Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
315
Ecological & Water QualityAssessment
Appendix 9 -
316
,
LAND. PEOPLE. WATER
^ISIIGl!^ITCONSULTING
FF' For North
,- Holdings Limited
OYSTER INDUSTRY RECLAMATION &
VINTAGE RAILWAY FACILITIES
For Far North Holdings Ltd
Ecological and Water Quality Assessment
June 2016
REPORT INFORMATION AND QUALITY CONTROL
Prepared for:
Author:
Far North Holdings Ltd
Revlewer:
Painela Kane
Marine Ecology Consultant
Approved forRelease:
Mark Poynter
Principal Ecology Consultant
Document Name
Mark Poynter
Version History:
pal Ecology Consultant
Oyster Industry and Vintage Railway Facilities 2206052016 Vl. O Final
V0.3 Draft
V0.4 Draft
Vi. .O Final
18 February 2016
26 February 201.6
22 June 201.6
Errr ^^' SAFE","BER
oIt:
IUI. -.
^
tonic0.8. " COG.
CONTENTS
INTRO DUCTiON .......,..,....,...,,..*..*,..*,...............................................,..,..,,..,...................................--
K ey E I ein e n ts of t h e P ro p o s a I . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.1.
WORK CARRI ED OUT. ...*............,..,.,,..,................................,..,,.....,..,..,..,......,,.,..*..,....................,...EXISTI NG E NunRON MENT, .....,,..,.,..,,...................................*............,..*...,........*..............................3, I GeneraI. ...................,..............,.....,..........................,.....................,.........,.,..........,..........,3.2 I n t e r t id al H a bit a ts . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . . .3 . 2 . I M at h od ............,.,.,.,............................,....,................,.,.,.,...,...........................,............,..............32.2 Inte rtidal Soft S h ore Biota Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . .. ..., .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . ........32.3 Intent daI Hard S h o re Biota Results . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ..32.4 Intern da! Se dim ent Qu ality . . . . ,... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - . . . ... .. ... ... . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '3 . 3 S u bti da I H abita ts ......................,................................,...................,.,....................................,.,.,.3.3. I M et h od. . . . . . . . ., . . ,. , .. ..... . .. .. . . . . . . .
3.32 S u bti d a I B i at a R e s u I t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . - . - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '33.3 S u btida I Sedjin ent Qua Iitv. . .. . . .. .. ... . . - -. - . . - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . ' . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '3.4 O pu a M a rina . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . , .,.3.5 M a rigrove, Saltm arsh a n d M a ritim e H a bitat . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. . . . .. .. . ... . .. . . . . . ., . .. . . ... . . . . , .. . . . . . . .3 . 6 B i rd life ...,.,,...,....-------......"""""""""" ""' "' "' """"""""""""""""""""""""" "' ' """"""""3 . 7 F ish 11 fe ...........................------.-.....,."""""""""""""" "' """"""""""""""""""""" ""' ' ' ' "" 'OYSTER IN DUSTRY RECLAMATION/DREDGING ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS. ,,......*..*..............................,.4.1 Oyster Industry Reclamation and Dredging Effects on Marine Invertebrates and Other Biota4.1. I Oyster I n d us try Reclain atio n . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . ., . . . . . . ..,. . .. ... .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .,.. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . ... ,.4. I. 2 Oyster I n d us try D redged Area . .,..,,, . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . ., .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . . . ..... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. . -4. I. 3 Oyster I n d us try P roject : Ot her Biota . ., ... . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ., .. . . . . . . . . . . . - . , -. .. . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . .. ., . . . . .
Oyster I n d u stry Wate r Qu ality Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .. . ,. ,. . ... . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2
4.2 .I Recla in a tion/D re dging Constru at 10 n Effects . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,........ ... .... .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2.2 R e cl a in a tio n St o rin w a t e r . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . .4.23 W a t e r q u a lity - Co n cl u s i o n . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Part 2 RMA Ecological Status ..4.3
Oyster Ind ustry Project: Suin in a ry and Co n clusions ..... ...... ...............,.,.. .... ....................4.4
VINTAG E RAILWAY ; ECO LOG ICAL E F F ECTS .................... .,............... ......... .. .. . . .......,... .... .,...........,.. ...HAIL Assessment Under the National Environmental Standard ........5.3.
Recla mation within the Site ............5.2
Vint age R ailway P roject : Suin mary a n d Conclusion ...... ..................... ..... ...,............ ........5.3
f^ISII Gl^ TCONSULTl"C
.......................................................,....,.....,.,.......................,.,.....
....................,.............,..........................,.............................,..............
Page
Ust of Tables
Table L Summary of Inter tidal Surficial Sediment Chemistry. Values are Mean t Standard Error; N = 4. .Table 2 : Robertson and Steve ns (2007), guidelines for marine sediments. ..... ........... ................ .....,..........Ta ble 3 : Suin in ary of Su btidal Surficial Sediment Ch emistry. ..............,.. ........... . . ... .. . ..... ....... ...
... I.
... I
... 2
.,, 3
... 3
... 3
,.. 3
... 3
... 5
... 5
... 6
... 6
.. 6
... 7
... 8
... 8
... 9
,.. 9
... 9
... 9
... 9
. 10
10
10
. 10
. 11
. 1.1
. 12
. 12
.13
. 13
. 13
. 14
Ust of Figures
Figu re I : Location a n d In dicative D evelo pin e nt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . .. . . . ... . . . . . .............. 2
Figure 2: Sediment and biological sampling sites, overlaid on indicative plan. Subtidal sites I - 3. Six inter tidalsites 4 - 9, three at the low tide mark 4 - 6 and three at the in Id-tide mark 7 - 9. ..... ........... 4
..........................................................,.......................................
............................................,.........................
1111/11 ,I I. . A1'11 V, ,.! NIP I'm I\',.. V I .\,, 1/1 re \ 7.11ili05 ?0 I b V I 41 I I, ,11
......................................
Ust of Appendices
Appendix A: Intertidal Habitat PhotographsAppendix B: Intertidal Biota ResultsAppendix C: Hill Laboratories Intertidal and Subtidal Surfidal Sediment Chemical AnalysisAppendix D: Subtidal Samples PhotographsAppendix E: Subtidal Biota Results
Appendix R Vintage Railway Facilities, National Environmental Standard, Preliminary Site Investigation Report(PSI)
320 f^ S 11 G I^ TCONSULTING
UV \!,'I '11/1/1'. 11 y A ":I Vin1. *I:,' I',. 11. '. 11, ' I .;, 1:11:1. + .' 20,115, U I t: I I , I 111.11
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Key Elements of the Proposal
Far North Holdings (FNH) propose to construct a new oyster landing facility requiring reclamation of the coastal marinearea and the Bay of Islands Vintage Railway Trust (the Trust) propose to develop land at the Coienso Triangle whichwill include a new railway station. The projects, while separate, will be undertaken conjointly by FNH.
Key elements of the proposal are described in the AEE prepared by Bay of Islands Planning Ltdl. Aspects consideredin this report are as follows:
Oyster Industry: Reclamation, dredging and discharges:
. Effects on a total marine area of 1.26 ha including reclamation of mangrove and intertidal soft shore area; a newroad, barge dock and boat ramp.
. Effects of capital dredging 15,000 in' up to 3 in depth in an area of 0.65 ha of shallow subtidal soft sedimenthabitat. This material will be used as direct fill for the reclamation.
. Reclamation of an area of 0.2 ha of upper shore for storage but not including any processing industry. The groundsurface will remain unsealed.
. Stormwater will be managed by clean water diversion from the hill slope and surface drainage being directed toproprietary treatment devices before piped discharge through the reclamation seawall.
I^^: Reclamation and Discharges:
. Reclamation of 0.32 ha of wetland which includes freshwater and saline habitat to the west of the railwayembankment. The estimated 7,000 in' of fillwillbe clean riverbed sands and grovels or quarry overburden.
. A parking area of 86 parks for cars and buses. Stormwater from the carparklng areas will be directed to thenorthwest to the existing roadside drains. No specialist stormwater treatment devices are proposed.
. The balance of the existing wetland, which will riot be affected by the reclamation, will be managed as part of theoverall development plan.
Far North Holdings Ltd hold existing resource consents on the Colenso site, enabling dredged spoil and cleanfill to bedeposited at volumes of up to 3000 in'/year. The site has been previously partially filled
An aerial plan showing the locality and development layout is shown below as Eig!!r^.,..
^ISIIGll^ITCONSULTING
' vintage Railway Station and Oyster Landing Facility. Coienso Triangle Opua. Resource Consent Applications by Far North Holdings LimitedJanuary 2016. Prepared for Fat North Holdings Ltd by Bay of Islands Planning Ltd
<1 \I- -, mall, SI, y A n11 '/I'll;, 11-. fly it I .I , I, 11 ,I. ; 14. . 2206,510i {, *., I I) I 1/1. ,I
~ .",. ~
"^
..^.,.~..~~ ".~
\
322
a
\
^.^.^, ..^
>.
.
* ~."^ ". ^
I
. *
..~^
I^'
^.,~^~.-"
.
*!.
""- ~ ...~
~.^^.~^ -
^
-.-..-
__ ___ _,_____...,. Ico Dor. ICpmonjPl. n ^;j~~ L I'," V"kge Rail"ay SISi;" & 0 .. 1.1 Rea. "uj;;I ,"~ ,- - ^----^-- ...~.
' ~ ' ' ' ' ' ~' '~~ ' " ' ' ~ '~~~~~ ~ "~ . I ~,~ =' ' ~ ' ~ . ' ~ ' ' re~__ _._ ____.,._,,____,_ . --~~======fS~'.~."" D ,,.,,
-, ,. ~" ~ ~
,.,^.~
^
f
-.~----~ -. --^
,;Bure I: 1.0< alloit and 111d;callve Developmenl
2 WORK CARRIED OUT
,* .-..^^^~~.".^_.._ ==,.,-....^.....-. .,*,, "
^ISI Gl^^ TCONSULTING
,... " ~." ~
The following work has been undertaken as part of this ecological and water quality assessment of effects:
. A review of relevant data bases, coastal plan information and other sources of information as relevant.
. A field survey on 22 December 201.5. The field investigations included a biological survey of the shoreline andsubtidal areas over a period of low water. Sediments were collected from the dredging zone and inter tidal areafor chemical and biological characteris at ion.
. A review of the ecological and water quality implications of the findings presented in the updated engineeringreport prepared by Haigh Workman consultants2 as part of the assessment of this project.
. An assessment of potential construction and operational effects of the oyster industry reclamation area and thenew facilities to be used by the Bay of Islands Vintage Railway.
. Mitigation of potential effects.
g^^"". L, , ."
. ~ ~ . .. ~. . ~ ~
^ - .. us
~~ ~, "
- ... . -
~~~. ~ ~
^.^
^
=* ^,
^. ^
^^
,
2 Engineering Reportjor Calenso Triangle Development Vihtoge Rollwoy Station und Oyster Landing Focil^tyror For North Holdings Ltd.Prepared for BOI Planning Ltd. Supporting Report for Applications to the Far North District Council & Northland Regional Council. HaighWorkman reference 151.19
,
Iiy', 11.1 Inch: \11 I 41/11 '11/11 11', ' ,., 11'.\'. tv I-. It 1111 , \ I Job, I, ; O I b 1.1 I * ; ^IT. ;I
3 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
3.1. General
The siteislocatedin the Kawakawa River estuary on its northwestern side about 600 in upstream of Ashby's boat yardand more or less immediately upstream of the swing mooring area. The coastal environment is muddy estuarine witha strong coastal fringe of mangrove forest and extensive interndal flats.
The area is relatively isolated and is accessible via a short track off Be antort Street. Some existing use is evidentlymade of this location for boat launching. On the day of the field survey, a small boat was observed launched andretrieved onto a trailer from the point where the reclamation and associated facility is to be located.
3.2 Intertidal Habitats
323
3.2. I. Method
The intertidal area was inspected at low tide over the low tide period on 21. " December 201.5 (See photos I. -9,Appendix A1. The site includes a rocky point and an interndal flat of muddy sand. The rocky outcrop at the point hadminimal biota. Only three common species were observed: pacific oyster (Crossostre0 9190s), Neptune's necklace(Hormosiro bunksii) and mudflat anemones (Arithopleuro oureorodioto).
Mud crab numbers were assessed by placing and photographing three 0.5 in x 0.5 in quadrats in the intertidal area ofthe muddy sandflat. Crab holes were counted within each quadrat (See photos to-1.2, Appendix A1.
The intertidal marine community was assessed by sampling the infaunal biota. Six intertidal samples (three at thelow-tide mark (samples 4 - 6) and three at the in Id-tide mark (samples 7 - 9)) were collected using a core sampler,The sampler retrieves a sediment core 15 cm in diameter to a maximum depth of 16 cm and thus samples an area of1.78 cm' of substrate and a maximum volume of 2830 cm3.
Each intertidal sample was sieved through a 0.5 min nylon sock on site and the biota retained was placed in a jar andfixed in ethanol. Each sample was later spiked with Rose Bengal dye to facilitate identification of small blota.
Subsamples of sediment were first removed from the core samples for chemical analysis.
The biota in these samples was subsequently extracted and sent to a taxonomist (G Stephenson, Coastal MarineEcology Consultants Ltd, Napier) for species identification. The data gives a semi quantitative indication of relativeabundance of the invertebrate community,
Biological sampling locations are shown in Figure 2.
f^ISIIGl^!ITCONSULTING
3.2.2 Inter tidal Soft Shore Biota Results
Results are presented in Appendix B.
The total number of species recorded was 25. The number of species per sample ranged from 12 to 17 with a meanof 14.5. The number of individual specimens per sample ranged from 1.59 to 295 with a mean of 232.5.
Polychaetes (bristle worms) dominated the assemblage and comprised of 14 taxa of which three species were by farthe numerically dominant and recorded at all sites. These were Cossuro consimilis tinean 83.51sample), Heteromostuslily'ormi's tinean 43.21sample) and Pri'on OSpio oucklondito (mean 56.21sample).
The predominance of C. consi'mills and P. aucklondico warrants comment. One literature source states that C.consimilfis can tolerate a wide mud percentage of 5 to 65%, with an optimum range of 20 to 25%, therefore preferringhabitats that are more sandy than muddy3.
3 http://WWW. walkatoregion. govt. nz/Templates/Public/Pages/Blank. aspx?Id=12253
' I * ', I ' I I I. :I 11 '. I ' , ,'. 11:1 ' .' ^ I\ : I:: ' ' , , 11 .'.'. I', I .I^ I 'I I I. . \ I I Ii!, :I\ ' " I i. V I Ij ; ,11. , I .
Figtile 2. Sediin{:in and biological sampling sites, overlaid on indicative plait Subtidal sites I - 3. SIX into hidal sites4 - 9, rulee 31 the low tide Inai k a - 6 alld three in Ihe 1111d -tide lita, k 7 - 9.
P. oucklond, ^a can tolerate a sediment mud content of up to 95%, with an optimum range of 20 to 70%4 and thereforeprefers habitat that tends to be more muddy. Both taxa are also cited to have shown sensitivity to coppercontamination. Where estuarine sediments become more muddy, P. oucklondico is likely to become more dominantor if polluted (particularly with copper), the abundance of C. consimi!is and P. oucklondio is likely to decline. This isconsidered to make C. consimi"s and P, oucklondio a good indicator species with which to assess changes in the inputof sediment and pollutants to estuaries.
Copper is the signature metal most likely to be elevated in an area with a high level of boat mooring and boat repairactivity. The relatively high abundance of C. consimilis and P. ducklondio suggests that copper contamination is notsignificant at this locality and this is consistent with sediment metals analysis which shows low copper concentrations.H. informis too favours muddy sand but is considered to be pollution tolerant rather than sensitive.
Three bivalve species, 6 crustacean species, I nemertean species (ribbon worms) and o1igochaetes were also recordedNext to the three abundant polychaetes, o1igochaetes were the only other group that was also 'abundant'. These hada mean density of 14.7 per sample and were present at all sites ('Abundant was arbitrarily set at a mean density ofmore than to animals per sample, although density estimates are of interest in terms of relative rather than absoluteabundance because the samples are only semi quantitative).
All other taxa were present at low abundance and or low occurrence. Specifically, It taxa had a mean density of oneor less, and 1.0 taxa had a mean density of between I and 10 individuals per sample.
The Interndal sampling is likely to have underestimated the presence of deep burrowing species such as shrimp andmud crabs, which may also be present.
To assess relative abundance of mud crabs, crab holes were counted in three 0.25 in' quadrats and resulted in densityof 98,61 and 52 crab's holes respectively. This indicates that mud crabs are abundant in the area.
wetland
. ,new~,! road
^ISIIGIH!T
I
1.1I
CONSULTING
4.
landing,@clllty
' http://WWW. waikatoregion. govt. nz/Templates/Public/Pages/Blank. aspx?id=12248
Irich it's ? 201 DJ?G I 11 V I O I runl
The biota did not reveal anything significant or unusual in benthic fauna in terms of rarity, biodiversity or exoticspecies. The spedes recorded are common.
These results are consistent with the findings of Swales at o1. (2012)5 which investigated macro-benthic fauna andconcluded that areas with low sensitivity included the inlets close to major catchment sediment sources (e. g. ,Kawakawa and Walkare Inlets). They summarised that communities in these areas are dominated by mud-tolerantspecies including the mud crab AUStrohelice crosso, annelids Isegmented worms e. g. polychaetes) and the bivalveThe oro Iubrico and o1180chaetes
3.2.3 Intertidal Hard Shore Blota Results
Hard shore habitat is very limited. The rocky outcrop at the point has minimal biota. Only three species wereobserved: pacific oyster ICrossostre0 9190s), Neptune's necklace alga (Hormosiro bonksii) and mudflat anemonesIAnthopleuro oureorodioto), There is no significant hard shore habitat or biota at the site.
3.2.4 Intertidal Sediment Quality
Three sediment samples were collected from the locations shown in Figure 3. These were analysed for the key metals:copper, lead, and zinc. Nutrients phosphorus, nitrogen and total organic carbon were analysed as an indicator ofnutrient enrichment. Samples were analysed by Hill Laboratories.
The sediment analysis is reported in Appendix C. Table I summarises the results in relation to ANZECC 200061nterimSediment Quality Guideline (ISOG) criteria and local background concentrations.
The trigger values set out by ANZECC are presented as two thresholds: a 'low' and 'high' threshold. Table I. presentsonly the Low value as no sample values exceeded this threshold, The IsQG-Low value represents a threshold belowwhich toxicological effects due to specific contaminants are unlikely and above which such effects become moreprobable.
The sediment metal values are well within the reference sediment quality guideline and suggest that the interndalsediments are not polluted with these metals to levels that are likely to cause adverse ecological effects.
ANZECC guidelines do not include trigger values for sediment nutrients and total organic carbon and there arecurrently no nationally accepted trigger values for nutrients in marine sediment. However, Robertson and Stevens(2007)7 developed a classification (Table 21 for sediment nutrients and total organic carbon concentrations. SouthlandRegional Council, Tasman District Council and Northland Regional Council have used this in monitoring programmesGuidelines from Robertson and Stevens (2007) provide a relative measure of the degree to which sediments can beconsidered enriched with a nutrient.
Phosphorus levels at the site are the only sediment quality indicator that is elevated and which falls in the range forthe 'Enriched' categorisation of Robertson and Stevens (2007).
This can be compared to a recent Northland Regional Council (2013)8 study, which assessed sediment quality in theharbours of the Far North district. Total phosphorus values in the sediment were low and rated 'very good' for justover half of the sites sampled using the classification system developed by Robertson and Stevens (2007). HokiangaHarbour had the highest concentrations of total phosphorus with half of the sites having a rating of 'enriched'. that issimilar to the Opua result.
^ISIIGIFllTCONSULTING
Swales, A. , Gibbs, M. . Hewitt, I. , Hares, S. , Grimths, R. , 015en, G. , Ovenden, R. , Wadhwa, S. , 2012. Sediment sources and DCcumulotion ratesin the Boy o1/5/@rids gridimplicotionsjor macro-benthicfouno, mangrove und softmorsh hourots. Prepared for Northland Regional Councilby NIWA, May 2012.
' ANZECC, 2000. AUStrolion ond New Zealond Guide"nesjor Fresh grid Morine Water Quo"ty. Australia and New Zealand Environment andConservation Council and Agricukure and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand.
'Robertson, B. , Sievens, L. , 2007. W@iwoko estuary 2007/1he SCOle monitoring ond h, storicolsediment coring. Prepared for EnvironmentSouthland. Wriggle limited, Nelson
' Northland Regional Council, 2013. For North HDrbours Worer grid Sediment Quo"tv InvestIgoti'on.
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Units
Phosphorus
Nitrogen
Total Organic Carbon
instkg
ingj'kg
ing!'kg
Mean * SE
20.20 * 0.40
13.40 ^ 0.25
62.00 * 1.00
Rating
Median
ing!'kg
81'100g
g/1.00g
Low Mod En I
19.90
736.70 ^ 6.67
ANZECC Isqe LowGuideline Value
65
13.20
0.16 ^ 0.01
61.00
3.3 Subtidal Habitats
Total Phosphorus ling/1181
< 200
200 - 500
500 - 1000
> 1000
1.59 ^ 0.06
^ISIIGIHIT
3.3, L Method
The subtidal marine community was assessed by sampling the irisitu blota, Three seabed samples (samples I - 31were collected using a biological 'box' dredge towed behind a small boat. The dredge has a serrated leadin ed e andin relatively soft but cohesive seabed, it collects a semi quantitative sample of near surface sediment down to aboutS to 10 cm.
In soft seabed where the dredge fills completely, the volume of each sample is about 5030 cm' The dredge samplesan area of about 0.02 to 0.03 in' of seabed. Photographs of the three box dredge samples are included as A endixD.
200
Rober, son and Stevens
IEnrichedj
> 500
CONSULTING
730.00
so
0.36
1.64
Total Nitrogen 18/100g)
< 0.05
> 0.2
The three seabed samples were collected from the area shown in Figure 3. These samples were all within or at theouter edge of the indicative dredging footprint to support the oyster industry reclamation.
Each seabed sample recovered was handled and processed in the same manner as the intertidal samples.
This sampling approach provides a semi quantitative evaluation of the type of community, diversity and generalabundance of biota within the footprint area of the proposed oyster industry reclamation.
>2
0.05 - 0.2
0.2 - 0.4
3.3.2 Subtidal Biota Results
Results are presented in Appendix E.
The total number of species recorded was 27. The number of species per sample ranged from 18 to 20 with a meanof 19.3. The number of individualspecimens per sample ranged from 179 to 253 with a mean of 223.
Polychaetes (bristle worms) dominated the assemblage and comprised t5 taxa of which four species were by far thenumerically dominant and recorded at all sites. These were Cossuro consimilis (mean 94,715ample), Heteromostusfinformis (mean 32,315ample), Poroonidoe sp. I, I (mean 261sample) and Prionospio oucklondico tinean 19.31sample).
Total Organic Carbon 18/100gj
<1
> 0.4
I. - 2
2-5
>5
As with the intertidal samples, the predominance of C. consimilis and P. ducklondic@ is consistent with the muddhabitat and sediments unpolluted by metals.
Two bivalve species, 5 crustacean species, I o1igochaete species and 4 nemertean species (ribbon worms) were alsorecorded. Next to the four abundant polychaetes, the crustacean Tendgomysis was the only other species that wasalso abundant and had a mean density of 10.3 per sample and were present at all sites.
All other taxa were present at low abundance and or low occurrence. Specifically, eight taxa had a mean density ofone or less and ,. 4 taxa had a mean density of between I and 1.0 individuals per sample.
The blota did riot reveal anything significant or unusual in benthic fauna in terms of rarity, biodiversity or exoticspecies. The species recorded are common. The sampling is likely to have underestimated the presence of deeburrowing species such as shrimp and heart urchins, which may also be present.
These results can be compared to the 2014 study for the Opua Marina (Poynter, 2014)gin which ten subtidal samplesrevealed 36 taxa at 9 to 17 taxa per sample, Overall, Poynter (2014) had more taxa, which is predicted with moresamples but the number of taxa per sample was slightly less. Polychaetes also dominated (19 taxa) with the dominantspecies also recorded as C. consimilis, Pornonidoe and H. finformis.
Swales et0/. (2012) alsoinvestigated macro-benthic fauna, and the site area nearest to this study (a sitelocatedjustnorth of Opua (Sample Site VNC in Swales at a1. , 2012/1 was assessed as being dominated by an infouna, which hadlow diversity.
3.3,3 Subtidal Sediment Quality
Three sediment samples were collected from the locations shown in Figure 3. These were combined to make acomposite sample and were analysed for the key metals: copper, lead, and zinc. Phosphorus, nitrogen and totalorganic carbon were also analysed. Samples were analysed by Hill Laboratories.
The sediment analysis is reported in Appendix C. As for the intertidal samples, Table 3 summarises the results inrelation to ANZECC 2000 sediment quality guideline criteria and reported background concentrations, Data wascompared to the nutrient ranges and classification provided by Robertson and Stevens (2007) as shown in Table 2.lable 3' Slimmary o1 Subtidal SUI'11ci;!I Sediment Cheii\1511y
; CF^:,,; ~ ' '~""""ANZEt:CTSd. 6 t6^,~V^foeunit^' ' ' Med'tT
ing/kg 65
ing/kg
ing/kg
^ISIIGl!^ITCONSUL, INC
Copper
Lead
,
Zinc
'. n.
Phosphorus ing/kg
811008Nitrogen
Total Organic Carbon g/1008
The subtidal sediments show the same finding as previously discussed for the inter tidal sediments. Metals are at alow concentration relative to ANZECC and are consistent with the NRC SoE data. Nutrients fall into the 'enriched'range in respect of phosphorus.
20
, ,
1.4
61.
740
200
Robertson and Stevens IEnriched)
> 500
Poynter, M. , 2014. 0puo Morino: Stoge 2 Exportsion ECologicol ond Worer Quolity AssessmentPoynter & Associates Environmental Ltd, January 2014
10 Source: SoE value cited in NRCletter to Far North Holdings Ltd dated 22/06/2012: Table 3
0.13
1.24
50
SoE, @ Kawakawa River
> 0.2
it. :11 V ", AN. , 14,111\.... Iy I at Ian It-\ ? 70005?(I ! U V I 11,1.1.11
>2
1.38
13
82
Prepared for Far North Holdings Ltd by
3.4 0pua Marina
A wide range of parameters were monitored as a requirement of the consents for the Opua Marina, This informationwas reviewed as part of the application for the Opua Marina Stage resource consents IPOynter, 201.4)'. The keyfindings of that work, which are relevant to the current proposal, are summarised below:
. In the period reviewed 2001-20, .3, the Opua Marina was compliant with water quality requirements expressed inthe consents. These requirements related to avoiding impacts on local seawater in respect of salinity,temperature, dissolved oxygen measured as parts per million and percent saturation, pH and faecal coliforms,
. Water in the lower Kawakawa River can be significantly affected by storm (rainfall) discharge at which timeturbidity, suspended solids and microbiological Indicator levels rise and clarity declines.
. Stormwater discharges from the marina carparks did riot contain and would not have been likely to cause,significant elevation in he aw metals or total petroleum hydrocarbons in the receiving waters or local sediments.
. Localised contamination of stormwater and sediments occurs at hot spots in the immediate vicinity of the Ashby'sBoatyard.
. Opua Marina is a Conditionally Restricted growing and harvest area under the Animal Products (Regulated ControlScheme)It. Oysters removed from the marina must be relayed for a minimum of 28 days to a marine farm up theWaikare Inlet (GA206) before they can be processed for sale. There are periods of restriction on harvestingoysters from the marina, which include the high boating activity over December to February, incidents of sewagedischarge into the Kawakawa River or Opua Marina catchment and periods following significant rainfall. Whilethere may be elevations of copper and at times bacteriological contamination of oysters within the marina, thisIs riot unexpected in such a location. Subsequent depuration of oysters in other parts of the estuary appears toremedy these local influences.
There are a wide range of natural and man-made influences which affect the water quality and habitat of the lowerKawakawa River, particularly close to Opua. However with increasing distance from Opua, the sources and influenceof contamination decrease, and outside of episodic events (e. g. storms), the estuary at the proposed site is relativelyunpolluted and is likely to have a generally high water quality.
328 f^ISI Gll^IT
3.5 Mangrove, Saltmarsh and Maritime Habitat
There is a narrow band of fringing mangrove forest of about 30 to 35 in width along the eastern side of the railwayembankment. This forest is a mixture of tall saplings and older trees. The canopy reaches 4-5 in height and the treesform a relatively dense thicket. A part of the reclamation encroaches into an approximately 0.2 ha area of thismangrove.
The reclamation will also overlay a small coarse sand/shell beach. The loss of the beach is unlikely to have marineecological implications although bird use at high tide times is possible.
On the western side of the railway alignment between the embankment and the road and reclaimed area of theColenso Triangle, is a narrow area of habitat, which grades from mangrove at its southwestern end into saltmarsh andthen a small area of reupo at its northeastern end. This remaining mangrove/maritime area is about 0.36 ha and theTaupo about 0,035 ha. The actual boundaries between the railway corridor and the Co!enso Triangle are unclear. FarNorth Holdings Ltd hold resource consents for dredged spoil and cleanfillto be deposited on this site at volumes of upto 3000 in'/year,
Tidal inundation of this 0.36 ha is via a culvert beneath the railway embankment at the southwestern end. This smallarea of marine habitat retains some ecological value as an estuarlne to freshwater vegetation sequence and ispotential habitat for bird species such as banded rail and common species such as pukeko.
CONSULTING
'' The Animal Products IRegulated Control Scheme IRCSj-Bivalve Molluscan Shellfish I Notice 2006 and Animal Products ISPecifications forBivalve Molluscan shellfishI Notice 2006
L: v', I I'I milli'. 11 \ .\:111 \'I'll a, ;.' ;'"11\'.'.,\' I .:, 11/1 It'< 1/1/'11, .!I: I !: I. ' I 11 I 111. .I
3.6 Birdlife
The muddy sandflats offer soft shore habitats to common birdlife within or likely to feed within the vicinity. Thesebirds include kingfishers (Holcyon cmcto), white faced heron (Ardeo nomehollondioe), little shags (Pholocrocoroxmelonleucos), red billed gulls (Lorusscopu"nus), black backed gulls It dominiconus), white fronted tern 1stemo strioto),Caspian tern (Hydropogne cospio) and pied shags (Photocrocorox vonus). During the site survey, only the white facedheron was seen feeding in the area, however all other species were seen in the vicinity during the commute to or fromthe site area from Opua Marina. There is extensive similar habitat available to bird species in this region of theKawakawa River estuary.
Overall, bird values at the site are riot special or considered to warrant particular consideration or concern in relationto the proposal. it is rioted that the remaining maritime habitat adjacent to, or remaining as part of the Colensotriangle area, retains some potential but small value for species such as banded rail and pukeko.
3.7 Fishlife
Fish have riot been specifically surveyed. Poynter (1989) 12 commented that more than 30 common fish species arelikely to use the local estuary for feeding, shelter, spawning and as a migratory route. Fish species likely to use thearea at one time or another include yellow eyed mullet, grey mullet, flounders, piper, anchovy like fishes, kahawai,koheru, kingfish, snapper, trevally, parore, rays and small wrasses. These are common coastal species.
There is a significant movement of diadromous freshwater fishes in the Kawakawa River. Marshall (1987)13 documentsa non-commercial harvest of 15000 kg of eels IAngui"o spp) from this river system. Significant populations ofmigratory eels Iboth juveniles and adults) as well as common smelt (Retropinno ratropinno), inariga (6010x^OSingculotus) and other whitebait species of this genus are likely to pass through or close to the area at different periodsthroughout the year,
^I S 11 G I^ T
The effects of the proposal were considered under the following headings:. Effects on marine invertebrates and other biota
. Water quality effects
. RMA Part 2 Status
. Conclusions
OYSTER INDUSTRY RECLAMATION/DREDGING ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
CONSULTING
4.1 Oyster Industry Reclamation and Dredging Effects on Marine Invertebratesand Other Biota
Direct effects on marine invertebrates will arise from the reclamation and dredging, as well as due to the changedhabitat conditions within the area. These effects are discussed below.
4.1. .I Oyster Industry Reclamation
The proposed reclamation will cover about 1.2 ha of mostly inter tidal habitat. As previously noted, the soft shore andupper hard shore biota, which occurs within the area proposed for reclamation is riot notable ecologicalIy.
The loss of 0.2 ha of mangrove is not significant relative to the extensive mangrove habitat present in the Kawakawariver estuary.
'2 Poynter, M. , 1989. Bay of Islands Harbour Plan. Kawakawa Subcatchment. Stream, Wetland, Estuarine Resource Survey. Re ort re aredfor the Northland Regional Council.
'' Marshall, Y. , 1987. Maori mass capture of freshwater eel: An ethnoarchaeological reconstruction of prehistoric subsistence and socialbehaviour. NZ Journal of Archaeology. VCI9:55-79.
11.11, '. I Iv .\, 141 V, n1 '11/1. I, J, I, .... I, r J 11.11, . \ ? ? 00,1520ib V I 11 I 1/1. "
The blota that will be lost involves species, which are common and therefore likely to be well represented elsewherein inid and estuarine areas of the Bay of Islands.
Overall, loss of marine biota or marine habitat within the reclamation is a minor effect.
4.1.2 Oyster Industry Dredged Area
The physical area of dredging to create adequate depth for barges and offloading vessels is 0.65 ha, The habitat itselfis a uniform sandy mud. There are no special habitat values such as eel grass beds, shallow reefs, or coarse shellsubstrates,
Over the last century, this area is likely to have 'naturally' shallowed and become muddier because of sift depositionfrom land clearance. A 1,997 Hydraulics report prepared for the CPUa Marina (Christian, 1,997)14 refers to anunreferenced 1987 gentechnical report that indicates in filling with sediment of 2.5 to 3.0 metres in the Opua basinsince European occupation.
All marine life within this dredged footprint will be removed. This is a minor effect given that the area affected is smalland the benthic community is typical and is not characterised by any notable qualities in terms of its biodiversity orthe presence of rare species.
This ecological effect on the seabed community is potentially largely reversible. The newly exposed seabed afterdredging should be of a similar texture and grain size composition to that presently occurring, The exposure of thearea to the periodically elevated storm silt loads and near~bed turbidity, which are likely to occur in the area, shouldencourage rapid 'aging' of the exposed sediments such that they are effective Iy indistinguishable from the generalbenthic environment in the area. The dally tidal eXchange and the fact that there is free flow of water through thearea should present a good supply of planktonic larval organisms to recolonise the new substrate. Colonisation willalso occur by mobile invertebrate such as whelks and starfish migrating from adjacent zones.
The resultant benthic community in the dredged area, should in a relatively short period be naturally reinediated andreflect that which is currently present. However, any requirement for maintenance dredging will effective!y repeatthe cycle of loss and recovery.
Notwithstanding the potential for maintenance dredging, the footprint of the effect on subtidal benthic habitat issmall and the marine ecological effect of dredging is consequentially minor.
330
f^I S 11 G I^^ TCONSULTING
4.1.3 Oyster Industry Project: Other Biota
Some marine algae and invertebrates may develop on and aggregate around any new structures within the tidal zone.This will further mitigate any minor effects associated with the works, structures and operations at the facility.
White faced herons will be prevented from feeding over the small soft shore upper inter tidal area to be taken as partof the reclamation but will have some new opportunities on the reclamation seawalls. No significant intertidal birdfeeding areas will be affected. Impacts on shorebirds will be less than minor.
Movement of fish and migratory native freshwater fish will not be impeded. Estuarine fish such as Yellow eyed mulletand grey mullet will continue to frequent the area over the high tide. Effects on fish can be considered less thanminor.
4.2 Oyster Industry Water Quality Effects
4.2. ,. Reclamation/Dredging Construction Effects
The reclamation construction could take up to 20 weeks. The construction methodology described by Haigh Workmanenvisages all the material to be dredged will be used in the reclamation.
'' Christian, C. , 1997. Hydroulits reportfor the proposed morino at Opuo. Prepared for Mair and Associates by Aucktand Unisetvices Ltd.
1.1v\I^. : 1114f I, \11v I\ rill \,. 1/1 ill, I, .; ^I\.... I+ . :, I 11/1 I^ ^ \ I: "1.05 :L: I. : V I I^ I'm "I 11!
An important characteristic limiting any potential for contamination of adjacent zones is the physical characteristicsof the sediment. The Beotechnical information indicates that material near the surface is a mixture of sandy mudsand muddy sands. This is likely to character ise the bulk sediments as well, particularly given the relatively limiteddepth of sediment to be removed. The physical observations of the biological samples indicate the material is uitecohesive. These sediments should be able to be removed relatively intact, which will limit exposure orloss of sedimentparticles to the surrounding waters.
This is riot in a sensitive location either ecological Iy or visually (in the context of observed turbid plumes). Thereclamation footprint and nearby zones are already prone to natural elevation in sediment and turbidity. It is notanticipated that specific sediment/turbidity control such as a geotextile boom will be required from an ecologicalperspective.
Based on the surficial sediment analyses, the sediments to be dredged have been shown not to be polluted. Thereforerelease of contaminants such as heavy metals from sediments placed in the reclamation is riot an Issue,
There is riot a potential for the reclamation construction to generate unacceptable levels of turbidity beyond the site,or cause potentially smothering sedimentation, or to release other than minor concentrations of pollutant.
The sediment and turbidity risk is very low taking into account the following considerations and strategies:. The proposed hydraulic digger method of dredging which should limit the release and loss to the water column
of significant amounts of silt.
. The short period and intermittent operation of the digger/barge.
. The shallow water that reduces the time that sediment can be lost from the digger bucket between the seabedand the barge.
. The tidal flows and flushing characteristics in the area, which should quickly dissipate intermittent small sedimentplumes and prevent concentration of sediment within the area over success tidal cycles.
4.2.2 Reclamation Stormwater
Stormwater is proposed to be treated through proprietary devices before discharge through the seawall. The activitieson the reclamation are unlikely to generate other than small quantities of particulates and organic water bornematerial. No specific or potentially significant contaminant sources or processes will occur on the reclamation.
Effects from these discharges are considered to be less than minor.
No monitoring is proposed for the stormwater discharges.
4.2.3 Water Quality-Conclusion
The water quality to be maintained in the area is primarily focused on the faecal coliform limits identified in the CBwater classification. Default general requirements (as per section 70(I) of the RMA) are also applicable. In particular,the oyster industry reclamation discharge(s) after reasonable mixing must not give rise to any of the following effects:
. Production of conspicuous oil or grease films, scums or foams or floatable suspended material;
. Any conspicuous change in colour or visual clarity;
. Any emission of objectionable odour;
. Any significant adverse effect on aquatic life;
. Any significant adverse effect on aesthetics or amenity values.
Discharges from the activity and car parking are not expected to raise issues of colour, clarity, odour, aesthetics oramenity or adverse effects on blota.
Seen also in context of the low key nature of the facility and the high flushing potential of the adjacent waters, andgiven the intermittency of such discharge (i. e. rainfall dependant), it is concluded that the general water qualityperformance criteria will be achieved and any water quality effects will be less than minor arising from any discharge.
331
f^I S 11 G I^^ ^CONSULTING
, I * *I ,- I 11' ,I 11 '. 11 .- .". 11/1 I^ ,, .I I I P , , I A ., \ ; .I I I^it It '. I .; 111.1i' XI I I 'I I n ; ^ 11, . I II
4.3 Part 2 RMA Ecological Status
Part 2, Section 6(c) of the Act requires as a matter of national importance '.., the protection of areas of signjfitontindigenous vegetotibn und signfficont hobitots of I'ridigenousfouno. ..'
There is no significant indigenous vegetation present within the development footprint or otherwise affected by theproposal.
The intertidal zone that will be lost within the oyster industry reclamation is not a significant habitat of indigenousfauna by virtue of any special features. It is likely to be typical of the large area of estuarine intertidal flat in thevicinity. On this basis, it has a small ecological value.
The subtidal zones to be lost within part of the reclamation and the dredged area are riot distinguished as specialrelative to subtidal habitats in the area in general or by virtue of the biodiversity or rarity of the local biota.
Section 7(d) of the Act requires particular regard to be given to '... the I'ntrihsi'c volues of ecosystems. ..' Ecosystemvalues are not undermined by the proposal which will have localised and minor ecological effects.
Section 7(f) of the Act requires regard to be had to the '... momtenonce ond enhoncement of the quality of theenvironment. ..'. Inevitably and relative to the existing and background situation, there is some effect onenvironmental quality associated with establishing this oyster industry fadlity. That effect is considered to be minorand localised to the site. In the context of me asurable changes in environmental quality indicators, such as metalsconcentrations in sediments, the water column and shellfish, or concentrations of microbiological pathogens, themagnitude of any change will be small and well within acceptabte limits,
332
4.4 Oyster Industry Project: Summary and Conclusions
I) The marine environment is in general unpolluted and water and sediment quality is good. These characteristicsare likely to reflect, and to be maintained by the flushing that occurs in response to tidal patterns and river ineoutflows.
2) There are no significant inter tidal shores within the site of the oyster industry reclamation.
3) The subtidal biota is typical of that documented elsewhere in the area and is dominated by common species ofpolychaetes and crustacea.
41 Dredging effects on subtidal biota will be no more than minor. The effect should be reinediated in a short periodof time by natural recruitment and reco!on is ation of the new seabed which will be of a similar texture to thatwhich presently exists,
51 Although maintenance dredging, if required will repeat the cycle or biological loss and recovery, the overallsignificance of the ecological effect is minor.
6) The oyster industry reclamation will have no more than minor effects on birdlife as the area of potential wadingbird habitat affected is very small.
71 Sediments to be dredged are not polluted with heavy metals or other contaminants. There is no significant riskof pollutant releases as a consequence of the dredging.
8) Any sedimentation effects beyond the oyster industry reclamation works area will be limited and localised.Sediment related effects on habitats and biota beyond the site will be 00 more than minor
91 Turbidity generated during dredging will be localised, short term, intermittent and minor.
101 Other potential water quality effects, such as from small quantities of volatile hydrocarbons which might escapefrom barge bilges or unburned fuel fractions, will be minor and localised based on experience from marinas.
1.1) There will be no adverse effects on water quality arising from the stormwater discharges from the reclamation.Local water quality targets as expressed in the applicable CB water classification and the general performancestandards under the regional coastal plan (and RMAct) will be maintained in relation to any discharges.
f^I S 11 G I^ I^CONSULTING
I)\ ', I, .I ' r- UiiLli . ,'. I I. I '/11^I-V. , .', 11\.... Iv ! ,, f 11/11, . * ' :fj*., IC I , '.' I I" ; 1/1 *I I;
1.2) Given the small scale of the proposed development, no pre construction, construction or operational ecologicalor water quality monitoring is required.
5 VINTAGE RAILWAY: ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
5.1 HAIL Assessment Under the National Environmental Standard
A Preliminary Site Investigation Report (PSI - Appendix F1 has been prepared under the Resource Management(National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health)Regulations 201.1 (NES). This is to clarify historical use, source of landfill material; and potential soil contaminant issuesat the 'Colenso triangle' site.
Information provided by FNH indicates that the site received clean hardfill from Franklin Street, Opua in and around3998/99. It has been a vacant area between the State Highway causeway and the railway embankment, with nodevelopment. FNH has owned the site since 2000. As previously rioted, FNH hold resource consents to deposit up toapproximately 3000 in' per annum of harbour dredging's and cleanfill to the site. However, it is unclear if there hasbeen any other additional dredge spoil disposal or clean fill deposited to the area since 1998/99. If this has occurred,the site inspection suggests the amount is small.
There appears not to be any source of potential contamination and the site is used for storage of derelict marinapontoons and other solid debris, road slip material and possibly dredging's (sediment), No liquids or Ieachablematerials are, or have been, stored at this site location. None were observed during the site inspection.
From information received and collated, and from a site inspection, 45ight have identified no types of materials thatcould contaminate the site or any locations where contamination has occurred. We believe that the likelihood ofcontamination is verylow. Contaminants may have entered the maritime area adjacent to the site from State Highwayroad stormwater run-off.
The PSI concludes thereis no need for further investigation or sampling at this site to satisfy N ES protocols and furtherthat in terms of the NES, the site is suitable for the proposed use, being the construction and development of theVintage Railway facility,
333 f^ SII Gl^^ TCONSULTING
5.2 Reclamation within the Site
The site lies between State Highway 11 Kawakawa"Opua Road and Otiria-Opua Railway Embankment. Most of theColenso site is already reclaimed. Most of the area to be reclaimed lies within the 'railway' zoneimmediately adjacentto the existing embankment. This is a modified small area of wetland of about 20 in width and 90 in length which ispartly maritime but which is encroached by weed and nori-wetland species along its margins. It has probablydeveloped as a consequence of the protection offered by the seaward 'bund' formed by the railway embankment.
There is a gradient of terrestrial mainpas) -freshwater (raupo)-saline vegetation running from approximately north(Beaufort St end) to south through the yet to be developed part of the site. The wetland area to be reclaimed is small,totals about 0.18 ha, and has a maximum width of about 20 in. 45ight is unclear if this area, or part of it, is alreadyconsented for reclamation under the existing FNH consents for activities at the Colenso site.
The wetland is not identified within the regional Protected Natural Areas database that covers this area15 4Sightunderstand that Department of Conservation have been consulted by FNH and have advised that it does not havespecific reservations about the use of the area as proposed.
Stormwater from car parking that will developed on the Colenso site will discharge to the existing roadside drain andfollow the existing pathway to the estuary. There is a high level of certainty based on the monitoring results for the
15 L Conning and N Miller 1999 Naruroloreos of the KerikeriEcologitolDistrictReconn0!$50nce Survey Reportjbrthe Protected NoturolAreosProgramme Published by the Department of Conservation, Northland Conservancy.
lily. I*-I I'. 11 I^ \11' . A I'^I I 'I, :I I" !:,. ;;. I^I, ..,, \ ' ., I 1/1 It. '. ., IUI^I I*IC I, . \' I , 11.1. I I
existing Opua marina carparks that concentrations of suspended particulates and heavy metals will be low and willmeet receiving environment requirements and maintain water quality.
Stormwater from part of the development site adjacent to the railway embankment will discharge through theremaining wetland but that happens now and as no increased stormwater volume or source of contaminants isinvolved, any effect is de minimus.
Overall, the loss of this area to reclamation is a minor ecological effect, given the location and its small, isolated andrelatively modified state.
5.3 Vintage Railway Project: Summary and ConclusionL) The PSI concludes there is no need for further investigation or sampling to satisfy NES protocols and the site is
suitable for the proposed use, being the construction and development of the Vintage Railway facility.
2) The habitat affected by the project is a small area of modified wetland between the existing largely reclaimedland within the Colenso site, the public road and the railway embankment. The area is riot a recognised habitatin the ecological district database on habitats of significance.
31 Although the area retains some wetland values, the significance of the effects of the reclamation is low by virtueof the small area and narrowness of the wetland affected and the existing level of habitat modification anddisturbance, The latter includes the presence of the state highway; the railway embankment, which facilitatesthe existing railtrail and walkway; the existing development and reclamation on the Colenso site; and the adjacenthouses (residential activity and probably pets).
41 The retention and management of the non- reclaimed part of the site will maintain part of the maritime wetlandand this could be managed and potentially enhanced, with marginal weed control and some native plantings.
5) There will be no adverse effects arising from the proposed stormwater management on the site.6) Overall, the effects of the Vintage Railway project are concluded to be minor.
334 y^I S 11 G I^ ^FCONSULTING
:)y ',(I', kiri!I. 11 \ '11/1 ',, 1/11 I'll' 11,111. '...! y ' "I I'lli* '. ; Kibo', 2 :; I 11 V I Ii I 111.11 1.1
335 ff^ISI G1^11 ^CONSULTING
^:
Intertidal Habitat Photographs
Piloto I. View 1101/1site towaid Ashl, ys Boatyattl
it, .. .
.. .... ,
'- . ', '.,: ' '?<:,;'- ~
.,. , .I * - " ,- $fj!.;<:.. 5r- ~- *-". ~, ' "~ d
"':~'. '-, .r-' '.=,{,.I .,, . . .? ., q. '._
^I S 11 G I^ T
.^
CONSULTING
Pilot0 31 Rockv point featii, es
.^..,,
,*,;-^:;;,
,%. ..
,^..
<. 4Z;==-~.-^ -
,L. ^r
Photo 2 Rocky point at sitei, serifoiloca15/1/'11boat BCC, 55
^*...^
^
-." mm
- ~.' :>'^: . - 4.2:,,~-~
"'-I * *_:f, ^-E'* ,-!. . '.*=:. "-=.,;. - _ :,
,, r- - =:;.' ~ ',,,.;,,- <:,*;' ' ""\, ' ';- ""' "'. * , ,. ,,.,,, ,., ,. .,. v*;:"' 'f ,, . * :"~:*, * ' .',' ' *.re , ,. , .* . .,.~ ' 45,
, ., I, , _.. ., ,*^.,-I^*. . "::S' ' '
'31/0105 Rocky uoint ice!!lies
,its . .' * ... .. ,
~ "" ' " ""FLU ": " .'='.\. r, !*!g::3' ' - ~ ' " ' '~" '
;!^Z : '~, I. ~. "'! "' - ';^It^.;t. --,',:.'.;"!;::' :"'.';" '.,;-
.., ...... ... ,.,,, ,nj. ^^j!^;;""" ,^!^^IJ:=.:'a':!^;;;^~ . , ~ I . -" ";^'.,^^e;^^^;::t;^^i^\"*- - '-. a;:^^:;;^", .'--,., ' - ^;",^"^::",^*,,.,,: '^;^^^'^;*.' ':, ,"I %:;I '.;^;;"!^;""""*";,,^.,. ' !;^;'I;,;^':'.:. '.,, j"L, :-' , ^.^$.:L .^!i-<,;^;.:\**""^:*~:i;. t^;;;: ."' '! . b. .- *-,:=;;' *\*:. ;*; ' ,,* ;;=:;^'it; 511', 43^ '
,.,,,.
1:3-=I^I;' "~,~r~,
,,- ..
.,. F.
". ~.
~Q
I
Photo ": 110c$. You'llI 1,311i, e5.
, . -.\. :L .-- "},.,..~J. .,.. ."
- ' "' '.' ,^II, ,',,*:*:*\,\,' " "
~ . .~ ..'~ 3.'. "'.*I",~ ' ,.'., . ., ,\ . ...
t";" ~:', -^t^,: ', fa' ' '. tip:\;-,- ' ~ : '.~ *^,,I, ,. I, . t;;'. ',~ \4>;^:^- " A, I. ',.'
', i';^,",::: '*"'. , ^-;.!. of. ; *:;..,' 1.1 ,<!. ;\ '\.,; :, ;,*..^^ .
I _ .,,., . \,,. ,
.
01/0106' 1:11uriidalarta, ,11/01/11 silowingj, ,iciiir. UV\1/1\
!Cjit rule \ neckl;ite 118 to and In Intrlv IOC k .. 111 I at L
Photo I Rocky point looking toward shore
^ISI Gl^ TCONSULTING
NIOi0 9' Inter tidal mud{Iai 50/11h-west of poini, witInarigioves around the shoreline
=.
tai^ o
a.
.,.
~ ..,, . ..
~.... .. ..... .,
, . --<
- - <
;'. .
ly~
";^:!.
I' \-
, . .
. ,..
*. -
. ;;.,
<.,^
.:^(l;
*"*;I
' ' "
"".~
. m
m .
-,.^
\~.-
,=.,-,
~;. ., 4. . . ..
,-,,
' ' ?
';^i: ' ,
, -
- -.
<, .
..'. ' . . .* .
I. ,_
. .. .... \.
" .,. ,... ..
~ .~ 31 F1
,
" ^ It
a:
,a go C , ^ ^ r* V ^ or
^
"~
a
^-
<-.
to u
n
= OR
^! !:;.
^^
^5
1
a. ,
^ -. C
, a.
in .-
~b
-.
g FD t -"
I^
-^
ip ,
, ID
F.
~.
Cm
O~
^O
33
^~
^,
":,.
. .
. , .' *,,~
,.. . '
'/ :
._- r
, '. \
' r .
'*. ~
" 'O
S. ., ,
. --.:-~
, .t ,'I:
. . ...~
"~
'" ' "
I;,,. . .,*:"
'. ~
.r. ~
., .* ....
.. . -...
p,
"' ' .
; ,
.,.,
_' .
_ ' .
'
' ' '*
:. ' 'a".
.'.' '"
. tL . ' *
J*' <
': ^:
;;"4'
1. *j
. . ._
. . ,
.,..
.,.'*,.:.^,. e
".. . ' ~
>
- .L
. +
- "
.. ..-, ..".
.' -I. ..
,.
;\,. =
.\"
.~
.
u. ;;
~,
A.
*"..
' .,
. .
,.,.$
: :,:.
.*:a
.. ..
*=.=
',.
. v.
"',
It.
' '
' "--
;:I
"' "
""'"
4'.\',*
">
,' ' "
,'..
,.
'
.,;-
*{^:
, z; ,
-..,.
.-..
\ a
. . '*
..' V
,J. , ,
.. .. . ., -
._"_
.'. ',,
,' .
., ,
e:
=+
.:.
-I^.'~
.. q
',*
,,, .. , ,,,,, L
,'!, I ...,
a- q
. ... --- -
-
a, ~
,,~
, * r
= -
L .
'~.
. ..
*' ',' I
. ,, v
;"""
" "
'*. .,
{- '. "'
.;.,:.,;
:^. ^^
^',
a,
~C
=.
~O
,, a
: ,a, ,~
O I
b:; - a
ia
. I
- ,
aa
-"
O~
ize
.
o5
1=
go
IEC
^^
^.
..
~"
-"
~, :^-
?.
c; E^
-^
, It v
.U
^
A=
a,
"
, =-
,a ,in
^ =
.
..
a, -
^
-C
5 a'
- E
U
o . In
-"
.t
I ',~
,',, r . : ,. L"
, '.' ' '"" I
" * ,...'.
,, b
I h
. ,
,:I, -
.^;'*
,-*,,,
r. . I". a
, *
,,, it
. r14
6.3"
"$4
^j;,-
a. :
.;?:;-
}.,{.,^
:*^. '-
,;.. {j
; - * -
LS;..,
!,:;: .,
. ...,.
..*'
. r^
*,*.
^; , *
j=*.;^*;
*~ . ..,
,, 00
I!;:;.
,^*: .
, ill*
^^
..'. *'
. t*
,,: ,*
.,. .
.*tJ
;a
a
..,.
-^
coo
-,
<-.
in
c.
C.
< , JP E. ,
a = a
.r\~
,,..
'*.'
",;'*
, I~
*,?
v"
, . . . ,-,..
. @
*.. . 1
1 r
:. J
,'I
., ., , .. J ~
.,.
',^;;,
;.'-;"
"I^'
'~:;;
^ , ~
''"'~
';=
-"-
4' :. '*-'-'.'. IP
' ' ~
' '
",., , ... ^
'. :
*::
. .
. .,
.~.
',!-
*=
;' I
""
:.:.
: t^
;:.^
' ,^.
- ',
" L .r*. . , * ' "" ""
,., * . ,-^;,,.*. . *." ,.,.
,r.
-$
J,
* r
, ,,
, .
,.,
,_,
...
"~
"'>
' '. .
' "
I.._,. . ..-
.. *, ..\ .*
.,\ ' . . -
. ,
.* .
. .
..
^j*
^.
~- I
. - -*? - :,
. J. . .,.,,,.. . .
.
' F
F,
Nu
n ,. =
*a
i^ -,
~-
-,
FC 3~
ra o a " o a o ^ C , o ^ o " it a.
5.1 -
-a
=in
89.̂^ in
10
O. g :: by < 13 , ." a ^ x'
, ra = ^ a'
To^ , < to to * " ,
"^
Z F.
:^E
:^I
co^^
339 f^ISII Gl^ TCONSULTING
Intertidal Biota Results
A endix B
Species
Sample
NEMERTEA
Nemertea sp. #4
POLYCHAETA
Aonides trjj7do
Armondioinocu/oto
340
80ccordio (Porobocc@rdio) syrtis
Copite"o sp. #,.
Cirratulidae sp. #I
Cossuro consimi!is
Low 4
Heteromostusfrljformis
Nereididae (unidentified juveniles)
Paraonidae sp. #,.
Low 5
2
Pectinorio oustrol^^
Phylo novozeolondioe
Intertidal
f
Low 6
9
Prionospio aucklondrco
^ISIGIHIT
Prionospio yuriel
I
CONSULTING
Syllidae sp. #,.
Mid 7
5
OLIGOCHAETA
I
BIVALVIA
I
95
Mid 8
5
2
Arthrit, to sp, #,.
37
I
Pophies oustrolis
I
5
1.51.
The oro Iubrico
Mid 9
8
2
50
Unidentified bivalve juveniles
2
4
1.25
CRUSTACEA
3
2
19
A1pheus richordsoni
69
74
I.
I
Amphipoda sp, #I
I
3
42
Amphipoda sp. #2
4
6
I.
36
38
Copepoda sp. #,.
2
2
9
28
Tenogomysis sp. #I
I
10
24
Unidentified decopod megalopa
57
9
6
60
Total species in sample
6
6
43
65
2
Total specimens in sample
9
9
7
I
8
2
30
3
5
I.
2
73
I
44
5
I.
I
I.
I
2, .
3
7
I.
1.2
I
I.
4
235
I
3
I
14
3
294
I.
2
17
295
I.
I
16
1.85
2
13
I.
1.59
15
227
341
Hill Laboratories Intertidal and Subtidal Surficial Sediment Chemical Analysis
f^I SII Gl^ TCONSULTING
A endix C
I,
I,
ANALYSl
Hill Loborotories
Client: 4SIGHT Consulting LimitedContact: Mark Poynter
C/- 4SIGHT Consulting LimitedPO Box 402053
TUTUKAl<A 0153
BETTER TESTING BETTER RESULTS
Sample Type: Sediment
Sample Name:
342
REPORT
Total Recoverable CopperTotal Recoverable Lead
Total Recoverable PhosphorusTatal Recoverable Zinc
Total Nitrogen*
TDIal Organic Carbon'
R J Hill Laboratories LimitedI Clyde StreetPrivate Bag 3205Hamilton 3240, I^w Zealar^
Lab Number
ing/kg dry wl
ing/kg dry wl
ing/kg dry wl
ing/kg dry wi
9/1 00g dry wt
9/1 Dog dry wl
Sample Name:
Lab Number
ing/kg dry wi
ing/kg dry w!
ing/kg dry wi
OF METHODSThe following table(, I Dies a hid d. scriplia, of lib meltrodB used to conch, ci Ih. analyses for this job. The beenon limits gi*n below are Ihoso attainable in a tonicl cban matrixDoled ion Iimiis may be high. rlo, I'dladual ,amples ,hauld irisuff, cads. riple be are11thb. or mr. matrix, .q, ,r's ihai dimtioris be reformed tiring anal sis
Sample Type: SedimentTest
Environmental Solids SamplePreparation
Total Recoverable CopperToIal Recoverable Lead
ToIal Rerunrable Zinc
Intentda1422-Dec-2015
Lab to, 1526003
Date Registered: 19-Jan-2016Date Reported: 28-Jan-2016Quote No:Order No:
Client Reference: AA1456
Submitted By: Mark Poynter
I526003.4
Tel +6478582000Fax +6478582001
anal mai@hill-labs. conzWeb WWW. hill-labs. co. nz
Intentda1522-Dec. 2015
730
1526003.5
0.17
1.66
Intentda15 Composite of SiteIntentda16
1<63um Fraclionl 1<63um Fractionl I, Site 2 and Site31<63umFractionI
1526003 11
20
14.0
61
,
Total Recoverable digesiion
Composite Environmental SolidSamples'
Sieving through 63 urn sieve. nogravimelnC result*
Total Recoverable Copper
ritertida1622-Dec-2015
Page , of 2
1526003.9
19.7
13.1
61
, 526003.6
0.15
1.48
Composite of SIIe Interlida14
I, Site 2 and Site t<63um Fractio3
1526003.7
Total Recoverable Lead
1526003. ,0
19.9
13.2
61
Method Description
Air dried at 35'C and sieved, <2mm fraction.Used for sample preparation.May contain a residual incislure content of 2-5%.
Nilricl hydrochloric acid digesiion. Us EPA 2002.
Individual sample fractions mixed together 10 form a compositefraction.
<631im Wet Sieved with no grayimelfic determination
0.16
1.64
Total Recoverable Phosphorus
Total Recoverable Zinc
740
1526003.8
21
13.9
0.13
,. 24
ToIal Nitrogen'
Dried sample. sieved as specified Of required).Nitric/Hydrochlotic acid digeslion, ICP-Ms. trace level. Us EPA200.2.
Dried sample. sieved as specilied or required).Nilric/Hydrochloric acid digestion, ICP-Ms. trace level. Us EPA200.2.
Dried sample, sieved as specified Of required)Nitric/Hydrochloric acid digestion. ICP-Ms. screen level UsEPA 200.2
Dried sample, sieved as specified Of required)Nitric/Hydrochloric acid digestion, ICP-Ms. trace level Us EPA2002.
Catalylic Combustion (900'C, 02), separation, ThermalCondudivity Detector IElerrientar Analyserl.
@ACCREDITED LABORATORY
Default Detection Limit Sample No4-7
This Laboratory is accredited by In Iemaiional Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ). which represents New Zealand Ithe International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC). Through the ILAC Mutual Recognition Arrangeme(ILAC-MRAj this accreditstionis internationally recognised.The Iesls reported herein have been performed in accordance with the terms o1 accreditation. with the exceptionIests marked '. which are riot accredited.
0.2 ing/kg dry wt
0.04 ing/kg dry wl
4-,,
I-3
40 ing/kg dry w!
4-7
O 4 ing/kg dry wl
8.11
0.05 9/100g dry wi
8.11
4-7
8-11
Sample Type: SedimentTest
Total Organic Carbon*Method Description
Acid pretrealment to remove carbonates present followed byCatalytic Combustion (900'C, 02), separation, Them alCondudivily DetectorjElementar Analyserl
These samples were collected by yourselves (or your agent) and analysed as received at the laboratory.
Samples are held at the laboratory after reporting for a length of time depending on the preservation used and the stability ofthe analytes being tested. Once the storage period is completed the samples are discarded unless otherwise advised b theclient.
This report must riot be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of the signatory.
41,.Ara Heron BSC CFech)Client Services Manager - Environmental Dinsion
Default Detection Limit Sample No0.0591,009 drywt 4-7
Lab No: 1526003 v I Hill Laboratories Page 2 of 2
344 f^ISII Gl^ TCONSULTING
Subtidal Samples Photographs
A endix D
Photo 3: Subtidal dredged sample 3
^SIIGIH!TCONSULTING
PITot0 2' SLibtidal diedged sample 2.
346 f^I S 11 G I^ TCONSULTING
Subtidal Biota Results
A endix E
Species
Sample
NEMERTEA
Nemertea sp. #I
Nemertea sp. #2
Nemertea sp. #3
Nemertea sp, #4
POLYCHAETA
347
Abyssoninoe 9010theae
Armondro inoculoto
Boorordio IPOroboccordio) spytis
Cossuro consimil^^
61ycero loinellfformis
I.
Heteromostusfiljformis
Subtidal
Maldanidae sp. #I
I
Nereididae (unidentified juveniles)
2
2
Paraonidae sp. #I.
2
f
Paraonidae sp. #2
I.
^ISIIGll^IT
Phy/o novozeolond^^e
3
Polynoidae sp. #I
CONSULTING
Prionospio oucklondico
2
I
Terebellidae sp. #,.
2
Syllidae sp. #I.
102
I
OLIGOCHAETA
2
4
2
BiVALVIA
31
2
Arthritico sp. #,.
143
I
The oro Iubrico
2
CRUSTACEA
a. Z
47
I.
Amphipoda sp. #,.
39
Amphipoda sp. #2
I
,.
2
Corophi^in sp. #I.
1.7
1.9
I
PhDxocephalidae sp. #I.
3
I
Tenogomysis sp. #I
2
3
49
I
Total species in sample
7
2
I
Total specimens in sample
3
I.
,.
53
I
I
5
8
I.
I.
I
1.8
6
2
1.3
I
18
,. 2
I
179
I
7
20
5
253
1.8
20
238
348 J^ISI Gl^ T
^!^;
Vintage Railway Facilities, National Environmental Standard,
Preliminary Site Investigation Report (PSI)
CONSULTING
O PEOPLE. \A1A'I'E;?
^ISIIGl!^ITCONSULTING
re. r North
Hddhgs Limited
VINTAGE RAILWAY FACILITIES
For Far North Holdings Ltd
National Environmental Standard
Preliminary Site Investigation Report (PSI)
REPORT INFORMATION AND QUALITY CONTROL
Far North Holdings LtdPrepared for:
Author:
Reviewer:
Painela Kane
Marine ECologist
Approved forRelease:
Mark Poynter
Principal Ecology Consultant
Mark Poynter
Document Name
Version History:
pal Ecology Consultant
. }..,.. ~
I
I
AAi. 456 Vintage Railway Facilities PSI220620i. 6 VL. O Final
I
,
V0.3 Draft
V0.4 Draft
V, .. O Final
V
sri'E ^"; ^:",:E'"E " a. R
ToneO-a" Code
CONTENTS
a.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
S UM MARY CONTAMINATED SITES REPORT CHECKLIST. ,.....,..,..........,,...........,..,..,.................,.*..,..,..........,.EXECUTIVE SU M MARY ...........................,....................................,,.........,..........,....................................... 2SCOPE OF WOR K .................,,,..,..,................................................,...........................,................,...........,... 2SITE ID ENTI F ICATION ..........,,*.....,................................................*.......................,..............,..*.................. ZSITE H 1STORY ......................,....,.....,............................,..........,.........,....,..............,...........,,.......,...........,... 5SITE Co N DiTioN AN D s u RRO U N DIN G ENviRON M E NT ....................,..........................,.,........*.......,.,........ 6BAS Is FOR G U IDELi N E VALUES ....,,....,.,............................................,------------------.,........,....'."""""""""""S ITE CH ARACTE R ISATION ............,.......,.....,.................,.......*,.,.........,...............................,........,....,.......... 9co N C LU SIO N S AN D REco M M EN DATl ON s. .... ... .......... ... .... ..,... .... .... .... .. .,....*,.. ....,. .......,..... ... ... .....,,.,.. .... . 9
351
List of Tables
Table I. : Hierarchy of documents containing guideline values for surface water, groundwater and sediment. ,... 8
List of Figures
Figure I: Current site plan of 8979 square metres being Section 38, Block V Russell Survey District, Opua andbe in g all of t h e Ia n d coin prised in certificate of title 55A/356. ........... .... .......,.............................................. 3
Figure 2: Site locality in ap, with site (Colenso tria riglej o ut!in e d in red. .......... .. ......................................... ........... 4Figure 3: Wider site locality map, with site ICOlenso trianglej outlined in red and Opua shown to the north of the
site . ................,...........,......................,....................,.......................... .............................................................
F ig u re 4 : Lo ca tion a n d in dica tive d e velo pin e nt. . ,, .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . ... . . 5
f^I S 11 G 11^ T
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Far North District Council ConsentAppendix B: Northland Regional Council Resource Consent 2008/153501Appendix C: Colenso Triangle - Opua, Earthworks and sediment control Plan RC CON 2003/1.53501.
CONSULTING
Page
. . I I. : I I ,I
,. SUMMARY CONTAMINATED SITES REPORT CHECKLIST
Indi^ate the reports contained in this document
..,,
Executive summary
Scope of work
Site identification
,
352
, .
Site history
Site condition and surrounding environment
Geology and hydrology
Sampling and analysis plan and sampling methodology
Field quality assurance and quality control (ONQC)
Laboratory ONQC
ONQC data evaluation
..
. . ,
Basts for guideline values
Results
f^ SII GII^I T
Site charactensalion
I^
CONSULTING
Remedial actions
Validation
Site management plan
Ongoing site monitoring
Conclusions and recommendations
.
^1:1ZiRj^Rl^^I^I^I^IA.
A.N.
N.N.^I^'A.Rj^
. .
R.
R.R.SEIS.R.
R.R.
R.R.R.R.R.
.
.
R.R.R.S.SI.S.
.
R.
R.R.S.S.S.
R.R.
R.R.R.R.R.S.R.
S.N.R.
.
R.
R.R.S.S.S.
R.S.
X
X
X
X
X
R.R.R.R.
X
X
X
X
X
^I^
X
X
X
I. :I I I:, I, ';'. 111,11'1' I*. I 11v .Iv ' .1,1111i. ' \ I' '.: .',(IC 1:1 I ;, '.' I ., I ^;I'll
R.S.R.S.SI.
S.R.
R.
X
X
R.
R.X
R.
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A Preliminary Site Investigation Report has been prepared under the Resource Management (National EnvironmentalStandard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 201.1 (NES)I toclarify historical use, source of landfill material; and potential soil contaminant issues at the site/property known asthe 'Colenso triangle' situated between State Highway 1.1 Kawakawa-Opua Road and Otiria-Opua RailwaEmbankment, Opua, Bay of Islands.
This site is being investigated for the Bay of Islands Vintage Railway proposal which is described in the ResourceConsent Application and AEE prepared by Bay of Islands Planning Ltd2
The site received clean hardfi!I from Franklin Street, Opua in and around 1998/99. Otherwise it has been a vacantarea between the State Highway causeway and the railway with no development. Since 2000 the site has been ownedby Far North Holdings Limited (FNHt), FNHL hold resource consents to deposit up to 3000 in' per year of harbourdredging's and cleanfill to the site. It is unclear if there has been any other additional dredge spoil disposal or cleanfilldeposited to the area. If this has occurred the siteinspection suggests the amountis small.
No source of potential contamination has been identified. The site is only used for derelict equipment and debrisstorage, road slip material and possibly dredging's. No liquids or Ieachable materials are, or have been, stored at thissite location.
From information received and collated, and from a siteinspection, we haveidentified no types of materials that couldcontaminate the site or any locations where contamination has occurred. The likelihood of contamination is very low.Contaminants may have entered the maritime area adjacent to the site from road stormwater run-off.
It is conduded there is no need for further investigation or sampling at this site to satisfy NES protocols.
The site is suitable for the proposed use, being the construction and development of the Vintage Railway facility.
3 SCOPE OF WORK
A Preliminary Site Investigation Report was undertaken to clarify historical use, source of landfill material; andpotential soil contaminant issues. The site was investigated on 22 December 201.5 and following this, relevantinformation was requested and received from appropriate sources.
^ISI Gll^ITCONSULTING
4 SITE IDENTIFICATION
The site/property is known as the 'Colenso triangle' situated between State Highway 11 Kawakawa-Opua Road andOtiria-Opua Railway Embankment, Opua, Bay of Islands. It ism the catchment of Kawakawa River. The siteis an areaof 8979 square metres more particularly described as the below variations:
. Section 38, Block V Russell Survey District, Opua and being all of the land comprised in certificate of title 55A/356.' Section 38 Survey Plan 372L7 contained in CT 139A/27 INorth Auckland Registry I.a Section 38 Kawakawa Parish Block V Russel Survey District, Opua.It is also at or about the location co-ordinates 1,701,007E 6090738N, Geodetic Datum 2000, New Zealand TransverseMercator Projection.
The site plan of 'Colenso triangle' is shown in Figure I, with site locality maps shown in Figures 2 and 3
' Ministry for the Environment 2012. Users' Guide: National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing contaminants in Soil toProtect Human Health. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.
Vintage Railway Station and Oyster Landing Facility. Colenso Triangle Opua. Resource Consent Applications by Far North Holdin s LimitedJanuary 2016. Prepared for Far North Holdings Ltd by Bay of Islands Planning Ltd
.Ichi, .,% I'. I I 200</1/6 V I 0 I "11N
,on,K.
I
,
I
OP 208.21AsCH
.\ .,
DPKJ
2
SE90 '
PIaLK *
'. 0.89
I',/,
'7,
.
^
Be aufoh SRre, Road
I,
OF 77.17PA".. I
PI Lot I
DP 183.0709.1 L. ,
^62 ,* pal*^,
ELL SD
272'
Id"qe
Ev 3e =
.
,
.
^
DP 77332A"", to,
die
^-.
.
R LOG I
DP lean07o^. EC
@52 ,"9 pansS. ..,
.
... ,. 1 Area Bdy^: ^
.
I
^SIIGl^T
ALot I
DP a83"7* ,^* " ~"I
,". y"p",,,@~;
L. - h. It, ",
^.,^
""..,. ab
*...~:^".
CONSULTING
a. ".,". "OF"
.
,
,,.
\.
- .C:^'. .
,
.,
.
.
".,,, I,,"..,.,^,.",.~.~ ^I'd. top, ., d. ^~..,,,..-.,^.a^, e. ,d.OP 147225 .."".,..,
*I, ^. 19.0. ., .~,..~~"'~d*.*,, '^
I' ".. ,*^,,,,^.**' ' '
""I. E. '~.. D. ago. ,^,.,,"".~..-,. Sri, ,",,,, jar","I"
b"
"",,~ a^
to
,
^", 0, .'I. e. .q
"
An. E. G. ,a, 'rs
30 .""
^
.0. CLOUT:
OPUA VIMAGE:RAILWA
^
^,^.
,.
,an. .,,"DPE, ...^. at..,.. rrC, ."a. .,,..,",.",."a. ^", t, ..., r, gq"="C. U",,. E.
"Err =, fLE. I
'CorENSOTRIA, IGLESITEPLAN
Unun , fog^=,,,^^.
.^,,. a.
co. HerePus UNrAc, "ALUA*FD. :Co. ~,"" ~,,. ."
ItoSCA!t:I.
ESPe_ ,,,.
1/1
, L. /
Figure 2: Site locality map, with site ICOlenso triangle) outlined in led.
I^
*\^.
, I, .
I,\
o
,
\
. 4,^
,
^ISII Gl^ I^
,"
.*,
@ w',,
*
CONSULTING
*.
,
I
,,, *!* ,,.. ,^!';^::;.
,4:1^ I-
\ . ,.... = . I .'. e. .,.,
,
,
I,
,
,.
,
,
,
I
,:'.,. I
,
,
,
a
,
I
,
t_',(11 I'll\:
hill" 56 Vini, .,:,, Rilllw;Iv , at intr, \ P\. 220b?016 V I O Final
,( 10, '11. '
5
Chronol ica List of Site Ow
SITE HISTORY
There is a title to the land firstissued to Te Puna PropeTties in ,. 983. It was then transferred to the Northland HarbourBoard in 1989, and then vested with the Far North District Council (FNDC) via the Northland Regional Council and FarNorth District Council Vesting and Empowering Act 19923, in 1992. Then transferred to Far North Maritime in 1994and ultimately to Far North Holdings Limited (FNHLjin 2000
The site received hardfill from Franklin Street, Opua in and around 1,998/99. Otherwise it has been a vacant areabetween the State Highway causeway and the railway, used for storage of non-liquid materials and there has been nodevelopment.
BE^
An aerial plan showing the general features of the locality, overlaid with the indicative locations of the developmentis shown below as Figure 4,
rid
^ISIIG!HITCONSULTING
I
<,.
,.
,.,
wetland
I"station
et
.~~
^! ~ newroad
a htjp://WWW. legislation. govt. nz/act/local/1992/0002/1atest/DLM80602 html
landingfacility
Resource Consents
Previous consents include:
. Far North District Council RC 20805^5 - RMALUC (Appendix A1
. Far North District Coundl RC 2040240 (Appendix A)
. Northland Regional Council Resource Consent CON2008^L5350L (Appendix B)There is also a Colenso Triangle - Opua, Earthworks and sediment control Plan prepared under RC CON 2003/3.53501(Appendix A).
These consents authorised dredged spoil and cleanfill to be deposited on the site at volumes of 3000 in'/year.Authorities included construction methodology; quality assurance including a monitoring programme where sampleswould be sent to an IANZlaboratory for water and sediment testing and reporting; sediment control; design; and dustsuppression measures. Consents also covered diversion and discharge of contaminated water from the dredged spoildeposit area to an unnamed tributary of Kawakawa River on Lot I DP 1,83897.
It is unclear if there has been dredge spoil disposal or clean fill deposited to the area other than that which occurredin and around 1998/99Ihardfill from Franklin Street, Opuaj. The area of existing redamation within the site isrelatively small and therefore any additional deposited material is likely to have been a small volume.Potential Contamination
357
There are no known incidents, chemical storage or product spills. There are no other discharge permits, relevantpermits, resource consents or licences (e. g. land-use consents; consents to discharge to air, water or ground; tradewaste consents; and dangerous goods thazardous substances111cences) than those previously mentioned above. Solidmaterial discharged appears to have been hard cleanfill,
There are no environmental reports, environmental incident Investigation reports, tank removal records, processdescriptions, waste disposal and chemical inventories, material safety data sheets or newspaper articles for this site.
J
Inventor , of Site Materials
^ISIIGll^IT
The site is only used for used for storage of used equipment and debris, road slip material and dredging's. FNHL advisethat no liquids or Ieachable materials have been stored at this site location. We observed none during the siteinspection
CONSULTING
6
Photos I - 6 were taken from the site visit on 22 December 201.5 and show the site condition and materials stored atthe site.
SITE CONDITION AND SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT
The site contained no buildings or roadways, and appeared to be used as a storage area for solid materials. There wasno presence of drums, wastes and fill materials and no obvious odours were coining from the site. The site was locked,gated and fenced with wire mesh fences and topped with barbed wire fencing, There was no obvious erosion issuesor stormwater discharge visible. There was no visible signs of contamination such as identifiable waste products,discoloration or staining of soil or bare soil patches. There were no visible signs of plant stress,
\ -: ! , ,I I. ^ 11 ,. I:J- ''.: ^I. '.' , I. , it ^ 1/1 -, .. I ' ,I .: ? ! 11.2 : I ; h I. , I : I I ^ ^I. : I .:
"' V. .,..., -
'. I. '.. ' ,I,
,. ^:., .. ,, ,, . ..I I '/' ' ""-. I F1
I .. . , ,/.. ....,. . I' ' "'*" "' ' "" " ' '~',"" " ,. .. .... ..
. ' .. ., I. I-', 'J . ., F' ...-
. .' I. *,,,
- .". ,, . . ,Ij, _ ..,
-. . . ,.- *./ ..- ,. -.... . . ..
^ISII Gl^^ TCONSULTING
,
,
^;^a',;
Photo 3
~~-
,~
. ....~
"
-~,-- \--":, L : :.' , ~~.---^
.
-..-- -
, .^
J
.~~F ,FF~ .
,
.\
--,, -
.~-. -
.--.------
--,-,
~\
...\\~~~
Relevant Local Sensitive Environment
11:1.I\.~ I' ~
~!""' - I' ^;:
.
I. *-...
...~
-,
,
~-
A. , 14 *6 V. ,11.11:,. Pal\',,, v ' ., tint, , * I' '. ^ .! 2011 10 I6 '.' I 0 I Iru, I
..
in ^=^
.. ,
..,.,.
.
.
,.
.41 I :g. " ' '
,,
91,0106
..
..
*^ '
.
\, ,,^;I;'\:
,
,
,. , .,...
' L~- "'
. , ,: . , ,A
.
There is a narrow band of hinging mangrove forest of about 30 to 35 in width along the eastern side of the railwayembankment. This forest is a mixture of tailsaplings and older trees. The canopy reaches 4-5 in height and the treesform a relatively dense thicket.
On the western side of the railway alignment between the embankment and the road and reclaimed areas of theColenso Triangle, is a narrow area of habitat which grades from mangrove at its southwestern end; into saltmarsh andthen a small area of raupo at its north-eastern end. The remaining mangrove/maritime area is about 0.36 ha and thereupo about 0,035 ha. The actual boundaries between the railway corridor and the Co!enso Triangle are unclear butit is understood that a large part if not all of this area is within the Colenso Triangle.
Tidal inundation of this 0.36 ha is via a culvert beneath the railway embankment at the southwestern end. This smallarea of marine habitat retains some ecological value as an estuarine to freshwater vegetation sequence and is alsopotential habitat for bird species such as banded rail and common species such as pukeko.
7 BASIS FOR GUIDEUNE VALUES
359
Inbio I
Basis of protection
Hiei Bit Ity of docu merits comai, ling 11/11dPljiig vain 0,101 ;11 I jar g w;;Iei . 1:1 Gundwaj*-I a litl sodi!ripiij
Human health
f
Reference document
Ecosystems
^ SII GII^I T
Dimkir^-Ivater Standards for New Zealand 2005 (Revised 2008) (MDH. 2008j
Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Querny(ANZECC and ARMCANZ, 2000/'Canadian Environmenlal Quality Guide"nes (CCME. 2002)SoilRemediation Circular IMinistry of Infrastructure and the Environment2009)
CONSULTING
Livestock2
Agriculture,fedea!10nal Use'
Australian and New Zealand Guide"nes for Fresh and Marine Water Qua"Iy(ANZECC and ARMCANZ, 2000)'
Canadian Environmental Qua"ty Guidelines (CCME, 2002 and subsequentupdates available under htlp://SI-Is. ccme. cal)
Identifying, Investigating and Managing Risks Associated vath Former Sheep--dip Sites, oninislry for the Environment, 2006)
*Heath and Environmental Guide"nes for Selecled Timber TreatmentChemicals (MIE and MOH, 1997)Guide"nes for Assessing and Managing Contaminated Gasworks SIIes in NewZealand (MIE, 1997)
Guide"nes for Assessing and Managing Petroleum Hydrocarbon ContaminatedSites in New Zealand IRevised 204I) (Ministry 101 the Environment, t999)
Sediment
NZRB = New Zealand risk-based; IRB = International risk-based.
I The Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Qual^, is grouped as an international riskbased document for human health. agriculture and recreauonal use as these sections use Australian-specific daia.In contrasl, New Zealand ecotoxicity data have been used in the derivation of values for protection of ecosystems.Hence these values are terrned New Zealand risk-based
2 These values are not Included in the EGV database. However, they are mentioned In this table to indicate thatthese values do exist. Readers should refer to the original documents to ascertain the Oasis of their derivation
Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Qua"ty(ANZECC and ARMCANZ, 2000)'
SoilRemediation Circular oninistry of Infrastructure and the Environment,2009)
Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemicalconcentrations in marine and estuarine sedinients (Long et ai, 1995)
Grouping
NZRB
IRB
I .
NZRB
IRB
NZTB
I "
NZTB
11. ^
ITB
IRB
8
From information received and collated and our site observations, no types of materials that could contaminate thesite or any locations where contamination has occurred have been identified. The likelihood of contamination fromthe site is very low. Nearby road stormwater run-off discharges to the maritime area adjacent to the site.
It is concluded there is no need for further investigation or sampling at this site.
SITE CHARACTERISATION
9
The site appears only to have received clean hardfillfrom Franklin Street, Opua in and around 1998/99. Otherwise ithas remained a vacant area used for storage of solid debris and materials.
As no liquids orleachable materials are or have been stored at this site, there appears to have been no risk of Ieachablematerials that could have contaminated the local or adjacent soils.
There is no need for further investigation or sampling at this site under the NES protocols.
The site is suitable for the proposed use.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
360
J^I S 11 G I^^ TCONSULTING
,'1.1 I .: ': I, '.' 11, , .I I' - P. ! . I~.'.'. I'. I ., t 11:1 I. * , I ' ' I I 11 lit 111 I 11 ',, I I I : 111, ; I
361
#^I S 11 G 11^ TCONSULTING
Far North District Council Consent
A endix A
362
FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL
FAR NORTH DISTRICT PLAN
DECISION A:
That PUTSuant to snO4B and s. ,27 of the Resource Management Act 199, , the Councilgrants its consent to RC 2080515 by Far North Holdings Limited to vary the conditions ofconsent of RC 2040240, This consent was granted for Far North Holdings Ltd to depositapproximately 3,000 in'. of incidental dredgings per annum on a property known as the'Golenso triangle' situated between Kawakawa~Opua Road and 01iria-Opua RailwayEmbankment, Bay of Islands, being more particularly described as Section 38 Survey Plan37217 contained in CT 139N^7 (North AUGkland Registry).
The Resource Management Act 4991AND
IN THE MATTER OF
an application for Resource Consentunder the aforesaid Act by
Far North Holdings Limited
I'ILE NUMBER: RC-20805,5-RMALUC
The following changes are:
IN THE MATrER OF
I. Condition I shall be amended to read as follows:
The application shall proceed in accordance with the following plans:a. The Richardson Stevens Consultants (1996) Ltd plan entitled: "Far North
Holdings, Dredging Disposal Area - Si!t Retention Pond ; referenced 82* 9;Sheet 3; dated July 2007; and
The Northern Civil Consulting Engineers Ltd plans entitled: 'Far NorthHoldings Limited, Sect 38 Blk 5 Russell Survey District - Dredge Fill Area IReferenced 13/1; Sheets I & 2; dated I February 2007 and attached to thisconsent with Council's approved stamp affixed.
^
b.
2. Condition 10 shall be amended to read as follows'
Any debris deposited on the Public Road and State Highway 11 such as dredgingdeposits or earthworks shall be removed by or at the expense of the Consent Holder,
For the purposes of clarity only the consent shall now be read as follows:
I. The application shall proceed in accordance with the following plans:
(a) The Richardson Sievens Consultants (1996) Ltd plan entitled: "Far NorthHoldings, Dredging Disposal Area - Silt Retention Pond"; referenced 8219;Sheet 3; dated July 2007; and
(by The Northern Civil Consulting Engineers Ltd plans entitled: "Far NorthHoldings Limited, Sect 38 Blk 5 Russell Survey District - Dredge Fill Area"'Referenced 43/1; Sheets I & 2; dated I February 2007 and attached to thisconsent with Council's approved stamp affixed.
2. That Siti^ Management shall be carried out in strict accordance with the 'Mitigation ofEffects' section detailed in the Report done by Richard Stovens Consultants (1996)Ltd, referenced 4.61 and dated 7 November 2003.
3. Establish and flag the lot boundaries and ensure that all work is carried out and allstored material is contained within the boundary of the lot.
4. The dredge tailing disposal area is to be bunded to prevent saturated dredged .material from flowing into the adjacent area,
5. All stormwater runoff and Ieachate from the dredge tailings is to be collected, filteredand discharged into the adjacent area.
6. That all dredgings transported by truck be dumped during normal working hoursbetween 8am to 5pm - Monday to Saturday,
7. That a sign be erected at the entrance to Beaufort Street when dredging materialsare being dumped to warn the public that trucks are working at the site.
8. The applicant is responsible for the repair and reinstatement of any undergroundservices damaged as a result of the Earthworks.
9. The applicant is responsible for the repair and reinstatement of the road carriageway,the kerb and footpath damaged as a result of the transport of dredge material suchworks where required will be completed to the satisfaction of the Council's RoadingManager.
10. Any debris deposited on the Public Road and State Highway 11 such as dredgingdeposits or earthworks shall be removed by or at the expense of the Consent Holder.
363
DECISION B:
That pursuant to s. 104, sit04C and s. 108 of the Resource Management Act 199t, theCouncil grants consent to the application (being RC 2080515) by Far North Holdings Limitedto undertake clearance of native vegetation required in association with the extension of adredging disposal operation and the access requirements required by RC 2070759 on theproperty located at Paihia Road, Kawakawa being legally described as Sec 38 KawakawaParish Bik V Russell So subject to the following conditions:
I , The vegetation clearance shall proceed in general accordance with the informationsupplied in support of this application.
2. Provide a detailed progressive planting and re-vegetation plan prepared by a suitablyqualified person, to reduce the visual impact of the proposed activity from the StateHighway and surrounding area. The plan is to identify the species of plants to beused ICOmmon and Latin namesI, their numbers and locations on the site, the heightat planting and maturity, and the means of maintaining these plants for the durationof the consent,
In addition the plan shall incorporate the following aspects:
i. Provision for roadside planting or similar, for the area impacted by accessrequirements (Diagram D) needed as part of the approval for RC 2070759.The landscaping plan shall provide and maintain screening along the StateHighway.
ii. Provision for the retention of existing vegetation (excluding the existing andproposed dredging deposit areas) or re-vegetation planting program.
Iii. Planting of the bund wall.iv. The existing plantings along Be aufort Street are to be maintained to a
minimum height of 3 metres in order to screen any items being stored withinthe site.
364
The landscaping plan shall be accompanied by a program of works detailing wheneach aspect of the landscaping plan shall be implemented bearing in mind that thelandscaping of i, ii and in will occur at different periods of time.
The existing and proposed vegetation shall be retained for the duration of the consentor an alternative landscaping plan shall be provided to the Council should thisvegetation be cleared. Any plants that subsequently die, or are removed or damaged,are to be replaced as soon as possible, at least within the next planting season (Mayto September inclusive).
3. Any Items stored within the site shall riot exceed a maximum height of 3 metres.
4, When undertaking the construction of the bund wall for the proposed new fill area,Far North Holdings Ltd shall repair the existing pathway from the beginning of MarinaRise Road to the railway line, a distance of approximately I Do metres, by re-metal!ing the surface of the path,
The following matters are rioted as being relevant to the land, and possibly requiring additionalaction for statutory or code compliance. The applicant and any prospective purchasers shouldbe aware of these matters; and hence the information will be placed on the property file and will
STATUTORYINFORMATIONIADVICE
be cited in any related Project or Land information Memorandum that may be issued by theCouncil.
(4) If during the course of undertaking the site works there is a discovery made of anyarchaeological find, or suspected find, the work on that portion of the site should ceaseimmediately and the NZ Historic Places Trust and a representative of the relevant localIwi contacted. Comply in all respects with the requirements and provisions of theHistoric Places Act I 993.
(2) Ensure compliance with the Far North District Council's General Bylaws, in particularChapter Eleven, Nuisances.
365
REASONS FOR THE DECISION PURSUANT To SECTION 1/3
I, It is considered that the proposed variations and vegetation clearance, subject toconditions of consent, will not generate any adverse effects on the environment thatcould be described as more than minor or that cannot be appropriate Iy mitigated byway of consent conditions to ensure that effects will be no more than minor.
2. In terms of engineering issues, these are adequately addressed in the informationprovided with the application and Council's Development Engineer is satisfied thatany effects will be appropriate Iy mitigated by way of consent conditions to ensurethat they are no more than minor.
3. The proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant assessment criteria of the PartlyOperative District Plan and it is also considered to be consistent with the relevantobjectives and policies.
DECISION PREPARED BY: Jessica Phillips Resource Planner
CONSENT GRANTED UNDER DELEGATEDAUTHORITY:
Pat Ki
5^"RC~20805t5: MALUC
ea
O '^;""DATE
RESOURCE CONSENTS MANAGER
. - -as-\
SECr".Sb. "~,""a
.
\
.. ~
~*~
tsuj"I^. a
I
.^
DC~ '"'
^.
~.
\
'^^,*
^
,
*.
.
\. -,
.
I'll; I; ^
., I^
.. ^ .
.to^ ^
.
. .~
.
,.;I!^,!,, , , .'* '"'I" * *
.' ^,.":I
1/1,
.^
I
,
*
.^ ^
*
^^
..."^,,~
..
.^ ^
,,,
.^^
I__
~ ~. ~'. L
\
,
I'
^
..
F. G
..,
CJL
@
,..
"^
us. "
.
DEC",
..
I. V.
..
.,
WritsSln, us. Owl "^^V. ^
,." ~.
~ " .-..
*
So^^". Ian^"713^tour
P
APPROVED PLAN
'~~I
~
*
.,
PLANNER
...
^
co, ^:<21^;a^,!:^.... Dale. *^.;.^^;.^;^:;?&-.,
I~',..
k
I;^I"""
^. .~
.
.~. ^"*
...,.
......*,........
11/1E
CA>O>O,
F" Null Holdiigs muonSECT-38 ER 5 ^55" Sumy ^
SI;,,. C I : 500
^GE, "*"EQ
^q porn^ A,
toa:
Grin;
aleN, I^F1
NA
Co. "" Tit. ",,.
,. 11
gym HD:
2012
, ,,//,1/1
, ,/,
,/ I I ,~11,,/,
I I
,/,
, ,/,
I' I ,/^:. .,', ,Co
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I,,
,
,
,
,
F'
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
.
I
,
-' I I
,
I
*
I,
\
,
\
,
,
,I
,
,
,
'*
I
,
\
,,
,
I
.
,
,
.' I
,
.
,
,
,, I ,
^,.
,^..
,
,
. I
I
I
,
,
.
,
,
,.
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
I
,
' I
,
,
,
,
\
!P-
J
\
,
I
\
,
,
I
\
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
^ -.- -., -
\
\
~'~ " 4 ~
SECr3a
Bur5. RUBS^ SIMy on^
\
,
.\
.
^.^
\
J
^^
\
\
\
~
\
^
\
-,
.
^
.,.*
\
,
I
\
I
I
\
^
I
\ :=:^^\:.*';'^':L">', r",^>>
,,.I
I
I
\
I
V'
\
,.
J
I
J
-.-.,
\
I
F'
FC.
..
\
I
at :
I
\
,
API, Row:0:
.. .-
C, H.
,
0,0007
,
If
I
I
\
J
pyroz@?
J,
BOY ACcoR4GY . ^^'
J
., ,' .^!>',. - <:13\ I
I~ '*\"', 'I, , ' '3--'^' ". '~'
DWG STATUS . Dl^
I
,
,
I
,^, , , , ,
I
...,
.^
.,
^. ~
I
.,
.,
I
I
APPROVED PLANPLANNER . ,. . 00. ..:....................,
RC. ^;;'^:^!;^!*:^,... Date. ,::,.^^:;t:^^"
,
I
..
^^
\
\
./
,
,
,
I
,
,.
I
I
I
I
.
I
,
II./
I
I
I
:,
I
I
If^'I"^!I
,
I',.
,.
I
I
I
III
I
I
I
I
I,.
*
.,,F
I
..
- .
.-. -
.
co". In,"",
",^
~...
,
I
I
F
II
./I
,.
nTLE:
I
\
,I
I
.,
I
I
\
,
I
I
..
,
,.
Far Nori!I Holdings UrnitedSECT 38 B!k 5 Russell Survey District
I
,
I
*
II
SC, LE:
,..,
\
,
I
..
,.
II
\
\
DREDGE FILLAREA
~
1000
^
03a^
\
~^--~
^GIN^ PAPERSIZE A4
~\
JOB:
*.
CAD;
\
CUEifr REF:
NA
Colonso Triangle
13/1
SHEET NO;
10f 2
tQ:
V
a^
I
.
II
1',,, OS,
\
I
\\
\\\\
DSP, ^ " "': "" ""' blind (',,'AREA 3^00^n'
rid
\
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
. . . . . . . , . . . ,.,. . , . . . =.. . f , , * ,. ~
.- ,...,. . . .... .,
-~... J. .-.,
\
\
Cut off I
dr, b ,1, drab I<
\
>\
indrihd.rls,
I\I
II
I
I
II
II
I
I
I
I
II
IIII
II
\
^
\
DISPOSALAREA 21300^r, '
\\
FUTUREDISPOSAL
AREA 9201n'
\\
t rel. ,,, Ion pond
\
51.1, ^
\
Pond IVdune 66m'80.0 ^'r, *MB x tar, 1009Sri, . RL copyox. 2, innSPDUoy RL OPP, 0^. 3.01viCrO3t in. . OPProx. 4,011,Decd 910,093 50Z
\\
I
2 Secvlc" acrid. "jut coLPI, (09)C^^.-F. " 1091.4^5734.a^hen^I^1st^,'(19^)I^ a^. in^^
... ..,
.,;.
\
11I
\\
...'.*
,
.." I '
.- 11
..
I
I
Motto, a riser
Flogiing d. cult I, p.damLer*, g dale.
-, 50*rim minimum
~flexible joint 90.11edto "H ri, ".
PLANNER,
ROVED PLAN
...- For North Holdings'~'@135^^!^11^g:"Pi^POSol Areo-Slit Retention
RC. ,^^9;;{'^:...... D^e. .^,:^:^:;^^^
,:^.
. ;;:: I:'_ :~; ~., ..-
..
I'd
.,..........
"'^v^:.**;'Pi. :,:4,41'\
Spat*QVpoleeled ,jilt81". n A24
R inP
RIP RapProtection
t on tint
300, min count pipeof 5:3 god.
I 1:10o
C^a00
Pond
Rattingri pond^,.
10Aru. *"""
For Inc ,d
d. "*
"..=
O, "
Se*
""
"V20071:10@O
r"^.* 8219
9.1
513
369
f^ISI Gll^I ^CONSULTING
Northland Regional Council Resource Consent 2008/153501.
^;
P, ,,$,,",,, to Ifre Re3@,"re Min, ,, ge, ,re, ,I Act 1991, ,IDE Nort"fr, ,,,{ R^i@,,,,/ Cold"ci!("e, ^i, ,,!lier ,"//,,{ WE Co, ,,, ci/'? ,{@e, ^a. eby g, t, ,, t " RE, @,"re Co, ,, e, ,r ,@:
FAR NORTH HOLDINGS LIMITED, PO Box 7, 0PUA o241
To carry out the following activities at the area known as the "Golenso Triangle",State Highway I I, Opua, in the catchment of Kawakawa River, on Sec 38Kawakawa Parish Blk V Russell SD at or about location co-ordinates I70,007E6090738N.
Advice Note: All 100at!bn co-ordinates in this document refer to Geodetic Datum2000, New Zealand Transverse Mercator Prqjection.
(01) Deposit up to 3000 cubic metres per annum of dredged spoil and cleanfill toland.
(02) Divert and discharge contaminated water from the dredged spoil deposit areato an unnamed tributary of Kawakawa River on Lot I DP 183897.
Subject to the following existing arid changed conditions:
I The works shall be undertaken generally ill accordance with the following'
. The Richardson Stevens Consultants (, 996) Ltd plan entitled: "Far NorthHoldings, Dredging Disposal Area - Silt Retention Pond ; Ref: 8219;Sheet 31 dated July 2007 (attached); and
^I^,.^,./lob
D
^
@
,
e
co I, ,,
I
~
CON2008, , 5350,
I^
The Northern Civil Consulting Engineers Ltd plans entitled: ' Far NorthHoldings Limited, Sect 38 Blk 5 Russell Survey District - Dredge FillArea"; Ref 1311 ; Sheets I & 2; dated 01/02/07 (attached).
The Consent Holder shall notify the Council in writing of the date that theplacement of dredged spoil is to commence at least one week beforehand.
The Consent Holder shall, within SIX weeks of the date of commencement ofthis consent, lodge with the Council for certification, an Erosion and SedimentControl Plan (ESCP). No disposal of dredged spoil shall commence until theCouncil has certified the ESCP. The ESCP shall in dude, but riot be limitedto, the following:
ReinvE, ,BER analRERS^121 DOOM. ""Jd,
t
(a)
(b)
Design details for the erosion and sediment controls, including thecalculations used to size these control structures;
Diagrams of a scale suitable for on-site reference, showing thelocations of all erosion and sediment control structures/measures, andcatchment boundaries for the sediment control structures;
The commencement and completion dates for the implementation ofthe proposed erosion and sediment controls;Measures to prevent spillage of fuel. oil and similar contaminants;
Measures to control the effects of dust;
Surface covering to minimise sediment runoff following completion ofdredged spoil disposal;
Means of ensuring contractor compliance with the ESCP;
The name and contact telephone number of the person responsible formonitoring and maintaining all silt detention structures; andContingency provisions for the potential effects of largelhigh intensityrain storm events.
For compliance purposes, the "Erosion and sediment controls"required by part (a) shall be designed in accordance with theprinciples and guidelines contained within the document entitled"Erosion and Sediment Control - Guidelines for Land DisturbingActivities" AUGkland Regional Council Technical Publication No. 90,dated March I 999.
The Consent Holder shall carry out the disposal of dredged spoils inaccordance with the certified ESCP. The Consent Holder may review andamend the ESCP, in consultation with the Council, at any time, during theterm of these consents. The amendment to the ESCP shall not take effectuntil certification of the Council has been obtained for the amendment.
The Consent Holder shall provide a copy of the certified ESCP to:
Attention: Property Portfolio AnalystThe Office of Treaty SettlementsP O Box 919
Wellington 6140
The Consent Holder shall adequately maintain the stormwater system so thatit operates effectiveIy and efficiently. This maintenance shall include, but notbe limited to, the maintenance of the free flow of water within all swale drainsand the regular removal of sediment from the sill trap. Any maintenancework that is considered necessary by a suitably qualified and experiencedperson for the effective operation. of the stormwater system shall becompleted by the dale stated by the Council in writing.
To minimise the discharge of suspended solids, no dredged spoil disposalshall be carried out between I May and 30 September in any year without theprior written approval of the Council.
The final fill platform shall not exceed a height of RL 3.5 metres above meansea level.
.
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(9)
(h)
(i)
371
4
5
6
7
8
q
,
9 Notwithstanding any other conditions, the exercise of this consent shall notcause the water quality in the unnamed tributary of Kawakawa River, asmeasured at the downstream boundary of Lot I DP 483897 to exceed thefollowing:
,
.
372
H
Dissolved ox an
Determinand
,
Total co 61
Total leadTotal Zinc
In addition, the exercise of this consent shall not cause any of the followingeffects in the unnamed tributary of Kawakawa River, as measured at theboundary of Lot I DP 183897:
(a) The production of conspicuous oil or grease films, scums or foams,floatable or suspended materials, or emissions of objectionable odour;There shall be no destruction of natural aquatic life by reason of a(b)concentration of toxic substances;
(c) The natural colour and clarity of the waters shall riot be changed to aconspicuous extent,
Notwithstanding any other conditions of these consents, the discharge shallnot cause the concentration of metals in sediments, as measured at or
railway culvert into thebeyond any point 20 metres downstream of theCoastal Marine Area, to exceed any of the following:
Not be chan ed b more than 0.2 H units.Not reduced below 80% salutation.1.3 milli rains et cubic metre4.4 milli
Concentration
15.0 milli rains er cubic metrerains
to
er cubic metre
Total arsenic
Metal
Total cadmium
Total chromium
Total co er
Total lead
Maximum allowable concentrationmilli rams or kilo ram, d wei ht
Total zinc
Advice Note, ' The results obtained from sampl^hg need to be comparedwith the quality of 'background" sediment samples correctedwithin the Kawakawa River, as outlined in the monitoringprogramme specified in Schedule i.
The Consent Holder shall monitor the discharge in accordance with theattached Monitoring Programme (Schedule I ). The Consent Holder maymake changes to the attached Monitoring Programme (Schedule I ) with theprior written certification of the Council.
Advi'ce Note: This condition does not preolude the Counci'I from monitoringthe di^charge at any time.
11
20
1.5
80
65
50
200
Rn, ,iruFMRFR mainFV1^011 21 Doerb .dare_I'D
.
12 To minimise sediment loss, all bare areas of land created by the exercise ofthese consents shall be effective Iy stabilised against erosion and sedimentloss; within two months of their construction for the outside face of all earthbund areas, and by 30 June on all other areas in each calendar year, exceptduring the year when dredging spoil from the Paihia Waterfront project orapproved and exercised) is deposited. Stabilisation measures shall includetopsoiling and establishing with suitable vegetation* to achieve not less thanan 80% groundcover, the placement of rock aggregate, or covering withmulch or other erosion protection material.
Prior to the commencement of filling operations, the Consent Holder shallprovide a stabilised construction entrance onto Be aufort Street, to prevent thetracking of spoil or debris onto offsite road surfaces. The stabilisedconstruction entrance shall be maintained throughout the duration of fillingoperations.
The Consent Holder's operations shall not give rise to any discharge ofcontaminants to air (dust or odour) at or beyond the legal boundary of theproperty, which is deemed by a suitably trained and experiencedEnforcement Officer of the Council to be noxious, dangerous, offensive orobjectionable to such an extent that it has, or is likely to have, an adverseeffect on the environment. The Consent Holder shall ensure suitablemitigation and control measures are available at all times to manage potentialodour and dust problems.
The Consent Holder shall, for the purposes of adequately monitoring theconsent as required under Section 35 of the Act, on becoming aware of anycontaminant associated with the Consent Holder's operations escapingotherwise than in conformity with this consent:
(a) Immediately take such action, or execute such work as may benecessary, to stop and/or contain such escape; and
(b) Immediately notify the Council by telephone of an escape ofcontaminant; and
(0) Take all reasonable steps to remedy or mitigate any adverse effectson the environment resulting from the escape; and
(d) Report to the Council in writing within one week on the cause of theescape of the contaminant and the steps taken or being taken toeffective Iy control or prevent such escape.
The Council may, in accordance with Section 128 of the ResourceManagement Act 4991, serve notice on the Consent Holder of its intention toreview the conditions of this consent, Such notice may be served annuallyduring the month of June, The review may be initiated for any one or more ofthe following purposes:
373
I
13
14
15
16
n " .. n, ,. . ^ n ,"n, . n H. ,, R. I a, ,t. ., u. ,.". 1.1.
,
(a) To deal with any adverse effects on the environment that may arisefrom the exercise of the consent and which it is appropriate to dealwith at a later stage, or to deal with any such effects followingassessment of the results of the monitoring of the consent and/or as aresult of the Council's monitoring of the state of the environment in the
To require the adoption of the best practicable option to remove orreduce any adverse effect on the environment.
To provide for compliance with rules in any regional plan that hasbeen made operative since the commencement of the consent.To deal with any inadequacies or inconsistencies the Councilconsiders there to be in the conditions of the consent, following theestablishment of the activity the subject of the consent.
(e) To deal with any material inaccuracies that may in future be found inthe information made available with the application. (Notice may beserved at any time for this reason. )
co To change existing, or impose new limits on conditions,
The Consent Holder shall meet all reasonable costs of any such review.
30 NOVEMBER 2019EXPIRY DATE:
(b)
(0)
(d)
374
area.
ISSUED at Whangarei this Twenty-eighth day of August 2008
,,<.. . ^c,t:^;. D L Roke
Consents Manager
Rc novaiBeR 2002 iREvisioN 21 00,110, tr, ,
.
SCHEDULE I
MONITORING PROGRAMME
The Consent Holder, or its authorised agent, shall monitor this consent inaccordance with this monitoring programme.
WATER AND SEDIMENT QUALITYI.
Water Quality1.1
Routine Monitoring
Triplicate* samples of water being discharged at the downstreamboundary of Lot I DP 183897, during, or immediately following, aperiod of moderate to he ary rainfall (greater than 15 min of rainfall Inany hour) shall be collected on at least two occasions each year. Allwater samples shall be collected, on the same day and preferablywithin the first hour of significant rainfall so as to collect the "first flush"of contaminants. Due to tidal influences on the stormwater
discharges, samples shall be collected as close as possible to thetime of low tide so as to achieve a true representation of stormwaterquality.
Samples shall be analysed for the following:
. total suspended solids;
' total copper;
. total lead; and
. total zinc.
Background Monitoring
Triplicate* water samples shall also be collected prior to thecommencement of earthworks and filling operations, These samplesshall be used for comparison and shall be considered to be indicativeof "background" water quality within the drainage system.
'Triplicate sampling shall involve collection of three separate samplestaken at least nine minutes apart during the same sampling event.Analysis shall be conducted on a composite sample made up of equalvolumes of each triplicate sample.
375
,
rip run, Eti9ED ,"I, ,PanelAN a,
.
,
,
1.2 Sediments
Three sediment samples shall be collected from the Kawakawa Riverat around a 20 metre radius from the discharge point (railway culvertoutlet). These samples shall be taken prior to the commencement ofany filling earthworks and shall be considered to be indicative of"background" sediment quality within Kawakawa River.
The samples collected from shall be composited and analysed for thefollowing:
. Sediment grain size characteristics runes < 63 microns; sands <2000 microns; grovels etc. > 2000 micronsl;
. total arsenic;
. total cadmium;
. total chromium;
" total copperj
. total lead ; and
. total zinc.
Sediment samples shall thereafter be collected at least annually aftera prolonged dry period, and analysed for the above mentionedparameters.
376
2.
2.1
FIELD MEASUREMENTS, RECORDS, SAMPLE COLLECTION,SAMPLE TRANSPORT, DETECTION LIMITS, AND LABORATORYREQUIREMENTS
Records
A record of rainfall conditions preceding and during sampling shall bekept. The rainfall recorder site to be used shall be agreed to by theNorthland Regional Council.
Sample Collection
All samples collected as part of this monitoring programme shall becollected using standard methods and approved containers,
Sample Transport
All samples collected as part of this monitoring programme shall betransported in accordance with standard procedures and under chainof custody to the laboratory,
2.2
2.3
RCMEMBER 2002jRamON a
,DOS Mulchc. Id.
.
I
2.4 Detection Limits
The detection limits for the analysis of metals in sediment and watersamples collected shall be equivalent to, or better than, thosespecified below:
377
Total co er
Metal
Total lead
2.5
Total zinc
Total arsenic
Total cadmium
Total chromium
Sediment samplesmilli rains er kilo ram
Laboratory Requirements
All samples collected as part of this monitoring programme shall beanalysed at a laboratory with registered quality assurance procedures(see definition below), and all analyses shall be conducted usingstandard methods.
Registered quality assurance procedures are procedures that ensurethat the laboratory meets good management practices and wouldinclude registrations such as ISO 9000, ISO Guide 25, and Ministry ofHealth Accreditation,
2
0.4
4
2
0.1
Water samplesmilli rams er cubic metre
2
1.00.2
2.0
NIANIA
N/A
ReinVEklBER 90021REM^, 21
I
I\,,.,. rim. I, I.
\
.
PLA
NS
@,.
.
.
.
,
,
,,
'I
I.I^ "* '
\ a
\\\ .. "
\, *., 1
1
,.,..
, ' ".-
". "
'I-\
p , V
' I, - '. . ,' ,,.,,. .,/ ,. , ..,,. .. ,
.,*\. jib-', ,. I , ,.
.
a."
*
.
J
,
,
- .-
I^., _, * 0
01
1
,^ Io11 I
,
L
.,
.. .,. . J
I
*
.
..
,
\
I'
I
^,**, e. \
8,
.
\ ..
00
6 '
b^; ^
~>
..
\
*
.
..,
.
.
,U
t
,
^.
,..
.
\.
In c
o
I
,
O, =
'a a
Z I, ,
Q *e
2.0
0
.
*
^-
It, !^o1
.,\
\
\
.
<^:. .' ^s
I*;^. *
*
CD
"
Q
'*. ' ~ 'vS
q
I, ^.., ^
^
.
L,.,.
F
Co
.~
6
.,
.
s.
.. .~
-^ ,-
a
,,.
~ $
3
O, g
\
.
11!
.
,I
a@
*
\
E. "
o1 ! 61 ,^..:, ipit: ; ^; 9O
I a!Z
18
@)^
.,..
\~
.
Rql^^a
^q;!R
E^9
0N
?I
.
..
.
.\
.
^is>
\.
Q<I"
^
*
.\
*
^n
\
.
..
~t
a
,.
\
.~Qa
~~
*
..
^Q
,. j$
u:
818
,.
,
\
a:
<. 5a&
.\
\'*
,
\
*
1<I
Doe 110 ., I!;Gild.
^;:)
,
\~.
*!,*,,^
^^
xi, ^
a^a^I
tt.
65^g
,
J
;;.
II
11
.^:
11 I
\. ..,. .//\ .,
I!I I. I', ?
' ^^' ;!;' ^ '., ., ,
I;^
*
^;, v.
^ SI15
V^
^!11.
un
co
;:
I^,.
=n
> .,
*,
13 "A 11
It
03
15;
Uru
' '
I . ^;,; " ;
a"
14
, I
,I^
RC
, mare
ER
2c0
2jR
^121
^ I
;^Ir̂*
!1-'-^,^I<
5 ^
LL
: <5
,.
^
6LS
12D
oc I^., in00.1u.
GCD ="!",
IP. S
ZooC Alit
H
TPO
"5:0
,',. O
q"u, "" ,"a
pubd 1,013,1816g '
a, ,,^ ^ PTT0;3~u^57^'!I^;:'^;^^,! 11!s~ 0^-!v 1030^:c:In 51^;613^:;:: t, u, ,;.,,,,*,,.,,,,*;,;,,,"^e, ,* - ~," "am , SI5U!PPI-I L!^,::3N 1:3. .! 11"";;;^^I!,\';,;;^'^'^^;.,^; * ;^^ ---^.- -^,^-.-. - - ~.-^^.^--.-,~--
,90.3 2:5 toad!d 10n, .* uus$00C
I'\"^
co:;^***"\I 1,1340 I
do^ d!*
CUI:g it *udu!u
SI5U!PPI. I L!^"::3N 1:3,1
II
>CV EQPjB
;;;!" papalowl Koni. ,S
I'
^
^
bills
I^. SI '
a, <I 1,033p Bun'ou
-EQ, aj, LLDrj
".!, ran o19,100. ,6IL:!=! all^XS!I.URU!L:!", untrueCSl~aa*.. p 6,313jg. ,p
,:*
Ia VB^!V I
\ I
14n, , I ,,,,,, ,,.,'\,' a;^^:^!c ,,'
I' "~:::~:~>\., I'" "^^I; \;' I ' ' ' "'*,' !:\2 I ' ' ' "\*,~ ,,,,, ,, 6' " IF
.
roc coop:= 9000wo'r to, ddo TB ian, a
LOOT '"0, ,C* \a Kg"1:8:5BUD'Z 're". 3 itU 3.09
6,301 cosl X .^" ", g PSagr"'99 ''riP, '
. 91, ,6
<6(I) pur, ,
,,'' *" """ """"' '
.L
pu, 6 ., ONu, 13, I
I
I
,/"""" Inap
' 11" , ^
,, LCDOC
I EUDOOSI C V38v
I
I
II
. .
I
I
,
I
"I, I
.
b^
I'/
II
11I
I
I
^,g
,
I
I
,,//.
I, '/, ,
III
S'
^,Q
I
I
I
II
,
I
I
I
I
CA>CoQ
a
.^15
;^
"r.
^.
Q"
381
f
^:
Colenso Triangle - Opua, Earthworks and sediment control Plan
^ S 11 G I^^ TCONSULTING
RC CON 2003/15350, .
*
..
,
^.ACENZ
Emuil: engineeTs@richnrdsonslevens. conz
I9 July 2007
Consents ManagerNorthland Regional Cou ncilPO Box 909WHANGAREl
Attention: David Roke
382
Richardson feversCo"^"If. "I^* 11996j
Dear Sir
Corenso Triangle - OpuaEarthworks and sediment control Plan RC CON 2003/153501
Enclosed is the Earthworks and sediment control Plan required as a condition of the aboveconsent.
We also wish to commence this filling operation on August I 2007. Clause 7 of theconsent restricts the dates for spoil disposal to I Oct - 30 April unless written approvalfrom NRC is obtained.
Please advise us of your approval of the above ESCP and amended dates for disposal asabove.
Lid
Gront Stove usB. E, At!. P. E. N. Z to, * Shad, ,DJ
Chartsred Professional Engineer
Sieve Turnera. e, in. I. P, e. Nz. Ichi! 5110dw. 11
Churler. d Professibnal Eng;ricer
,
Yours faithfully
Grant Stovens
RICHARDSON STEVENS CONSULTANTS (1996) LTD
File: 8219
\
.
.
.
^I^.ACENZ
Email: engineers@, ichordsorisievens. conz
19 July 2007
383
Richardson SlevensConsultonis
Earthworks and sediment control Plan
Colenso Triangle - OpuaEarthworks and sediment control Plan RC CON 20031153501
I. General
This Construction Management Plan is provided to comply with condition 3 of ResourceConsent RC CON 2003/153501
Further detail will be provided following appointment of a contractor for the works.
Earthworks volumes of 3000m'/ year are expected for this project. An Earthworks Consentis- riot required from NRC as the site is not classified as erosion prone land and thequantity is less than 5000m'.
Slit control in accordance with TP90 will be specified as part of the contract, This is due tothe close proximity of the Bay of Islands and potential to discharge sediment if adequatemeasures are not in place.
Close contact shall be maintained with NRC monitoring staff to ensure they are aware ofthe site and measures proposed.
2. Site ManagerIan Boddington - Far North Holdings Ltd
3. Construction Methodology
. Construct bund around perimeter using existing materials onsite.
. Disposal area 2 & 3 have granular material cover by using material onsite
. Construct sediment ponds in accordance with ARC TP90.
. Form contour drain to silt trap
. Install super SIIt fences
. Ensure access Road to disposal area is formed with compacted AP40.
. Work on filling Disposal area I first
(1996) Ltd
Gront StovensB. E, ALl. P. E. N. Z ichiC StockiraU
Chartered Pro^33ioi, o1 Engineer
Sieve TurnerB. e. . ALi. P. E. N. z. Icha. SI"at, ^I
Chartered Professiono! Bigine. r
,
Earthworks and sediment control Plan - Colenso Triangle2
8249
,
. Supply, Place and compact a minimum of loomm of AP40 on completed area beforecommencement on Disposal area 2. Topsoil and grass other areas as soon aspracticable.
Machinery hydraulic excavator, traxcavator/bobcat, trucks, roller, watercart.
4. Quality AssuranceIan Baddington FNH & Richardson Stevens Consultants will be responsible for theimplementation of the monitoring programme as per the consent conditions,
Samples will be taken and sent to an IANZ laboratory for testing and reporting.
384
5. Sediment control
Far North Holdings have a responsibility to ensure their development complies with theResource Management Act and the District Plan.
a) All site works shall be undertaken with the application and maintenance of recognisedmethods and techniques for the retention of sediment on site and the prevention ofdischarges of sediment off-site or into stormwater systems.
b) All site works shall be undertaken with the application of runoff control measuresisolating the site works and related activities from the surrounding land and preventingflows of stormwater into, across or escaping the area being worked.
c) Vehicle movements to and from the site or location where site works activities are beingundertaken shall not result in any material being deposited on a public road creating ahazard or a nuisance to road users,
6, DesignSand soils less than 8% clay and less than 40% slit.
Catchment area = 0,6570m2= o, 0066m2I% of area
Sediment retention ponds capacity = 66m3
Live storage volume 70% = 46m'Dead storage volume 30% = 20m'
Pond dimensions 15m x 5m. I ,Om deep
Use Level spreader to spread inflow velocities and allow rapid dissipation of inflowenergies,
Use concrete riser decant system to act as primary emergency spillway.
A Safety fence needs to be erected around the pond.
7. CommencementICOmpletion date of sediment control pondsI - 10 August 2007
Earthworks and sediment control Plan - Golenso Triangle3
8219
8. Measures to prevent oillfuel spillageNo special measures are planned.
9. Dust suppressionThe main practice used to control dust on earthworks sites will be application of water tokeep the soil moisture high enough to prevent dust generation. The need for usingwatercarts will be assessed on a daily basis by the site manager.
Contact Numbers shall be given to neighbours within 300m radius so any dust complaintsarising from the works can be dealt with promptiy.
385
Suitace covering to minimise sediment runoffto.
When disposal area I is completed this area will be capped with an aggregate layer tominimise sediment runoff.
1.1. Means of ensuring Contractor compliance with the ESCP.Engineer controlled contract Daily monitoring by the Engineers representative.
I2. Contact names and numbers
The work is currently out to tender and the person responsible for monitoring andmaintaining all silt detention structures will be advised
13. Contingency planBy reducing the active area of fill to 4400m' and implementing the ESCP with silt fencesand sediment retention ponds the site should cause no problems during high intensityrainfall events.
Ian Boddington (FNH) will inspect the site before and during any of these events toascertain if any additional works will be necessary,
Prepared by:
M Taylor G Stovens
Projects Engineer Chartered Professional Engineer
Richardson Stevens Consultants (1996) Ltd
Approved by:
Earthworks and sediment control Plan - Colenso Triangle4
8249
<^;"
<>
>
DISPOSALAREA I5000m a
\\
\\
cut off I
droin I
\I\\
DISPOSALAREA 55000m 3
\I\
.>
I
II
II
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
II
I
I
II
I
I
I
\\\
DISPOSALAREA 23000m a
\
\
super silt fence
\
\
\
FU TU R E
DISPOSALAREA 920ms
\
\
it retention pond
\
\
\
\
Pond IVolume 66m s
\
Bose 5m wide x 15m long2.0mBose RL OPProx.
Soilwov Rl. abbrox_ 3.0m
\\\\
bund (typ)
I
III
I
III
Moriho!e riser
F100ting decont typedewotering device
-1509mm minimum
-flexible joint groutedto MH riser
,^\<<^
,-.^bose level
Sitt Retention Pond D(
" r ". ..',. . A ' ' 'I ..',', ., J...,.
* .,... ..'.. ~ ,. .~*..~
. .,. ~ , ... , .. ~. ....
.
C, ,
O,
