility and unremarkable appearance in context of airport environs. Set back from the harbour, Sleeved by less sensitive activities.
8 Option 9 Option 10 Score -3.0-2.5-2.5-8 Reason Large reclamation of Manukau Harbour mudflats. Would engulf Wiroa Island. Would impact natural appearance of significant portion of the harbour. Geometric landform would be a dominant and discordant feature in harbour. New runway would be in more exposed location with higher visibility from harbour and surrounding shoreline. Would appear discordant feature. Score -3.0-3.0-3.0-9 Reason Very large reclamation of Manukau Harbour mudflats, extending into main harbour channel. Would impact natural appearance of significant portion of the harbour. More expansive effects than Option 9. Geometric landform would be a dominant and discordant feature in harbour. Airport would dominant greater proportion of harbour. New runway would be in more exposed location with higher visibility from harbour and surrounding shoreline. Would appear discordant feature dominating south-west portion of Manukau Harbour.
9 Discussion 1 Auckland International Airport Ltd (AIAL) is currently evaluating options for a second runway at Auckland Airport. The alternatives options are being evaluated against a range of environmental and operational criteria by means of multi-criteria analysis (MCA). This report provides background to the evaluation of options in terms of the following criteria: Natural character 2 The criteria are described in terms of the following indicators: Natural character Extent of effects on biophysical and experiential aspects natural character, relative to existing degree of natural character. Extent of effects on biophysical, perceptual and associative aspects of the overall landscape relative to the existing landscape qualities. Extent of effects on visual amenity having regard to visibility and nature of viewing audiences, and the extent to which the proposal is in keeping (or discordant) with the existing visual amenity. 3 In the case of the alternative runway options there is considerable overlap in the matters considered under each of these criteria (and hence similarity in scores) because the critical works for all three criteria would occur in the coastal environment. However, a distinction is made because natural character, landscape and visual amenity cover separate RMA section 6 and 7 matters. 4 The scores for natural character, landscape and visual criteria all fall within the lower half of the range because it is unlikely that an airport runway would have positive effects in terms of such attributes. 5 Ten alternatives have been identified for the Proposed Second Runway. The alternatives are all parallel with the Existing Runway, but located either north or south. The eight northern options are all on the same alignment but include alternative lengths and/or bias towards either the east or west. The two southern options entail alternative offsets (or separation distance) from the Existing Runway. 6 The analysis was undertaken against the background information contained in the Baseline Report. 1
10 Option 1 7 Option 1 is a northern option, with total length 3410m providing an operational runway of 3110m. All northern options assume a minimum separation of 2002m between the centreline of the Existing Runway and proposed alternatives. Option 1 is biased toward the east necessitating approximately 8ha reclamation of Tautauroa Creek a tributary of Pukaki Creek. The western end of the runway would stop well short (500m) of the Manukau Harbour shoreline. Natural Character 8 The works would impact on the Tautauroa Creek, reclaiming 8ha and cutting off the upstream remnants of the creek. Tautauroa Creek, though, is a short tributary of the main Pukaki Creek, and its natural character is modified by industrial activities on its northern and west banks. The works would avoid encroaching into Pukaki Creek proper (except for structures supporting navigation aids) and would avoid effects on the Manukau Harbour at the western end. 9 With the exception of effects on Tautauroa Creek discussed above, the works would be confined to land in an area that is already characterised by airport related activities including parking, aviation related logistics and support activities, and land that is otherwise earmarked for future airport activities. The only other adverse landscape effects of note would be impacts on the northern half of the golf course of the Aviation Golf Club. Overall, though, the works would be in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs. 10 The runway would have high visibility to people using the airport (for instance George Bolt Memorial Drive would be required to pass beneath the runway) but it would be in keeping with the amenity expected by such a viewing audience. Otherwise the runway would have low visibility because it would not extend beyond the airport environs. For instance it would not extend into the Manukau Harbour but rather would be located inland of ( behind ) the Existing Runway and airport facilities. At the eastern end it would not extend into viewshafts along Pukaki Creek. There would be some potential views from the NE, but filtered by vegetation. It would be buffered from the north (as with all northern options) by the developing logistics and industrial areas at the Landing and Verissimo Drive areas. Within the airport precinct itself there would be adverse visual effects on Abbeville and the Aviation Golf Club, although both activities are associated with the airport. Option 1 Score Effects on natural character -0.5 Effects on landscape qualities 0 effects 0
11 Option 2 11 Option 2 is a northern option, with total length 3835m providing an operational runway of 3535m. It is biased toward the west. No reclamation is required at the eastern end which stops short of the Tautauroa Creek, but the western end of the runway extends roughly 650m-700m into the Manukau Harbour, requiring reclamation of approximately 31ha. Natural Character 12 The works would reduce the biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character within an embayment of the Manukau Harbour. It would result in (relatively) moderate 31ha reclamation of intertidal flats and would impact on the Ihumatao Fossil Forest, which has been classified as an 'Outstanding Natural Feature' (at least partially destroying this feature). In terms of experiential aspects it would project a geometric landform from the shoreline which would dominate the bay. This corner of the Manukau Harbour is considered to have moderate natural character, but recognising the localised particular significance of the fossil forest. The works at the eastern end would avoid the Tautuaroa Creek and have little effect on the natural character of this area. For the sake of comparison, though, the Manukau Harbour is considered to have greater natural character than the Tautauroa Creek. 13 The land-based portion of the runway would be in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs as described for Option 1. The western end, though, would affect the landscape qualities of a corner of the Manukau Harbour. The reclamation would affect the Ihumatao Fossil Forest which has been classified an Outstanding Natural Feature. Overall, there would be relatively high landscape effects, although the effects would be contained somewhat within the bay between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake Headland which is already affected by the operations of the Existing Runway. 14 While the protruding reclamation would be discordant with the natural shoreline, the runway would have low visibility beyond users of the airport. It would be confined within the bay between the Existing Runway and the Maungataketake headland and would either be partly screened from the wider harbour by the Existing Runway, or seen against a backdrop of the Existing Runway. Option 2 Score Effects on natural character -1.5 Effects on landscape qualities -2.0 effects -1.0
12 Option 3 15 Option 3 is a northern option, with total length 3283m providing an operational runway of 2983m. It is a land-based option. It stops short of the Tautauroa Creek at the eastern end and stops just short of the Manukau Harbour shoreline at the western end. Natural Character 16 The works would not encroach into the Coastal Marine Area at either end, and would therefore largely avoid any effects on biophysical aspects of natural character. There would be some effects on experiential aspects of natural character due to the proximity of the runway to the shoreline, but such effects would be relatively minor because the natural shoreline itself would be retained, and the presence of airport activities as a backdrop to the shore would be experienced in the context of the existing airport. 17 The works would be confined to land in an area that is already characterised by airport-related activities (including parking, aviation related logistics and support activities), and land that is otherwise earmarked for future airport activities as described for Option 1. While similar to Option 1, this option would not encroach on the golf course of the Aviation Golf Club. Overall, the works would be in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs and would have minimal adverse landscape effects. 18 While the runway would have high visibility to people using the airport (for instance George Bolt Memorial Drive would be required to pass beneath the runway) it would be in keeping with the amenity expected by such a viewing audience. Otherwise the runway would have low visibility because it would not extend beyond the airport environs. For instance it would not extend into the Manukau Harbour but rather would be located inland of ( behind ) the Existing Runway and airport facilities. At the eastern end it would not extend into viewshafts along Pukaki Creek. There would be some potential views from the NE, but filtered by vegetation. It would be buffered from the north (as with all northern options) by the developing logistics and industrial areas at the Landing and Verissimo Drive areas. Within the airport precinct itself there would be adverse visual effects on Abbeville and the Aviation Golf Club, although both activities are associated with the airport. Option 3 Score Effects on natural character 0 Effects on landscape qualities 0 effects 0
13 Option 4 19 Option 4 is a northern option, with total length 3835m providing an operational runway of 3535m. It is somewhat similar to Option 2 but biased even further to the west: The eastern end of the runway stops short of George Bolt Memorial Drive, but the western end extends roughly 1250-1300m into the Manukau Harbour, requiring reclamation of approximately 60ha. Natural Character 20 The works would reduce the biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character of this part of the Manukau Harbour. It would result in a (relatively) moderately large 60ha reclamation of intertidal flats and impact on the Ihumatao Fossil Forest. In terms of experiential aspects it would project a geometric landform from the shoreline which would dominate the bay. In comparison with Option 2, this option would protrude into the Manukau Harbour proper beyond the bay that is contained between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake headland. This would extend the works into an area of higher natural character. 21 While the land-based portion of the runway would be in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs as discussed under Option 1, the western end would affect the landscape qualities of the broader Manukau Harbour. The reclamation would impact the Ihumatao Fossil Forest which has been classified an Outstanding Natural Feature. The runway would extend beyond into the broader Manukau Harbour beyond the bay between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake Headland. Because it would extend beyond the headland, the runway would be a prominent topographical feature on the harbour shoreline. 22 The runway would have moderate visibility over and above visibility to airport users. Its visibility would increase from the parts of the harbour to the north-west because the runway would protrude beyond the Maungataketake headland. From parts of the harbour to the south and south-west the new runway would be only partially screened by the Existing Runway, and it would compete with the Existing Runway for relative prominence. Option 4 Score Effects on natural character -2.0 Effects on landscape qualities -2.5 effects -2.0
14 Option 5 23 Option 5 is a northern option, with total length 3410m providing an operational runway of 3110m. It is a relatively short option, biased to the west. While the eastern end of the runway stops short of Tautauroa Creek, the western end extends roughly 250m-300m into the Manukau Harbour, requiring reclamation of approximately 11ha. Natural Character 24 The works would reduce the biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character within the embayment of the Manukau Harbour confined between the Existing Runway and the Maungataketake headland. It would result in a (relatively) small 11ha reclamation of intertidal flats, and would impact on the Ihumatao Fossil Forest. In terms of experiential aspects it would project a geometric landform from the shoreline. This corner of the Manukau Harbour has moderate natural character, while recognising the localised but particular significance of the fossil forest. Although the encroachment into the harbour is relatively small, it nevertheless would have similar effects as Option 2 on biophysical and experiential aspects because the works would affect the sensitive shoreline area and fossil forest. However, the works at the eastern end would avoid the Tautuaroa Creek and have little effect on the natural character of this area. 25 While the majority of the runway would be land-based and in keeping with the existing character of the airport environ as described in Option 1, the western end would affect the landscape qualities of a corner of the Manukau Harbour. The reclamation would affect the Ihumatao Fossil Forest which has been classified an Outstanding Natural Feature. However, overall the effects would be localised within a bay between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake Headland which is already affected by the operations of the Existing Runway. 26 While the protruding reclamation would be discordant with the natural shoreline, the runway would have low visibility beyond users of the airport. It would be confined within the bay between the Existing Runway and the Maungataketake headland and would either be partly screened from the wider harbour by the Existing Runway, or seen against a backdrop of the Existing Runway. Option 5 Score Effects on natural character -1.5 Effects on landscape qualities -2.0 effects -0.5
15 Option 6 27 Option 6 is a northern option, with total length 3835m providing an operational runway of 3535m. It is biased to the west: The eastern end of the runway encroaches a very short distance into the edge of Tautauroa Creek, but the western end extends roughly 400m-500m into the Manukau Harbour, requiring reclamation of approximately 19ha. Natural Character 28 The works would reduce the biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character within the embayment of the Manukau Harbour confined between the Existing Runway and the Maungataketake headland. It would result in a (relatively) moderately small (19ha) reclamation of intertidal flats and would impact on the Ihumatao Fossil Forest. In terms of experiential aspects it would project a geometric landform from the shoreline. This bay is considered to have moderate natural character, but recognising the localised particular significance of the fossil forest. Although the extent of reclamation is greater than Option 5, the effects on biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character would be similar. The small encroachment into the Tautauroa Creek would result in only some minor effects taking into account the modified nature of this tributary of Pukaki Creek. 29 While the majority of the runway would be land-based and in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs described in Option 1, the western end would affect the landscape qualities of a corner of the Manukau Harbour. The effects would be localised within a bay between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake Headland which is already affected by the operations of the Existing Runway. The reclamation would affect the Ihumatao Fossil Forest which has been classified an Outstanding Natural Feature. 30 While the protruding reclamation would be discordant with the natural shoreline, the runway would have low visibility beyond users of the airport. It would be confined within the bay between the Existing Runway and the Maungataketake headland and would either be partly screened from the wider harbour by the Existing Runway, or seen against a backdrop of the Existing Runway. Option 6 Score Effects on natural character -1.5 Effects on landscape qualities -2.0 effects -0.5
16 Option 7 31 Option 7 is a northern option, with total length 3410m providing an operational runway of 3110m. It is shorter variant of Option 4 so that the eastern end of the runway stops short of George Bolt Memorial Drive, but the western end extends roughly 850m-900m into the Manukau Harbour, requiring reclamation of approximately 40ha. Natural Character 32 The works would reduce the biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character of this side of the Manukau Harbour. It would result in a (relatively) moderately large (40ha) reclamation of intertidal flats, and would impact on the Ihumatao Fossil Forest. In terms of experiential aspects it would project a geometric landform from the shoreline. The reclamation would protrude into the Manukau Harbour proper beyond the bay that is contained between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake headland. This would extend the works into an area of higher natural character. 33 While the land-based portion of the runway would be in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs described in Option 1, the western end would affect the landscape qualities of the Manukau Harbour. The reclamation would affect the Ihumatao Fossil Forest which has been classified an Outstanding Natural Feature. The runway would extend just beyond the bay between the Existing Runway and Maungataketake Headland and therefore it would become a more prominent topographic feature and its effects would extend to the wider harbour. However, such effects would be less in degree than those of Option 4 because the end of the runway would be only a short distance proud of the headland. 34 The runway would have moderate visibility over and above visibility to airport users. Its visibility would increase from the parts of the harbour to the north-west because the runway would protrude beyond the Maungataketake headland. From parts of the harbour to the south and south-west the new runway would be only partially screened by the Existing Runway, and it would compete with the Existing Runway for relative prominence. The visual effects would be less than Option 4, however, because the runway would not protrude as far beyond the Maungataketake headland. Option 7 Score Effects on natural character -2.5 Effects on landscape qualities -2.0 effects -1.0
17 Option 8 35 Option 8 is a northern option, with total length 3835m providing an operational runway of 3535m. Option 8 is a longer version of Option 1. It is biased toward the east necessitating approximately 8ha reclamation of Tautauroa Creek similar to that of Option 1. The western end of the runway would stop just short of the Manukau Harbour shoreline. Natural Character 36 The works would impact on the Tautauroa Creek, reclaiming 8ha and cutting off the upstream remnants of the creek. Tautauroa Creek, though, is a short tributary of the main Pukaki Creek, and its natural character is modified by industrial activities on its northern and west banks. The works would avoid encroaching into Pukaki Creek proper (except for structures supporting navigation aids). The western end of the runway would avoid encroaching into the Manukau Harbour thereby avoiding biophysical effects, although there would be some effects on experiential aspects of natural character. Such effects would be relatively low taking into account the moderate natural character of this shoreline. 37 With the exception of effects on Tautauroa Creek discussed above, the works would be confined to land in an area that is already characterised by airport related activities as described in Option 1. This includes land used for airport activities (parking, logistics, aviation support) and land that is otherwise earmarked for future airport activities. There would be some (relatively minor) effects on the landscape qualities of the Manukau Harbour as a result of proximity of the runway. The works would compromise the northern half of the golf course of the Aviation Golf Club. Overall, though, the works would be in keeping with the existing character of the airport environs. 38 The runway would have high visibility to people using the airport (for instance George Bolt Memorial Drive would be required to pass beneath the runway) but it would be in keeping with the amenity expected by such a viewing audience. Otherwise the runway would have low visibility because it would not extend beyond the airport environs. For instance it would not extend into the Manukau Harbour but rather would be located inland of ( behind ) the Existing Runway and airport facilities. At the eastern end it would not extend into viewshafts along Pukaki Creek. There would be some potential views from the NE, but filtered by vegetation. It would be buffered from the north by the developing logistics and industrial areas at the Landing and Verissimo Drive areas. Within the airport precinct itself there would be adverse visual effects on Abbeville and the Aviation Golf Club, although both activities are associated with the airport. Option 8 Score Effects on natural character -0.5 Effects on landscape qualities -0.5 effects 0
18 Option 9 39 Option 9 is one of the two southern options. It has a total length 3410m providing an operational runway of 3110m. There would be a separation distance of some 1035m between centreline of the new runway and that of the Existing Runway. The runway works would require approximately 250ha reclamation. Natural Character 40 The works would have significant natural character effects on both biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character: The works would engulf half of Wiroa Island and impact on a (relatively) large area of intertidal flats. In addition to reclamations themselves, the works would cut-off tidal mudflats from the harbour proper within geometric bunds. This would result in altered natural processes and an unnatural appearance. The expanded airport would affect the natural character over a substantial proportion of the south-west quarter of the harbour. 41 While the existing airport appears as if it is largely embedded in the land, Option 9 would extend the geometric footprint of the airport into the Manukau Harbour to the extent the airport would more closely resemble an artificial island. Such a geometric landform would be the dominant feature on the eastern side of the harbour. If not actually reclaimed, the area of current intertidal flats contained within the proposed embankments would be perceived as part of the airport rather than part of the harbour. The role that Wiroa Island currently plays in anchoring one end of the airport would be lost. 42 In addition to people using the airport, the new runway and associated taxi-ways would have relatively high visibility due to its exposed location on the outside of the existing airport. It would be exposed to views from a large arc of the harbour to the south and west, and from shore areas to the west. The geometric form would be an incongruent element seen against the backdrop of the harbour. From experience of similar areas, there is also the potential for the land-locked inter-tidal area to become an unattractive area contrasting in appearance with that of the tidal mudflats in the harbour proper. Option 9 Score Effects on natural character -3.0 Effects on landscape qualities -2.5 effects -2.5
19 Option 10 43 Option 10 is one of the two southern options. It has a total length 3410m providing an operational runway of 3110m, similar to that of Option 9. However, there would be twice as much separation - some 2022mm between centreline of the new runway and that of the Existing Runway. The works would require approximately 715ha reclamation. Natural Character 44 The works would have hugely significant natural character effects on both biophysical and experiential aspects of natural character: The works would bisect and partly engulf Wiroa Island, and impact on a (relatively) very large area (715ha) of intertidal flats. In addition to reclamations themselves, the works would cut-off an area of tidal mudflats within geometric bunds. This would result in altered natural processes and an unnatural appearance. The expanded airport would affect the natural character over a substantial proportion of the south-west quarter of the harbour. 45 While the existing airport appears as if it is largely embedded in the land, Option 10 would vastly extend the footprint of the airport into the Manukau Harbour to the extent the airport would more closely resemble an artificial island. Such a geometric landform would be the dominant feature on the eastern side of the harbour. If not actually reclaimed, the area of current intertidal flats contained within the proposed embankments would be perceived as part of the airport rather than part of the harbour. The role that Wiroa Island currently plays in anchoring one end of the airport would be lost and the engineered works would create a new headland at the mouth of the Pukaki Creek. The area of intertidal flats contained within the embankments is likely to be perceived as part of the airport rather than part of the harbour. The degree of effect would be greater than Option 9 because of the considerably larger expansion into the harbour. 46 In addition to people using the airport, the new runway and associated taxi-ways would have high visibility due to its exposed location on the outside of the existing airport. It would be exposed to views from parts of the harbour to the south and west, and from land-based viewpoints to the west including the Puhinui parklands. The geometric form would be an incongruent element seen against the backdrop of the harbour. From experience of similar areas, there is also the potential for the land-locked intertidal area to become an unattractive area contrasting in appearance with that of the tidal mudflats in the harbour proper, resulting in adverse visual effects even for plane passengers. Option 10 Score Effects on natural character -3.0 Effects on landscape qualities -3.0 effects -3.0
20 CONCLUSIONS 47 There is a high degree of overlap and similarity of scores for the natural character, landscape and visual criteria. This is because, in this case, each criterion shares the same critical factors (more or less) namely the extent to which the works will protrude beyond the shoreline and the extent of reclamation of tidal mudflats. To put it another way, the options that extend furthest into the harbour would be the most visible, the most discordant in terms of landscape patterns, and have the greatest effects on biophysical natural character, and on the harbour s natural appearance. 48 There are significant differences between the options in the degree of likely adverse effects. However the scoring system is not very sensitive to such differences for two reasons: Any natural character, landscape and visual effects of a Proposed Second Runway are likely to be adverse (or at best neutral), thereby limiting the available score range from 0 to -3; Any options that extend into the harbour are likely to have significant adverse effects, thereby further compressing scores for such options to the -1.5 to -3 range. However, within this small range there will be very large differences, for example between Options 5 and 10. 49 The options fall into three groups in terms of effects: The northern options that are either land-based (Option 3) or east-biased (Options 1 and 8) would have the least effects by a significant margin. They would have least effects on natural character, lowest visibility, and would be in keeping with the character of the airport environs. The northern options that protrude into the Manukau Harbour (Options 2, 4, 5, 6, 7) would have significantly greater adverse effects. There would be a sudden step in effects as soon as such an option extends beyond the shoreline because of impacts on the Ihumatao Fossil Forest and on the shoreline itself. However, the effects of the shorter options (Options 2, 5, 6) would be confined to the bay between the Existing Runway and the Maungataketake headland. There would be a second step in effects with longer options (Options 4 and 7) which would extend effects beyond the bay into the wider harbour. The southern options (Options 9 and 10) would have the greatest adverse landscape effects by a significant margin. They woud have the greatest impacts on natural character because of the extent of reclamation of intertidal mudflats, because the airport would become a dominant geometric feature in the south-west quarter of the harbour, and it would be exposed to more views from the harbour and shores. Gavin Lister Isthmus 13 April 2016