Report for an application for resource

consent under the Resource Management

Act 1991
Restricted discretionary activity

1. Application description
Application number(s): LUC60413579 (s9 land use consent)
WAT60419009 (s14 water permit)
Applicant: Brigham Creek Business Park Ltd
Site address: 18 Westpoint Drive, Hobsonville
Legal description: Lot 901 DP 502477
Site area: 4.4263 hectares
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)
Zoning and precinct: Business - Light Industry
Overlays, controls, special features, Precinct
designations, etc:
Hobsonville Corridor Precinct, Sub-Precinct C
Overlay
Natural Resources: High-Use Aquifer Management
Areas - Kumeu Waitemata Aquifer
Controls
Macroinvertebrate Community Index –
Rural/Exotic/Urban
Designations
Road Widening - Hobsonville Road – ID 1467,
Designations, Auckland Transport
Airspace Restriction Designations - ID 4311, Defence
purposes - protection of approach and departure paths
(Whenuapai Air Base), Minister of Defence
Notice of requirement
Hobsonville Road Widening

Page 1 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

2. Locality Plan

Figure 1: Locality plan. Source: Auckland Council GIS

3. The proposal, site and locality description

Proposal
The proposal involves the construction of seven new industrial warehouses with ancillary office,
car parking, yards, accessways, signage and landscaping. Four of the buildings will be
constructed on the upper platform with frontage to Hobsonville Road, while three will be
constructed on the lower platform fronting Westpoint Drive. The floor areas and car parking
numbers for each of the buildings are summarised in Table 1 below.

Page 2 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 • Buildings A, B, and C, fronting Westpoint Drive, are each provided with individual vehicle
crossings to Westpoint Drive, with car parking fronting the road. Buildings D, E, F and G
are located on the upper platform. Buildings G and F have access to Laurenson Road
only, via the shared access. Buildings D and E have access from the shared accessway
as well as direct access onto Hobsonville Road. Buildings D and E share a vehicle
crossing onto Hobsonville Drive that serves the yards of both warehouses and the
Building E car park. Building D also has an individual vehicle crossing onto Hobsonville
Drive serving the car park.

• Each building will be provided with two wall mounted signs on the elevations visible from
the streets. The wall mounted signs will measure up to 30m2 each. Buildings A, B, and
C will have additional 10m2 wall mounted signs attached to the office annexures.
Buildings D and E fronting Hobsonville Road will be provided with a 3.0m (h) by 1.6
metre (w) plinth sign alongside the Hobsonville Road crossings. Buildings F and G will
be provided with the same style of plinth sign along the shared access frontage.

• Each building will be provided with a separate storm filter to treat yard and car park
runoff in accordance with the requirements of the underlying stormwater discharge
consent. In order to control overland flow, a nib will be placed atop the north-eastern end
of the retaining wall separating the building platforms

• Earthworks of 22,100m³ over 3.7462hectares.

Site and surrounding environment description

The site is a currently vacant with a retaining wall approximately 5m in height having
constructed and earthworks undertaken through the underlying subdivision consent. An
extension to Westpoint Drive along the northern boundary has been constructed but has not yet
been vested in Council.

The site forms the final stage (Stage 4) of the Brigham Creek Business Park, with Stages 1-3 to
the south-west of the site largely completed with (mainly) warehouse style developments.

An unmanned Gull Service station has been previously separated from and abuts the site, with
frontage to Hobsonville Road. Land on the opposite side of Hobsonville Road, to the south-east
is characterised by low density residential development. Hobsonville RSA and land used for
horticultural purposes abuts the north-eastern boundary. A stormwater pond, established as part
of the wider development, is located to the north-west of the site on the opposite side of the
Westpoint Drive extension.

Page 3 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Figure 2: The site as existing and constructed under consent LUC-2015-31 and SUB-2015-33
with retaining wall, road extension and COAL.

4. Background
Specialist Input

The proposal has been reviewed and assessed by the following specialists:

• Ethan Fu – Development Engineer

• Sam Shumane – Traffic Engineer
• Shahriar Tehrani – Auckland Transport Development Planner
• Chantel Clayton – Urban and Landscape Design Specialist
• Shanya Chand – Regional Earthworks Specialist
• Richards Simonds – Consultant Groundwater Specialist

Consent History

The subdivision of the site and surrounding area was enabled by LUC-2015-31 and SUB-2015-
33. The consent enables the further subdivision of subject site (Lot 901), into 12 separate
allotments. The Commonly Owned Access Lot (COAL) and services (including connections) for
Page 4 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)
 this subdivision have been completed and the applicant has lodged for 224c with council. At the
time of writing this report, titles had not been issued for this site and so the site is still technically
considered as per the parent title 18 Westpoint Drive.

The subdivision lot boundaries do not align with the buildings proposed under this consent. The
applicant has confirmed that the subdivision will proceed, and a further application will be
lodged to adjust the boundaries, remove the COAL and provide for appropriate easements.

The applicant may also be required to apply for variations to any consents which apply to the
new lots if the conditions cannot be met. The applications are required to be approved before
any building works can proceed under this consent. The applicant has proffered an Augier
condition of consent requiring the approval of a new subdivision consent that removes the
COAL, redundant easements, and creates new easements as necessary to accommodate the
development prior to the commencement of construction of any foundations.

Consent Notice

Consent Notice 10729140.3 (registered on the Certificates of Title) contains ongoing matters
relating to the site, requiring an on-site stormwater management system that meets the
requirements of the Tenth Schedule, as follows:

This follows the requirements of Stormwater Discharge Consent REG-2014-525.

Contamination

The applicant has provided email confirmation from Joel Chisholm, Senior Monitoring
Inspector that the remediation was undertaken in accordance with the Remedial Action
Plan and the low-level contaminated soil on the site was spread throughout the
stormwater reserve. A Site Validation Report dated September 2015 was provided to
confirm this placement, additionally, the applicant has proffered a condition of consent
to provide evidence of compliance with these conditions prior to works commencing.

Road Widening Designation and Notice of Requirement

The site is subject to Auckland Transport Designation 1467 providing for the widening of
Hobsonville Road. The designation extends into the site 13 metres from the centreline of the
road and 2.88 metres from the front boundary. In addition to the designation, a Notice of

Page 5 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Requirement (‘NoR’) for the widening of Hobsonville Road was submitted to Auckland Council in
March 2012.

The proposal had been reviewed by Auckland Transport and approval under Section 176(1)(B)
and Section 178(2) of the RMA has been provided for the proposed works within the
designation and NoR footprints and as such the proposal is not considered to prevent or hinder
the NoR.

The proposal has considered the future road widening and buildings have been set back from
the designation sufficiently to maintain the front yard setback and planting as required by
Standard I603.6.8.

Airspace Restriction Designations - ID 4311

The site location is within Minister of Defence designation 4311. The separation between the
Obstacle Limitation Surface identified in designation 4311 and ground level is approximately
30m. Any permanent and temporary structures (including construction equipment such as
cranes) must not breach that height without prior written approval from the NZDF.

NZDF has reviewed the application and has recommended conditions to ensure that the risks of
bird strike, glare and structure height is mitigated. The conditions include specifications for roof
treatment to avoid attracting birds as birds (roof gradient requirements or other measures such
as netting), lighting and glare conditions and a structure limit and have been included in the
decision to ensure that the designation is sufficiently considered.

5. Reasons for the application

Resource consent is required for the following reasons:

Land use consent (s9) – LUC60413579

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)

District land use (operative plan provisions)

Hobsonville Corridor Precinct Sub-Precinct C

• New buildings or parts of buildings that are located on sites fronting Hobsonville Road
and subject to building height restrictions area as shown on I603.10.3 are a restricted
discretionary activity under rule I603.4.3(A31).
Transport
• The proposal involves accessory parking, loading and access that does not meet the
parking and access standards and is a restricted discretionary activity under rule
E27.4.1(A2).
o A vehicle Access Restriction applies and vehicle crossings must not be
constructed or used to provide vehicle access across that part of a site
boundary which has frontage to an arterial road required by Standard
E27.6.4.1(3)(a). Two vehicle crossings are proposed onto Hobsonville Road,
which is an Arterial Road.

Page 6 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 o The two crossings on Laurenson Road are separated by 4.6m where the
minimum permitted separation distance is 6 metres required by Standard
E27.6.4.2(T146).
o A 10.2 metre wide vehicle crossing is provided where the maximum permitted
width is 9 metres (Standard E27.6.4.3(T155)); and
o The accessways to Buildings A, B and C are provided with a platform of 1 in 16
where the maximum permitted gradient is 1 in 20 (Standard E27.6.4.4.(3));

• Under rule E27.4.1 (A5) consent is required as a restricted discretionary activity where
a Vehicle Access Restriction (VAR) applies under the standard E27.6.4.1(3).
o The proposal involves construction of a new vehicle crossing on site where
VAR applies, in this case Hobsonville Road, being an arterial road.

Land Disturbance - District

• To undertake general earthworks of 37,462m2 and 17,500 m3, as the earthworks are
greater than 2,500 m2 and 2,500m3 in the light industry zone, is a restricted
discretionary activity under rules E.12.4.1(A6) and (A10) respectively.
Signage
• Comprehensive development signage requires resource consent as a restricted
discretionary activity under rule E23.4.1(A53)
Regional land use (operative plan provisions)

• To undertake general earthworks of 34,462m² as the earthworks are greater than 2,500
m² within the Sediment Control Protection Area is a restricted discretionary activity
under rule E11.4.1(A9).

Note: The applicant had initially applied under E11.4.1 (A4) however following recent
interpretation regarding permanent stormwater ponds the reason for consent has been
updated.

Water permit (s14) – WAT60419009

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)

Regional land use (operative plan provisions)

• Dewatering or groundwater level control associated with a groundwater diversion

authorised as a restricted discretionary activity under the Unitary Plan, not meeting
permitted activity standards or is not otherwise listed is a restricted discretionary
activity under rule E7.4.1(A20).
o The groundwater diversion for the proposed retaining wall will be for greater
than 30 days and beyond the construction period ((E7.6.1.6 (2 & 3)).

Page 7 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 • The diversion of groundwater caused by any excavation, (including trench) or tunnel
that does not meet the permitted activity standards or not otherwise listed is restricted
discretionary activity under rule E7.4.1(A28).
o The groundwater diversion for the proposed retaining wall will be for greater
than 10 days ((E7.6.1.10 (1d)).

The reasons for consent are considered together as a restricted discretionary activity overall.

6. Status of the resource consents

Where a proposal:

• consists of more than one activity specified in the plan(s); and

• involves more than one type of resource consent or requires more than one resource
consent; and
• the effects of the activities overlap;

the activities may be considered together.

Where different activities within a proposal have effects which do not overlap, the activities will
be considered separately.

In the instance, the effects of the proposed resource consents will overlap and thus they are
considered together as a restricted discretionary activity overall.

7. Public notification assessment (sections 95A, 95C-95D)

Section 95A specifies the steps the council is to follow to determine whether an application is to
be publicly notified. These steps are addressed in the statutory order below.

Step 1: mandatory public notification in certain circumstances

No mandatory notification is required as:

• the applicant has not requested that the application is publicly notified (s95A(3)(a));
• there are no outstanding or refused requests for further information (s95C and s95A(3)(b));
and
• the application does not involve any exchange of recreation reserve land under s15AA of the
Reserves Act 1977 (s95A(3)(c)).

Step 2: if not required by step 1, public notification precluded in certain

circumstances
The application is not precluded from public notification as:

• the activities are not subject to a rule or national environmental standard (NES) which
precludes public notification (s95A(5)(a)); and
• the application does not exclusively involve one or more of the activities described in
s95A(5)(b).

Page 8 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Step 3: if not precluded by step 2, public notification required in certain
circumstances
The application is not required to be publicly notified as the activities are not subject to any rule
or a NES that requires public notification (s95A(8)(a)).

The following assessment addresses the adverse effects of the activities on the environment, as
public notification is required if the activities will have or are likely to have adverse effects on the
environment that are more than minor (s95A(8)(b)).

Only those effects that relate to matters that are within the council’s discretion under the rules
are considered in this assessment. These matters are:

• I603.8.1 (1), (2) Matters of discretion

• E27.8.1 (9), (12) Matters of discretion
• E12.8.1 (1) Matters of discretion
• E23.8.1 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) Matters of discretion
• E11.8.1 (1) Matters of discretion
• E7.8.1(1), (4), (6) Matters of discretion

No other effects have been taken into account in this assessment.

Adverse effects assessment (sections 95A(8)(b) and 95D)

Effects that must be disregarded

Effects on persons who are owners and occupiers of the land in, on or over which the
application relates, or of land adjacent to that land

The council is to disregard any effects on the persons who own or occupy the land in, on, or
over which the activity will occur, and on persons who own or occupy any adjacent land
(s95D(a)). The land adjacent to the subject site is listed in the following table:

Table 1
Address
19 Westpoint Drive
32 Westpoint Drive
4 Laurenson Road
108 Hobsonville Road
112 Hobsonville Road
114 Hobsonville Road
177 Brigham Creek Road
45 Suncrest Drive
299 Hobsonville Road
301 Hobsonville Road
307 Hobsonville Road
309 Hobsonville Road
311 Hobsonville Road
313 Hobsonville Road
315 Hobsonville Road
317 Hobsonville Road
319 Hobsonville Road
Page 9 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)
 321 Hobsonville Road

Figure 3: Map of adjacent properties – subject site indicated with red dot.

Any effect on a person who has given written approval to the application

No persons have provided their written approval.

Effects that may be disregarded

Permitted baseline

The permitted baseline refers to the effects of permitted activities on the subject site. The
permitted baseline may be taken into account and the council has the discretion to disregard
those effects where an activity is not fanciful. In this case the permitted baseline is new
buildings within the Hobsonville Corridor Precinct, except where they are located on site fronting
Hobsonville Road and subject to building height restriction.

Page 10 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Assessment
Receiving environment

The receiving environment beyond the subject site includes permitted activities under the
relevant plans, lawfully established activities (via existing use rights or resource consent), and
any unimplemented resource consents that are likely to be implemented. The effects of any
unimplemented consents on the subject site that are likely to be implemented (and which are
not being replaced by the current proposal) also form part of this reasonably foreseeable
receiving environment. This is the environment within which the adverse effects of this
application must be assessed.

The receiving environment comprises of land to the north-east and south-west of the subject
site which is zoned Business – Light Industry and is in varying stages of development, generally
being undertaken from west to east. Hobsonville School is located approximately 180m to the
west within this zone. To the north-west is the Upper Harbour Motorway and on and off ramps to
Brigham Creek Road. To the south-east on the opposite site of Hobsonville Road is residentially
zoned land, immediately adjacent to Hobsonville Road, this land is zoned Mixed Housing Urban,
with some lower intensity zone to the south-east.

Adverse effects

Buildings, development and signage

The proposal has been reviewed by Chantel Clayton, Council’s Landscape Architect
who provides the following assessment:

• The proposal interfaces with three street frontages being Westpoint Drive,
Laurenson Road, and Hobsonville Road. Of the seven new warehouses four of
them will front Hobsonville Road which requires development within Hobsonville
sub-precinct C to provide a good amenity interface with the residential
properties on the opposite side of Hobsonville Road.

• The design, location and scale is appropriate for the locale for the following
reasons:

o The ancillary offices demonstrate design articulation, and will feature

curtain glazing and a differing materiality from the warehousing.

o The warehouses will be clad in a pre-cast concrete and profiled metal,

with profiled metal roofing. The metal will be finished in a dark recessive
colour. The building interface is not anticipated to be in high contrast
with the residential properties along Hobsonville Road.

o Columnar tree species are proposed along all road frontages, including
Hobsonville Road. The trees are anticipated to achieve mature heights
that will assist in softening the bulk and height of the development
through changing seasonal visual amenity for the residential properties
along Hobsonville Road.

• The comprehensive development signage is of an appropriate scale, and

location within the development and when relating to the warehouse façades;

Page 11 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 the plinths are appropriately located, will remain unlit and will be accompanied
with landscaping.

• An annotated landscape treatment plan was provided that indicated the

proposed location and extent of planted and hardscaped areas. The proposed
planting provides a buffer and screening between industrial activities and
neighbouring residential zone.

I adopt Ms Claytons assessment and consider that the scale and form of the proposal
is appropriate for the location and will result in less than minor adverse amenity effects.

Land disturbance

Council’s Regional Earthworks Specialist Shanya Chand has reviewed the proposal
and confirms that the applicant has prepared a suitable erosion and sediment control
plan (ESCP) in accordance with Auckland Council guidance document number 005,
“Erosion and Sediment Control Guide for Land Disturbing Activities in the Auckland
Region”, June 2016, Incorporating Amendment 2 (GD05). To manage the effects of
sediment, the application proposes:

• Two stabilised entranceways to allow for vehicle access to and from the site to
minimise the tracking of sediment onto the public road.

• Five Decanting Earth Bunds (DEBs) and one Sediment Retention Pond (SRP)
to treat dirty water runoff prior to discharging to the receiving environment.

• Two indicative stockpile areas to ensure all stockpile material is managed as

per GD05 best practice.

• A Super silt fence which extends along the north-eastern, north-western and
southwestern boundaries to impound and treat sediment laden surface flows
prior to discharging the receiving environment.

• Earth bunds within the site to manage and divert sediment laden surface flows
to the treatment devices.

Provided the earthworks are managed in accordance with the application documents,
including any additional recommendations, Ms Chand considers that the potential
effects arising from sediment discharges will be appropriately managed and mitigated. I
adopt Ms Chands assessment and conclude that the adverse effects of the earthworks
are less than minor.

Transport and vehicle access

Council’s Traffic Engineer Sam Shumane has reviewed the proposed traffic layout in
consultation with Auckland Transport and has concluded;

• That the twelve mobility spaces distributed over the parking areas are
acceptable. Parking areas of Buildings C and F consist of up to ten spaces so
only one mobility space is required, and these are provided fully.

Page 12 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 • The tracking curve analysis provided in the Traffic Commentary for all parking
areas and can confirm that the spaces meet the required dimensions and
comfortable manoeuvring areas are provided.

• All buildings will have at least one cycle rack for visitors at the main door to the
office plus two hanging cycle racks for staff. This provision meets the relevant
requirements and is considered acceptable.

• The end-of trip facilities are sufficient noting that Building A will have an office
GFA greater than 500 m² and the applicant has accepted a condition of consent
to ensure sufficient end of trip facilities are provided.

• The loading provision and tracking curve analysis for trucks within the site is
acceptable.

• In regard to the vehicle crossing, although the distance between the crossings
is about 4.6 m, the civil engineering plans still show a reasonable stretch of
footpath between the crossings that can be used as a refuge by pedestrians if
necessary.

o Visibility splays to be installed at all crossings which will provide

sufficient clearances to exiting motorists to see a pedestrian on the
footpath.

o Taking the number of spaces served by the crossings into account, it is

Mr Shumanes’ view is that there will be very little conflict between
turning vehicles.

• On the basis of the comments above, Mr Shumane does not consider the
effects of this technical infringement (less than 6.0 m separation) to be
significant and should not be considered further.

• The tracking curve analysis provided by Flow for all crossings satisfactorily
demonstrates the workability of those along Laurenson Road and Westpoint
Drive.

• The crossings of Access Ways 3, 4 and 5 (all to Westpoint Drive) don’t include
the required visibility platform with a maximum gradient of 5.0%, proposed
platform gradient is about 6.3%. Mr Shumane has examined this technical
infringement and didn’t identify any potential for safety problems.

Auckland Transports Development Planner Shahriar Tehrani has also reviewed the
proposal and provide the following additional comments:

• The underlying subdivision consent (SUB-2015-533) provides for the

establishment of 3 vehicle crossings onto Hobsonville Road. If this subdivision
consent is being considered as part of the receiving environment, it can be
argued that the current proposal has less of adverse effect and better outcome,
provided issues related to tracking will be addressed.

Page 13 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 • The proposed tracking for vehicle crossing 6 on Hobsonville Road shows a
semi-trailer truck turning left out of the site has sufficient space to turn without
encroaching upon the eastbound traffic lane.

• Vehicle crossing 6 is not a TDM standard vehicle crossing design and will
require a departure from standard. The proposed vehicle crossing will have a
50mm high mountable splay which trucks can used to turn left while light
vehicles will still turn at low speed.

• The crossing 4 visibility is insufficient with the existing parking bays and the
applicant has confirmed that these parking bays will be removed and reinstated
with grass berm. This is considered sufficient to manage the effects of the
proposed vehicle crossing to an acceptable level.

• The applicant has confirmed that end of trip facilities in warehouse A will be
provided in accordance with Table E27.6.2.6 ((T105) of the AUP(OP).

• The cut to fill balance for the earthworks on the site will result in approximately
1,700 truckloads in total, and it is expected that there will be approximately 36
loads delivered per day on average. Construction traffic shall enter and egress
the site from Laurenson Road or Westpoint Drive only, this is considered
acceptable.

I adopt the above assessments and consider that the proposed traffic arrangement will
result in less than minor effects on the wider environment.

Geotechnical

A geotechnical review has been provided by CMW Ltd, and reviewed by Councils
Development Engineer Ethan Fu who notes that ‘considering the proposal is primarily
recontouring to provide building platforms, yards, parking, and access areas, also the
underlying earthworks and associated retaining structures has been certified in the Geo
completion report for Brigham Creek Business Park Stage 4, 18 Westpoint Drive,
Hobsonville referenced AKL2019-0058AJ Rev.0, dated 5 August 2022, it is reasonably
believed the risk of proposal earthworks and retaining structures will be manageable’.

I adopt Mr Fu’s assessment and consider that the proposed earthworks will result in
less than minor instability risk on the surrounding environment.

Servicing

The proposal has been reviewed by Watercare who confirm there is sufficient capacity
in Watercare's water and wastewater networks at the time of this assessment to
accommodate the proposed 7 warehouses.

The proposed stormwater mitigation / treatment has been reviewed by Healthy Waters
Team specialist, Richard Challis, has reviewed proposed treatment device (Stormwater
360) calculation and confirmed the proposal meets the requirement for stormwater
mitigation / treatment which is required in the underlying consent REG-2014-525.

Page 14 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 I adopt the above assessments and consider that the adverse effects of the proposal in terms
of servicing will result in less than minor effects on the surrounding environment.

Groundwater

The application also seeks consent to take groundwater for dewatering purposes
during excavation for building platforms for two commercial buildings (Buildings A & G),
and in the long-term for dewatering and groundwater diversion following construction of
a retaining wall with associated drainage, for the proposed platform for Building G at 18
Westpoint Drive, Hobsonville. The proposed groundwater diversion has been assessed
by consultant Geotechnical Engineer, Pat Shorten who provides the following
assessment:

• It is considered that there are no adjacent terrestrial or freshwater ecosystems

that may be adversely affected as a result of the groundwater-related activities.
There are no nearby dewatering and groundwater diversion consents and
therefore, there are no cumulative effects occurring on the surrounding sites.
There are not considered to be any adverse effects on the underlying
Waitemata aquifer due to the proposed activity and the effects on any other
users of the aquifer will be less than minor.

• The applicant has assessed a fully saturated 1.7 m deep excavation adjacent to
the Gull Service Station at 112 Hobsonville Road, which is considered to be a
worst-case scenario in relation to groundwater drawdown effects. Using one-
dimensional consolidation theory, with appropriate geotechnical parameters,
CMW subsequently calculated that the predicted consolidation settlement at the
site boundary would be approximately 9 mm.

• At Location 2 , the excavation for Accessway 3 above Westpoint Drive, CMW

state: “The Civil Focus drawings in Appendix depict final gradient remaining
higher than Westpoint Drive and the deepest cuts being high on the batter so
that even if groundwater were intercepted by the excavation, flows would
remain in the same direction toward Westpoint Drive. Previous earthworks
depicted on the Woods as-built drawing for Brigham Creek Stage 4 in Appendix
A confirm that this location was previously filled by up to 5m, with subsoil drains
installed beneath. On this basis, the underlying soils have been over-
consolidated already and no significant settlement will occur as a result of the
proposed cuts or any associated (and highly unlikely) groundwater draw-down.”

• In relation to the proposed excavation near the Gull Service Station at 112
Hobsonville Road CMW has assessed the mechanical settlement associated
with the construction of a 2.5 m high concrete tilt slab wall for Building G, as
less than 5 mm.

• In relation to the effects on a small utility building located near the site boundary
on the Gull fuel station, CMW state: “… the worst-case possible settlement
effect at the boundary in this part of the site is less than 14mm. It can be
expected to be slightly less than this at the utility building. As stated, we
consider such an effect to be negligible.”

Page 15 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 • In relation to the effects of the proposed dewatering on existing public services
and infrastructure, CMW state: “… sewer connections to manholes in the south
western corner of the Gull site are 2m deep and 2m offset from the boundary so
will not be affected.”

Mr Shorten concurs with the assessment of groundwater drawdown and settlement

provided by CWM Geosciences on behalf of the applicant. I adopt Mr Shortens
assessment and consider the effects of the proposed groundwater diversion to be less
than minor.

Mana Whenua Values

With respect to mana whenua values the application was not referred to mana whenua
for assessment as the extent of works for the proposed development is not within the
High-Use Stream Management Overlay or the Wetland Management Areas Overlay, is
not a water take for a commercial activity (is only related to the diversion of water for
excavation) and is not considered to be a significant water take or use, all of which
have been previously advised to Council as of interest to mana whenua. Additionally,
the subject site does not contain any scheduled heritage places, is not a scheduled
site, is not in a place of significance to Mana Whenua and no concerns were raised
with respect to the adjacent terrestrial or freshwater ecosystems that may be adversely
affected as a result of the groundwater-related activities. The application was available
for mana whenua to flag their interest through the application register and no such
contact was received. Based on this, it is considered that any adverse effects on Mana
Whenua values will be less than minor.

Adverse effects conclusions

It is considered that appropriate earthworks and stormwater quality controls will be in place; that
the bulk, location, and design of the buildings provide an appropriate interface to the
residentially zoned land on the opposite of Hobsonville Road; that the design and location of
vehicular access will not compromise the safety or efficiency of the road network; and that the
scale and design of signage is appropriate to the built form of the development and will not pose
a risk to traffic safety. In addition, the proposal is adequately serviced, and the proposal
adequately addresses the risks associated with groundwater drawdown. Therefore, I conclude
that the adverse effects on the environment that are less than minor.

Step 4: public notification in special circumstances

If an application has not been publicly notified as a result of any of the previous steps, then the
council is required to determine whether special circumstances exist that warrant it being
publicly notified (s95A(9)).

Special circumstances are those that are:

• Exceptional, abnormal or unusual, but something less than extraordinary or unique;

• outside of the common run of applications of this nature; or
• circumstances which make notification desirable, notwithstanding the conclusion that the
activities will not have adverse effects on the environment that are more than minor.
Page 16 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)
 In this instance I have turned my mind specifically to the existence of any special circumstances
and conclude that there is nothing exceptional or unusual about the application, and that the
proposal has nothing out of the ordinary run of things to suggest that public notification should
occur.

Public notification conclusion

Having undertaken the s95A public notification tests, the following conclusions are reached:

• Under step 1, public notification is not mandatory.

• Under step 2, there is no rule or NES that specifically precludes public notification of the
activities, and the application is for activities other than those specified in s95A(5)(b).
• Under step 3, public notification is not required as the application is for activities that are not
subject to a rule that specifically requires it, and it is considered that the activities will not
have adverse effects on the environment that are more than minor.
• Under step 4, there are no special circumstances that warrant the application being publicly
notified.

It is therefore recommended that this application be processed without public notification.

8. Limited notification assessment (sections 95B, 95E-95G)

If the application is not publicly notified under s95A, the council must follow the steps set out in
s95B to determine whether to limited notify the application. These steps are addressed in the
statutory order below.

Step 1: certain affected protected customary rights groups must be

notified
There are no protected customary rights groups or customary marine title groups affected by the
proposed activities (s95B(2)).

In addition, the council must determine whether the proposed activities are on or adjacent to, or
may affect, land that is subject of a statutory acknowledgement under schedule 11, and whether
the person to whom the statutory acknowledgement is made is an affected person (s95B(3)).
Within the Auckland region the following statutory acknowledgements are relevant:

• Te Uri o Hau Claims Settlement Act 2002

• Ngāti Manuhiri Claims Settlement Act 2012
• Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Claims Settlement Act 2012
• Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara Claims Settlement Act 2013
• Te Kawerau ā Maki Claims Settlement Act 2015
• Ngāti Tamaoho Claims Settlement Act 2018
• Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki Claims Settlement Act 2018

In this instance, the proposal is not on or adjacent to and will not affect land that is subject to a
statutory acknowledgement and will not result in adversely affected persons in this regard.

Page 17 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Step 2: if not required by step 1, limited notification precluded in certain
circumstances
The application is not precluded from limited notification as:

• the application is not for one or more activities that are exclusively subject to a rule or NES
which preclude limited notification (s95B(6)(a)); and
• the application is not exclusively for a controlled activity, other than a subdivision, that
requires consent under a district plan (s95B(6)(b)).

Step 3: if not precluded by step 2, certain other affected persons must

be notified
As this application is not for a boundary activity, there are no affected persons related to that
type of activity (s95B(7)).

The following assessment addresses whether there are any affected persons that the
application is required to be limited notified to (s95B(8)).

In determining whether a person is an affected person:

• a person is affected if adverse effects on that person are minor or more than minor (but not
less than minor);
• adverse effects permitted by a rule in a plan or NES (the permitted baseline) may be
disregarded;
• the adverse effects on those persons who have provided their written approval must be
disregarded; and
• as a restricted discretionary activity, only those effects that fall within the matters of discretion
restricted under the plan can be considered. These matters are listed in the public notification
assessment section of this report.

Adversely affected persons assessment (sections 95B(8) and 95E)

No persons are considered to be adversely affected by the proposal because:

• The 20m² signage on buildings D, E and G and the potential luminance levels have the
potential to effect persons at residential properties along Hobsonville Road. As these signs
face a residential zone, they may require reduced luminance levels to the other proposed
signage to avoid adverse visual effects on the residents. It is understood that it is the choice
of any future tenants to decide whether to luminate their signage. Therefore, a condition of
consent has been added to ensure future luminance levels for signage on building D, E, and
G will not dominate or cause adverse visual effects for the residents’ living opposite. The
applicant has accepted this condition and therefore it forms part of the application.
• Erosion and sediment controls will be implemented to ensure that the proposed earthworks
are appropriately managed to contain sediment laden waters on site. Therefore, it is
considered that no adjacent properties will be affected by sediment laden waters.
• The proposed vehicle accesses have been assessed and found to appropriately mitigate the
safety concerns to an appropriate level. Therefore, it is not considered that the effects of the
proposed traffic arrangement are less than minor.

Page 18 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 • The groundwater diversion and drawdown including undertaking the proposed activities in
accordance with the application, adherence to good practice and the recommended
conditions, result in minimal settlement at the boundary(9mm or less) and should ensure any
actual adverse effects remain within the consented envelope and the risks to the
neighbouring properties are less than minor.
• There is sufficient capacity in the water, wastewater and stormwater networks and
stormwater treatment in line with the NDC has been proposed to a sufficient standard to
ensure that there will be no adverse effects on persons at adjacent sites.
• The overland flow path shown on GIS within the site has been managed through the
underlying consent (LUC-2015-31, LUC-2013-289), it is also demonstrated that the overland
flow path is managed in the proposed accessway therefore, it is believed the flood hazard is
suitably managed in a manner which does not affect person on adjacent sites.
• No mana whenua groups have registered their interest in the application through Council’s
application register service or otherwise.

Step 4: further notification in special circumstances

In addition to the findings of the previous steps, the council is also required to determine
whether special circumstances exist in relation to the application that warrants it being notified
to any other persons not already determined as eligible for limited notification (excluding
persons assessed under section 95E as not being affected persons).

Special circumstances are those that are:

• Exceptional, abnormal or unusual, but something less than extraordinary or unique;

• outside of the common run of applications of this nature; or
• circumstances which make limited notification to any other person desirable, notwithstanding
the conclusion that no other person has been considered eligible.

In this instance I have turned my mind specifically to the existence of any special circumstances
under s95B(10) and conclude that there is nothing exceptional or unusual about the application,
and that the proposal has nothing out of the ordinary run of things to suggest that notification to
any other persons should occur.

Limited notification conclusion

Having undertaken the s95B limited notification tests, the following conclusions are reached:

• Under step 1, limited notification is not mandatory.

• Under step 2, there is no rule or NES that specifically precludes limited notification of the
activities, and the application is for activities other than those specified in s95B(6)(b).
• Under step 3, limited notification is not required as it is considered that the activities will not
result in any adversely affected persons.
• Under step 4, there are no special circumstances that warrant the application being limited
notified to any other persons.

It is therefore recommended that this application be processed without limited notification.

Page 19 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

9. Notification recommendation

Non-notification
For the above reasons under section 95A this application may be processed without public
notification.

In addition, under section 95B, limited notification is not required.

Accordingly, I recommend that this application is processed non-notified.

Mimouk Hannan Date: 16 June 2023

Senior Planner
Resource Consents

10. Notification determination

Acting under delegated authority, and for the reasons set out in the above assessment and
recommendation, under sections 95A and 95C to 95D, and 95B and 95E to 95G of the RMA
this application shall be processed non-notified.

Brogan McQuoid Date: 19 June 2023

Team Leader
Resource Consents

Page 20 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Decision on an application for resource
consent under the Resource Management
Act 1991
Restricted discretionary activity

Application number(s): LUC60413579 (s9 land use consent)

Applicant: Brigham Creek Business Park Ltd
Site address: 18 Westpoint Drive, Hobsonville
Legal description: Lot 901 DP 502477
Proposal:
To construct seven new industrial warehouses with ancillary office, car parking, yards,
accessways, signage and landscaping. Four of the buildings will be constructed on the
upper platform with frontage to Hobsonville Road, while three will be constructed on the
lower platform fronting Westpoint Drive. The floor areas and car parking numbers for each
of the buildings are summarised in Table 1 below.

• Buildings A, B, and C, fronting Westpoint Drive, are each provided with individual
vehicle crossings to Westpoint Drive, with car parking fronting the road. Buildings D,
E, F and G are located on the upper platform. Buildings G and F have access to
Laurenson Road only, via the shared access. Buildings D and E have access from
the shared accessway as well as direct access onto Hobsonville Road. Buildings D
and E share a vehicle crossing onto Hobsonville Drive that serves the yards of both
warehouses and the Building E car park. Building D also has an individual vehicle
crossing onto Hobsonville Drive serving the car park.

• Each building will be provided with two wall mounted signs on the elevations visible
from the streets. The wall mounted signs will measure up to 30m2 each. Buildings
A, B, and C will have additional 10m2 wall mounted signs attached to the office
annexures. Buildings D and E fronting Hobsonville Road will be provided with a
3.0m (h) by 1.6 metre (w) plinth sign alongside the Hobsonville Road crossings.

Page 1 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Buildings F and G will be provided with the same style of plinth sign along the
shared access frontage.

• Each building will be provided with a separate storm filter to treat yard and car park
runoff in accordance with the requirements of the underlying stormwater discharge
consent. In order to control overland flow, a nib will be placed atop the north-
eastern end of the retaining wall separating the building platforms

• Earthworks of 22,100m³ over 3.7462hectares.

Resource consent is required for the following reasons:

Land use consent (s9) – LUC60413579

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)

District land use (operative plan provisions)

Hobsonville Corridor Precinct Sub-Precinct C

• New buildings or parts of buildings that are located on sites fronting Hobsonville Road
and subject to building height restrictions area as shown on I603.10.3 are a restricted
discretionary activity under rule I603.4.3(A31).
Transport
• The proposal involves accessory parking, loading and access that does not meet the
parking and access standards and is a restricted discretionary activity under rule
E27.4.1(A2).
o A vehicle Access Restriction applies and vehicle crossings must not be
constructed or used to provide vehicle access across that part of a site
boundary which has frontage to an arterial road required by Standard
E27.6.4.1(3)(a). Two vehicle crossings are proposed onto Hobsonville Road,
which is an Arterial Road.
o The two crossings on Laurenson Road are separated by 4.6m where the
minimum permitted separation distance is 6 metres required by Standard
E27.6.4.2(T146).
o A 10.2-metre-wide vehicle crossing is provided where the maximum permitted
width is 9 metres (Standard E27.6.4.3(T155)); and
o The accessways to Buildings A, B and C are provided with a platform of 1 in 16
where the maximum permitted gradient is 1 in 20 (Standard E27.6.4.4.(3));

• Under rule E27.4.1 (A5) consent is required as a restricted discretionary activity where
a Vehicle Access Restriction (VAR) applies under the standard E27.6.4.1(3).
o The proposal involves construction of a new vehicle crossing on site where
VAR applies, in this case Hobsonville Road, being an arterial road.

Page 2 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Land Disturbance - District
• To undertake general earthworks of 37,462m2 and 17,500 m3, as the earthworks are
greater than 2,500 m2 and 2,500m3 in the light industry zone, is a restricted
discretionary activity under rules E.12.4.1(A6) and (A10) respectively.
Signage
• Comprehensive development signage requires resource consent as a restricted
discretionary activity under rule E23.4.1(A53)
Regional land use (operative plan provisions)

• To undertake general earthworks of 34,462m² as the earthworks are greater than 2,500
m² within the Sediment Control Protection Area is a restricted discretionary activity
under rule E11.4.1(A9).

Note: The applicant had initially applied under E11.4.1 (A4) however following recent
interpretation regarding permanent stormwater ponds the reason for consent has been
updated.

Water permit (s14) – WAT60419009

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)

Regional land use (operative plan provisions)

• Dewatering or groundwater level control associated with a groundwater diversion

authorised as a restricted discretionary activity under the Unitary Plan, not meeting
permitted activity standards or is not otherwise listed is a restricted discretionary
activity under rule E7.4.1(A20).
o The groundwater diversion for the proposed retaining wall will be for greater
than 30 days and beyond the construction period ((E7.6.1.6 (2 & 3)).

• The diversion of groundwater caused by any excavation, (including trench) or tunnel

that does not meet the permitted activity standards or not otherwise listed is restricted
discretionary activity under rule E7.4.1(A28).
o The groundwater diversion for the proposed retaining wall will be for greater
than 10 days ((E7.6.1.10 (1d)).

Decision
I have read the application, supporting documents, and the report and recommendations on the
application for resource consent. I am satisfied that I have adequate information to consider the
matters required by the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and make a decision under
delegated authority on the application.

Page 3 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Acting under delegated authority, under sections 104, 104C, and Part 2 of the RMA, the
resource consent is GRANTED.

Reasons
The reasons for this decision are:

1. The application is for restricted discretionary resource consent, and as such under s104C
only those matters over which council has restricted its discretion have been considered.
Those matters are:

• I603.8.1 (1), (2) Matters of discretion

• E27.8.1 (9), (12) Matters of discretion

• E12.8.1 (1) Matters of discretion

• E23.8.1 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) Matters of discretion

• E11.8.1 (1) Matters of discretion

• E7.8.1(1), (4), (6) Matters of discretion

2. In accordance with an assessment under ss104(1)(a) and (ab) of the RMA, the actual and
potential effects from the proposal will be acceptable as:

a. The scale and form of the proposal provides a good amenity interface within the
streetscape and the residential properties on the opposite side of Hobsonville Road.
This is a result of the articulation of the built form, setback from Hobsonville road and
the anticipated mature heights of the proposed planting. As the future tenants who will
decide whether to luminate their signage, a condition of consent has been offered by
the applicant to ensure future luminance levels for signage on building D, E, and G will
not dominate or cause adverse visual effects for the residents’ living opposite.

b. The location of the proposed stabilised entranceways is also to be confirmed prior to

works commencing therefore to ensure appropriate erosion and sediment controls are
implemented at each stage and to allow contractor input, a condition requiring a
finalised Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) has been included.

c. The design details of the proposed erosion and sediment controls, such as the
Decanting Earth Bunds (DEBs) and Sediment Retention Pond (SRP), also have not
been included in the submitted ESCP. To address this, a condition for a finalised ESCP
has been included below.

d. DEBs and a single SRP have been proposed as treatment devices and will require
chemical treatment. Ms Chand considers that chemical treatment of the devices should
be undertaken in accordance with industry best practice including submission of a
Chemical Treatment Management Plan (ChTMP) to Council prior to earthworks
commencing, therefore a condition to this effect has been included below.

e. Earthworks of this nature impose a higher risk if undertaken outside of the Auckland
Council earthworks season (1 October – 30 April of any year) during the wetter months
and as such, a season restriction has been recommended to ensure that the potential

Page 4 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 effects associated with the proposal are managed appropriately should winter works be
proposed.

f. The applicant has proffered a condition of consent for Building A to provide end-of trip
facilities and this is covered by a condition of consent.

g. Conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure that the proposed vehicle
crossings are suitably constructed to mitigate the safety risks to an appropriate level
and the applicant has offered conditions of consent to ensure that the required
resolutions are obtained from Auckland Transport and reinstatement of the grass berm
alongside crossing 4.

h. Provided the take of groundwater (dewatering) and groundwater diversion activity is

undertaken in the manner described in the application material and summarised above,
and subject to the proposed conditions, the potential adverse effects of the activity on
the environment and on neighbouring properties are considered to be suitable
mitigated. It is considered appropriate to set a term of thirty-five years for the
groundwater take and groundwater diversion consent because the dewatering and
groundwater diversion will continue in the long-term.

i. Mr Fu believes the risk of instability as a result of the proposed earthworks and retaining
structures will be manageable. A new geotechnical completion report or updated
geotechnical completion report will be required after completing the earthworks and
associated retaining walls in this application. Conditions of consent have been included
in this regard.

j. Watercare has reviewed the application and advised that there is sufficient capacity in
Watercare’s water and wastewater networks to accommodate the proposal. The
applicant will be required to undertake detailed design to address the discrepancies
between the underlying subdivision consent connections, this land use consent and any
future subdivision around the consented building in this development. The applicant is
aware of this requirement, and it will be a condition of consent.

k. The proposed stormwater management device (Stormwater 360) has been confirmed
by Mr Challis of Healthy Water to meet the requirements of the network discharge
consent REG-2014-525 and is therefore considered appropriate to manage the effects
of stormwater.

l. The applicant has proffered a condition of consent to confirm that the remediation
required in the underlying consent has been completed satisfactorily and therefore
contamination issues are satisfactory.

m. The applicant intends to complete the current subdivision (SUB-2015-33) to enable the
vesting of infrastructure and the Westpoint Drive extension. Once the subdivision is
complete, a new subdivision application will be lodged which will remove the Commonly
Owned Access Lot (COAL) and redundant easements, create new boundaries around
the buildings proposed under this consent, and create associated easements as
necessary. The applicant proffers a condition of consent requiring the approval of a new
subdivision consent that removes the COAL, redundant easements, and creates new
easements as necessary to accommodate the development prior to the commencement
of construction of any foundations.

Page 5 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 n. NZDF have assessed the proposal and have provided conditions of consent to ensure
that any works undertaken within Designation 4311 appropriately mitigate the risk of
bird strike or conflict with the airspace.

o. It is considered the proposal will result in acceptable level of effects on mana whenua
values considering it is not a type of water take or use that is of priority to mana
whenua, is not located within a site of interest to mana whenua, and no mana whenua
registered an interest in the application.

p. In terms of positive effects, the proposal will provide for additional warehouse space in a
light industrial zone and provide for the financial wellbeing of the owner.

3. With reference to s104(1)(ab), there are no specific offsetting or environmental

compensation measures proposed or agreed to by the applicant to ensure positive effects
on the environment and/or within the relevant matters of discretion.

4. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(b) of the RMA the proposal is consistent
with the relevant statutory documents, insofar as they relate to the matters over which
discretion is restricted. In particular the proposed warehouses meets the intentions of the
Hobsonville Corridor Precinct by ensuring the proposed warehouse achieve a suitable
interface within the residential properties on the opposite side of Hobsonville Road. The
proposal is also consistent with the objectives and policies around land disturbance under
Chapters E11 and E12 as the proposed earthworks will suitably manage the erosion and
sediment and the stability of surrounding sites is not compromised. The transport
assessment confirms that the proposed vehicle accessways and parking is appropriate and
does not cause and adverse safety effects on the transport network. And the signage is
appropriately managed to be appropriate for the location and development.

5. As a restricted discretionary activity, the other matters that can be considered under
s104(1)(c) of the RMA must relate to the matters of discretion restricted under the plan. In
this case no other matters require consideration.

6. In accordance with s123 of the RMA a duration of consent has been set for the regional
earthworks component of land use resource consent LUC60413579 for five years.

7. In accordance with s123 of the RMA a duration of consent has been set for the water take
permit WAT60419009 for thirty-five years.

8. In accordance with s128 of the RMA the conditions of this consent WAT60419009 may be
reviewed by the Manager Resource Consents at the Consent Holder’s cost. This is to deal
with any adverse effects on the environment which may arise or potentially arise from the
exercise of this consent and which it is appropriate to deal with at a later stage. Also to vary
the monitoring and reporting requirements, and performance standards, in order to take
account of information, including the results of previous monitoring and changed
environmental knowledge on:

1) ground conditions

2) aquifer parameters

3) groundwater levels; and

4) ground surface movement

Page 6 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 9. In the context of this restricted discretionary activity application for land use and water
permit, where the relevant objectives and policies and other relevant provisions in the
relevant statutory documents were prepared having regard to Part 2 of the RMA, they
capture all relevant planning considerations and contain a coherent set of policies designed
to achieve clear environmental outcomes. They also provide a clear framework for
assessing all relevant potential effects and there is no need to go beyond these provisions
and look to Part 2 in making this decision as an assessment against Part 2 would not add
anything to the evaluative exercise.

10. Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable.

Conditions
Under sections 108 and 108AA of the RMA, this consent is subject to the following conditions:

1. This consent must be carried out in accordance with the documents and drawings and
all supporting additional information submitted with the application, detailed below, and
all referenced by the council as resource consent number LUC60413579 and
WAT60419009.

• Application Form and Assessment of Environmental Effects titled “Land Use

Consent Application, Assessment of Environmental Effects & Statutory
Assessment, Brigham Creek Business Park - 18 Westpoint Drive, Hobsonville”,
prepared by Planning Focus, dated December 2022, Ref 2356, dated 1
December 2022

Report title and reference Author Rev Dated

Geotechnical Plan Review of CMW 0 12
Preliminary Development Plans 18 Geosciences December
Westpoint Drive, Hobsonville (Lots 1 to 2022
15) Doc. Ref. AKL2022-0216AB
Groundwater Draw-Down and Boundary CMW 1 9 May
Effects Report, Doc. Ref. AKL2022- Geosciences 2023
0216AC
Civil Engineering Report Civil Focus B 7 Feb
2023
Transport Assessment Flow 12
Transportation December
2022
Groundwater Draw-Down and Boundary CMW 1 9 May
Effects Report AKL2022-0216AC Geosciences 2023

Drawing title and reference Author Rev Dated

Existing Services 22023-100 Civil Focus A 25.11.2022
Design Contours 22023-200 Civil Focus A 25.1.2022
Cut and Fill Plan 22023-210 Civil Focus B 7.2.2023
Retaining Wall plan 22023-220 Civil Focus A 25.11.2022

Page 7 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Retaining Wall Long Sections Sheet 1 of Civil Focus A 25.11.2022
2 220223-221
Retaining Wall Long Sections Sheet 2 of Civil Focus A 25.11.2022
2 220223-222
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Civil Focus C 21.3.2023
22023-230
Roading Plan 22023-300 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
Road Longsections Sheet 1 of 5 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
310
Road Longsections Sheet 2 of 5 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
311
Road Longsections Sheet 3 of 5 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
312
Road Longsections Sheet 4 of 5 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
313
Road Longsections Sheet 5 of 5 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
314
Carpark Longsections Sheet 1 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-315
Carpark Longsections Sheet 2 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-316
Carpark Longsections Sheet 3 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-317
Carpark Longsections Sheet 4 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-318
Road Cross Sections Sheet 1 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-330
Road Cross Sections Sheet 2 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-331
Road Cross Sections Sheet 3 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-332
Road Cross Sections Sheet 4 of 4 Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
22023-333
Drainage Plan Sheet 1 of 4 22023-400 Civil Focus C 21.3.2023
Drainage Plan Sheet 2 of 4 22023-401 Civil Focus B 21.3.2023
Drainage Plan Sheet 3 of 4 22023-402 Civil Focus B 21.3.2023
Drainage Plan Sheet 4 of 4 22023-403 Civil Focus B 21.3.2023
Stormwater Long Sections Sheet 1 of 2 Civil Focus B 21.3.2023
22023-410
Stormwater Long Sections Sheet 2 of 2 Civil Focus B 21.3.2023
22023-411
Reticulation Catchment Plan 22023-430 Civil Focus B 7.2.2023
Overland Flow Path Catchment Civil Focus B 7.2.2023
Plan22023-431

Page 8 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Overland Flow Path Sections 22023- Civil Focus B 7.2.2023
432
Overland Flow Path Sections 22023- Civil Focus B 7.2.2023
433
Overland Flow Path Sections 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2022
434
Overland Flow Path Sections 22023- Civil Focus A 25.11.2023
435
Public Reticulation Catchment Plan Civil Focus A 21.3.2023
22023-436
Treatment Catchment Plan 2023-437 Civil Focus A 21.3.2023
Wastewater Long Sections Sheet 1 of 1 Civil Focus A 25.11.2022
22023-510
Water Supply Plan 22023-600 Civil Focus B 7.2.2023
Site Plan RC007 Williams 9 27.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Building A – Plan RC010 Williams 4 23.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Building B – Plan RC012 Williams 4 27.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Building C – Plan and Sections RC014 Williams 4 27.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Building D – RC016 Williams 4 23.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Building E – RC017 Williams 4 23.3.23
Architects Ltd
Building F RC018 Williams 4 23.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Building G RC019 Williams 4 23.3.2023
Architects Ltd
Landscape Plan – Overall 002 LASF - 16.2.2023
Landscape
Architects
Landscape Plan – Lot A 003 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects
Landscape Plan – Lot B 004 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects
Landscape Plan – Lot C 005 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects
Landscape Plan – Lot D 006 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects

Page 9 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Landscape Plan – Lot E 007 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects
Landscape Plan – Lot F 008 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects
Landscape Plan – Lot G 009 LASF - 18.2.2023
Landscape
Architects

Other additional information Author Rev Dated

Site Validation Report, 106 Hobsonville Groundwater 22 Sept
Road and 2015
Environmental
Services
S92 response Paul Arnesen 27.3.2023
S92 response Paul Arnesen 23.3.2023
S92 response (tracking plans) Paul Arnesen 10.5.2023
S92 response (groundwater) Paul Arnesen 23.5.2023

Advice Note:

The engineering assessment of this resource consent is limited to an effects-based

assessment allowed by the Unitary Plan. Plans approved under Resource Consent do not
constitute an Engineering Plan Approval. A separate engineering approval will be required
for the design of any infrastructure that is to vest in council.

2. Under section 125 of the RMA, this consent lapses five years after the date it is granted
unless:

a. The consent is given effect to; or

b. The council extends the period after which the consent lapses.

3. The consent holder must pay the council an initial consent compliance monitoring
charge of $1,044 (inclusive of GST), plus any further monitoring charge or charges to
recover the actual and reasonable costs incurred to ensure compliance with the
conditions attached to this consent.

Advice note:

The initial monitoring deposit is to cover the cost of inspecting the site, carrying out
tests, reviewing conditions, updating files, etc., all being work to ensure compliance
with the resource consent(s). In order to recover actual and reasonable costs,
monitoring of conditions, in excess of those covered by the deposit, should be charged
at the relevant hourly rate applicable at the time. The consent holder will be advised of
the further monitoring charge. Only after all conditions of the resource consent(s) have
been met, will the council issue a letter confirming compliance on request of the
consent holder.

Page 10 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Specific conditions – land use consent LUC60413579
Duration

4. Resource consent LUC60413579 (regional earthworks component only) must expire 5

years from the date of issue unless it has been surrendered or cancelled at an earlier
date pursuant to the RMA.

Pre-commencement

5. Prior to the commencement of earthworks activity, the consent holder must provide
evidence that the remediation required under consent LUC-2015-31 & SUB-2015-33
has been completed to the satisfaction of Council with regard to the subject site.

6. Prior to the commencement of building works the consent holder must obtain an
approved subdivision resource consent to remove the Commonly Owned Access Lot
(COAL) – Lot 200 approved under SUB-2015-33 and on LT 564416 and redundant
easements, undertake boundary adjustments and create associated easements as
necessary to accommodate the consented buildings.

For clarity, this condition does not preclude earthworks activities authorised under this
consent from being undertaken.

Advice Note:

The applicant was also advised they could apply to do a s127 to the current subdivision
prior to completing their 224c and could then relodge a new s223 Survey Plan and
complete 224c on a revised subdivision scheme which aligns to this consent. This was
a more advisable pathway than undertaking boundary adjustments and changes under
new subdivision resource consents after 224c for the current SUB-2015-33 / LT
564416 scheme.

7. Prior to the commencement of the earthwork activity, the consent holder must hold a
pre-start meeting that:

• Is located on the subject site;

• Is scheduled not less than five days before the anticipated commencement of

• earthworks;

• Includes representation from Auckland Council compliance monitoring officer[s];

and

• Includes representation from the contractors who will undertake the works

The meeting must discuss the erosion and sediment control measures and the
earthworks methodology and must ensure all relevant parties are aware of and familiar
with the necessary conditions of this consent.

• The following information must be made available at the pre-start meeting:

• Timeframes for key stages of the works authorised under this consent;

• Resource consent conditions;

Page 11 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)
 • Finalised Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (FESCP)

• Chemical Treatment Management Plan (ChTMP)

Advice Note:

To arrange the pre-start meeting required by please contact the Council on

monitoring@[Link], or 09 301 01 01. The conditions of consent
should be discussed at this meeting. All additional information required by the Council
should be provided 2 days prior to the meeting.

Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

8. Prior to the commencement of any earthworks on the subject site, a Finalised Erosion
and Sediment Control Plan (FESCP) must be prepared in accordance with Auckland
Council Guideline Document 2016/005 ‘Erosion and Sediment Control Guide for Land
Disturbing Activities in the Auckland Region, June 2016, Incorporating Amendment 2
(GD05) and submitted to the Council. Earthworks activity on the subject site must not
commence until written certification from Council is provided that the FESCP meets the
requirements of GD05 and contains sufficient detail to address the following matters:

a) Specific erosion and sediment control measures (location, dimensions,

perimeter controls) including;

i. Location of the stabilised entranceways;

b) Earthworks staging plans identifying changes to the erosion and / or sediment

control measures during each stage;

c) Supporting calculations and design drawings;

d) Catchment boundaries and contour information;

e) Details of construction methods;

f) Timing and duration of construction and operation of control works (in relation
to the staging and sequencing of earthworks)

g) Details relating to the management of exposed areas and final stabilisation

measures (e.g., grassing, mulching, aggregate); and

h) Monitoring and maintenance requirements

Advice Note:

In the event that minor amendments to the erosion and / or sediment controls are
required, any such amendments should be limited to the scope of this consent. Any
amendments which affect the performance of the controls may require an application to
be made in accordance with section 127 of the RMA. Any minor amendments should
be provided to the Council prior to implementation to confirm that they are within the
scope of this consent.

Chemical Treatment Management Plan

9. Prior to the commencement of land disturbance on the subject site, a Chemical

Treatment Management Plan (ChTMP) must be prepared in accordance with GD05 by
Page 12 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)
 an appropriately qualified and experienced person and submitted to Council for
certification. No earthwork activities may commence until certification is provided by
Council that the ChTMP meets the requirements of GD05, and the measures referred
to in that plan have been implemented. The ChTMP must include as a minimum:

a) Specific design details of chemical treatment system based on a rainfall

activated dosing methodology for the site’s decanting earth bunds and
sediment retention pond;

b) Monitoring, maintenance (including post-storm) and contingency programme

(including a record sheet);

c) Details of optimum dosage (including assumptions);

d) Results of initial chemical treatment trial;

e) A spill contingency plan; and

f) Details of the person or bodies that will hold responsibility for long term
operation and maintenance of the chemical treatment system and the
organisational structure which will support this system.

Advice Note:

In the event that minor amendments to the ChTMP are required, any such
amendments must be limited to the scope of this consent. Any amendments which
affect the performance of the CTMP may require an application to be made in
accordance with section 127 of the RMA. Any minor amendments should be provided
to the Council prior to implementation to confirm that they are within the scope of this
consent.

Construction Traffic Management Plan

10. Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, the consent holder must submit to
and have certified by the Council, a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP)
The CTMP must be prepared in accordance with the Council’s requirements for traffic
management plans or CTMPs (as applicable) and New Zealand Transport Authority’s
Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management and must address the surrounding
environment including pedestrian-and bicycle traffic as well as public transport. No
construction activity must commence until the CTMP has been certified by the Council
and all construction traffic must be managed at all times in accordance with the
approved CTMP. The CTMP must be included in the application for a Corridor Access
Request and include the following:

The requirement to ensure that construction traffic must enter and egress
the site from Laurenson Road or Westpoint Drive only.

End of trip facilities

11. Prior to lodgement of building consent for Building A the consent holder must include
within the plans to be submitted for the building consent for Building A, a shower
facility. The applicant must install the shower facility within Building A to satisfy
requirement for provision of end of trip facilities.

Page 13 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Finalised landscape specifications and maintenance requirements

12. Prior to the commencement of any work on site, or prior to the approval of building
consent, the consent holder must provide to the Council for certification, additional the
information outlined below which have been prepared by a landscape architect or
suitably qualified professional. This is in addition to and must support the consented
landscape concept plan(s) ‘Brigham Creek Business Park Commercial Development
Stage 4 18 Hobsonville Road, Hobsonville Resource Consent Landscape Proposal’,
prepared by LASF (dated 18.02.23) and, at a minimum, must include:

• Details of draft specification documentation for any specific drainage, soil

preparation, tree pits, staking, irrigation and mulching requirements

• An annotated furniture plan and related specifications which confirm the

location and type of all lights, fences, walls and other structural landscape
design elements.

• A landscape maintenance plan (report) for ongoing maintenance

purposes. The report must include related drawings and specifications for
all aspects of the landscape design and must include the following
requirements:

i. Irrigation

ii. Weed and pest control

iii. Plant replacement

iv. Inspection timeframes

v. Contractor responsibilities

Advice Note:

It is recommended the management / maintenance programme must describe plant

establishment and details of maintenance methodology and frequency, allowance for
fertilising, replacement of plants, including specimen trees in case plants are severely
damaged / die over the first five years of the planting being established and watering to
maintain soil moisture.

Corridor Access Requests

13. It will be the responsibility of the consent holder to determine the presence of any
underground services that may be affected by the consent holders work in the road
reserve. Should any services exist, the consent holder must contact the owners of
those and agree on the service owners’ future access for maintenance and upgrades.
Services information may be obtained from [Link]

14. All work in the road reserve must be carried out in accordance with the general
requirements of The National Code of Practice for Utility Operators’ Access to
Transport Corridors [Link]
and Auckland Transport Design Manual [Link]
guidelines/transport-design-manual/

Page 14 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 15. Prior to carrying out any work in the road corridor, the consent holder must submit to
Auckland Transport a Corridor Access Request (CAR) and temporary traffic
management plan (TMP), the latter prepared by an NZ Transport Agency qualified
person and work must not commence until such time as the applicant has approval in
the form of a Works Access Permit (WAP). The application may be made at
[Link]
car/ and 15 working days should be allowed for approval

Advice Notes:

The Consent Holder will need to obtain all necessary approvals from the relevant utility
providers prior to carrying out the relocation works.

The Consent Holder is advised that at least two vehicle crossings do not meet the
current standards and will therefore require a Departure from the Standards before
installation. This process may be completed when applications for vehicle crossing
permits are lodged.

Any structures that may be required within the road reserve that will support the private
development will need an encroachment license before installation.

Hobsonville Road is a Limited Access Road (LAR). To obtain access onto an LAR
pursuant to s346 of the Local Government Act, approval must be provided by Auckland
Transport as the Territorial Memorandum Authority for roads within the Auckland
Region, of which the Group Manager Network Management and Safety has delegated
authority.

This is a separate approval outside of the resource consent process, which is required
for any new vehicle crossing onto an LAR. The LAR approval request is reviewed by
AT Traffic Engineering team, which can be sent at the same time as the resource
consent application.

Please contact TrafficEngineering@[Link] to submit an LAR request and for more

information.

• Application details include but are not limited to the following:

• Reason for application; and

• Description of the proposal including sight lines, operating speed of the road, traffic
volumes etc.

Resolutions

16. The modification of Auckland Transport assets, road markings such as no stopping at
all times (NSAAT), and modification to the parking bay requires resolution from
Auckland Transport. A copy of the Resolution from the Traffic Control Committee must
be submitted to the Council prior to the occupation of the buildings provided for by this
consent approval.

Advice Note

Permanent traffic and parking controls as required by this condition are subject to a
Resolution approval from Auckland Transport. Changes to traffic / parking controls on
Page 15 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)
 the road reserve will require Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee (TCC)
resolutions. The resolutions, prepared by a qualified traffic engineer, will need to be
approved so that the changes to the road reserve can be legally implemented and
enforced. The resolution process requires external consultation to be undertaken in
accordance with Auckland Transport’s standard procedures. It is the responsibility of
the consent holder to prepare and submit a permanent Traffic and Parking Changes
report to Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee (TCC) for review and approval.
No changes to the traffic and parking controls will be allowed before the resolution is
approved by the Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee (TCC). All costs shall
be borne by the consent holder.

Application details and can be found from the following Auckland Transport website
link:

[Link]

Earthworks period

17. Earthworks on the subject site must not be undertaken between 01 May and 30
September in any year, without the submission of a ‘Request for winter works’ for
approval to Council. All requests must be renewed annually prior to the approval
expiring and no works must occur until written approval has been received from
Council. All winter works will be re-assessed monthly or as required to ensure that
adverse effects are not occurring in the receiving environment and approval may be
revoked by Council upon written notice to the consent holder.

Advice Note:

Any ‘Request for winter works’ will be assessed against criteria in line with the
information required to assess a comprehensive application. Principally that will focus
on the level of risk, the propensity to manage that risk with contingency planning and a
‘track record’ of good compliance with consent requirements. Each ‘Request for winter
works’ submitted, should include the following:

• Description of works proposed to be undertaken between 01 May and 30

September and the duration of those works.

• Details of proposed measures to prevent sediment discharge from these

specific works, particularly during periods of heavy rainfall.

• Details of area(s) already stabilised.

• Revised erosion and sediment control plan detailing stabilisation to date and
timeline/staging boundaries showing proposed progression of stabilisation.

• Contact details for contractor who will undertake stabilisation of the site
including date(s) expected on site.

• Alternatives/contingencies proposed if the contractor referred to above

becomes unavailable.

• Details of site responsibilities, specifically who is responsible for erosion and

sediment controls and stabilisation processes over the specified period.

Page 16 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 During Earthworks

18. The decanting earth bunds, sediment retention pond and any other authorised
impoundment devices utilised as part of the earthworks must be chemically treated in
accordance with the approved Chemical Treatment Management Plan (ChTMP). All
measures required by the ChTMP must be put in place prior to commencement of the
earthworks activity and be maintained for the duration of the earthworks activity.

19. The erosion and sediment controls at the site must be constructed and maintained in
accordance with the certified final Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, and Auckland
Council Guideline Document 2016/005 ‘Erosion and Sediment Controls Guide for Land
Disturbing Activities in the Auckland Region’ (GD05) and any higher standard referred
to through the conditions below, throughout the duration of the earthwork activity, or
until the site is permanently stabilised against erosion. A record of any maintenance
work must be kept and be supplied to the Council on request.

20. All perimeter controls must be operational before earthworks commence.

21. Earthworks must be managed to minimise the deposition of earth, mud, dirt of other
debris on any road or footpath resulting from earthworks activity on the subject site. In
the event that such deposition does occur, it must immediately be removed. In no
instance must roads of footpaths be washed down with water without appropriate
erosion and sediment control measures in place to prevent contamination of the
stormwater drainage system, watercourses or receiving waters.

Advice Note:

In order to prevent sediment laden water entering waterways from the road, the
following methods may be adopted to prevent, or address discharges should they
occur:

• Provision of a stabilised entry and exit(s) point for vehicles

• Provision of wheel wash facilities

• Ceasing of vehicle movement until materials are removed

• Cleaning of roads surfaces using street-sweepers

• Silt and sediment traps

• Catchpit protection

In no circumstances should the washing of deposited materials into drains be advised

or other condoned. It is recommended that you discuss any potential measures with
Council’s monitoring officer who may be able to provide further guidance on the most
appropriate approach to take. Please contact Council for more details. Alternatively,
please refer to Auckland Council Guideline Document 005, Erosion and Sediment
Control Guide for Land Disturbing Activities in the Auckland Region, June 2016
(GD05).

22. The site must be progressively stabilised against erosion at all stages of the earthworks
activity and must be sequenced to minimise the discharge of contaminants to

Page 17 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 groundwater or surface water in accordance with the certified Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan.

Advice Note:

Stabilisation measures may include:

• The use of waterproof covers, geotextiles, or mulching

• Top-soiling, grassing and hay mulching of otherwise bare areas of earth

• Aggregate or vegetative cover that has obtained a density of more than 80% of
a normal pasture sward.

It is recommended that you discuss any potential measures with Council’s monitoring
officer who may be able to provide further guidance on the most appropriate approach
to take. Please contact Council for more details. Alternatively, please refer to Auckland
Council Guideline Document 005, Erosion and Sediment Control Guide for Land
Disturbing Activities in the Auckland Region, June 2016 (GD05).

23. Immediately upon completion of abandonment of earthworks on the subject site, all
areas of bare earth must be permanently stabilised to the satisfaction of the Council.

Advice Note:

Should any earthworks be completed or abandoned, bare areas of earth associated

with the works must be permanently stabilised against erosion. Measures may include:

• The use of mulching or natural fibre matting

• Top-soiling, grassing and mulching of otherwise bare areas of earth

• Aggregate or vegetative cover that has obtained a density of more than 80% of
a normal pasture sward

The on-going monitoring of these measures is the responsibility of the consent holder.
It is recommended that you discuss any potential measures with the Council’s
monitoring officer who will guide you on the most appropriate approach to take.
Alternatively, please refer to Auckland Council Guidance Document 005, Erosion and
Sediment Control Guide for Land Disturbing Activities in the Auckland Region, June
2016 (GD05).

Geotechnical

24. The construction of permanent retaining walls (if any) and building foundations and the
placement and compaction of fill material must be supervised by a suitably qualified
engineering professional. In supervising the works, the suitably qualified engineering
professional must ensure that they are constructed and otherwise completed in
accordance with Practice for Land Development and Subdivision, section 2 -
Earthworks and Geotechnical Requirements, version 1.6, 24 Sep 2013, and in
accordance with the recommendations comprised within the Geotechnical Completion
Report for Brigham Creek Business Park Stage 4, 18 Westpoint Drive, Hobsonville,
prepared by CMW Ltd, referenced AKL2019-0058AJ Rev.0, dated 5 August 2022.

Page 18 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 25. Within two months of completion of civil works the consent holder must provide, a new
or updated Geotechnical Completion Report as abovementioned must be signed by
chartered professional geotechnical engineer who supervised the works and provided
to the Council.

a) The GCR must determine if the earthworks have been carried out in
accordance with the conditions of the consent and that the site has been
left in a condition suitable for its intended use. The GCR report must
include a “Professional Statement” the extent of inspection, revisit and
review of all references and assumptions made during the investigation,
assess the results of testing and opinion on the compliance of the
development.

Avoid Damaging Assets

26. Unless specifically provided for by this consent approval, there must be no damage to
public roads, footpaths, berms, kerbs, drains, reserves or other public asset as a result
of the earthworks and construction activity. In the event that such damage does occur,
the Council will be notified within 24 hours of its discovery. The costs of rectifying such
damage and restoring the asset to its original condition must be met by the consent
holder.

Vehicle Crossings

27. All new vehicle crossings must be designed and formed to Auckland Transport’s
Standards. This must be undertaken at the Consent Holder’s expense and to the
satisfaction of the Council.

28. Prior to the occupation of the new buildings, all redundant vehicle crossings must be
removed and reinstated as kerbing, berm and footpath to Auckland Transport’s
Transport Design Manual requirements, including a regrade of the footpath across the
vehicle crossing to 2.0% crossfall. This must be undertaken at the Consent Holder’s
expense and to the satisfaction of the Council.

29. A pedestrian visibility splay must be provided on both sides of the proposed vehicle
crossings (if practical). Any boundary fencing and / or landscaping within the visibility
splay areas of 5.0 m x 2.0 m (5.0 m on either side of the driveway within the site and
2.0 m on both sides of the front boundary from the edge of the crossing) must not
exceed 0.9 m or, alternatively must be at least 80% visually permeable. Landscaping in
the visibility splay area will need to be trimmed and maintained in perpetuity to comply
with the stipulated height.

Signage – Luminance levels

30. Where signage is proposed to be on buildings D, E, and G, and where visible from the
residential zone along Hobsonville Road, any proposed luminance must be internal
only, and luminance levels must comply with the AUP(OP) Signage Standards E23.6
which requires varying luminance levels between dusk and dawn (daytime); and
between sunset and sunrise (night-time). The brightness of the LED (or alternative
internal luminance method) back lights for the signage must be automatically controlled

Page 19 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 with an in-built detector/sensor to control the luminance level. Signage must be static,
and must not be digital, animated, or display a changeable message.

Implementation and maintenance of approved landscape design

31. Prior to the development being first occupied and within an appropriate planting
season, the consent holder must implement the landscape design ‘Brigham Creek
Business Park Commercial Development Stage 4 18 Hobsonville Road, Hobsonville
Resource Consent Landscape Proposal’, prepared by LASF (dated 18.02.23) which
has been approved by the council under condition (12) and thereafter retain and
maintain this landscape (planting, pavement and street furniture) in perpetuity to the
satisfaction of Council’s in accordance with the maintenance plan which has been
approved under condition (12).

Note: Where tree species specified are not available at the time of installation, or when
being replaced as part of the maintenance schedule, any substitutes must be native
trees and of a similar form and anticipated height.

Advice Note:

Consider mass planting tussock grasses, and/or groundcovers to reduce maintenance

required for mown grass and increase greater water uptake.

Stormwater device

32. The consent hold must design, install and maintain private on-site stormwater
management devices (Stormwater 360 or other device to Council approval) in
accordance with Auckland Council standards from the point of collection to the point of
discharge.

33. The stormwater management device or system must be installed or built by a suitably
qualified service provider.

34. The stormwater management device or system must be fully operational before the use
of the impervious area.

35. Within three months of the practical completion of the works, the consent holder must
provide the following to the council:

a) Written evidence in the form of a validation report that the stormwater

management device or system was installed or built by a suitably qualified
service provider; and

b) As-built plans of the stormwater management device or system, certified

(signed) by a suitably qualified service provider as a true record of the
stormwater management system.

36. The stormwater management device or system must be operated and maintained in
accordance with best practice for the device or system.

37. Details of all inspections and maintenance for the stormwater management system, for
the preceding three years, must be retained by the consent holder. These records must
be provided to the council on request.

Page 20 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Stormwater Reticulation Network

38. The consent holder must design and construct a stormwater connection(s) and
extension to the network to serve the proposed industrial buildings in accordance with
the requirements of the stormwater utility service provider.

Advice Note:

• Acceptable forms of evidence include Engineering Approval Completion

Certificates.

• It shall be either amend the application of ENG60064823 or applying for a new

Engineering Plan Approval application if any new extension or connection will
be proposed.

• Stormwater utility provider is Auckland Council Healthy Waters.

• Public connections are to be constructed in accordance with the Stormwater

Code of Practice.

• Alterations to the public stormwater reticulation network require Engineering

Plan Approval.

• Plans approved under Resource Consent do not constitute an Engineering Plan

Approval and should not be used for the purposes of constructing public
reticulation works in the absence of that approval.

Wastewater Reticulation Networks

39. The consent holder must design and construct connection and extension to the
proposed public wastewater reticulation network to serve the proposed industrial units
in accordance with the requirements of the wastewater utility service provider.

Advice Note:

• Acceptable forms of Evidence from the Utility Providers include a Certificate of

Acceptance.

• It shall be either amend the application of ENG60064823 or applying for a new

Engineering Plan Approval application to ensure only ONE connection to be
consented.

• Alterations to the public wastewater reticulation network require Engineering

Plan Approval. Additional approval is required from Watercare/Veolia as part of
the Engineering Plan Approval Process.

• Public connections are to be constructed in accordance with the Water and

Wastewater Code of Practice.

• Plans approved under Resource Consent do not constitute an Engineering Plan

Approval and should not be used for the purposes of constructing public
reticulation works in the absence of that approval.

Page 21 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Water Supply

40. The consent holder must design and construct extensions for the proposed dwellings to
the public water reticulation network in accordance with the requirements of the water
utility provider.

Advice Note:

• Acceptable forms of evidence from the Utility Providers include a Certificate of

Acceptance.

• It is required to identify the firefighting service and provide hydrant test report at
Engineering Plan Approval application stage

• Alterations to the public water reticulation network require Engineering Plan

Approval. Additional approval is required from Watercare/ Veolia as part of the
Engineering Plan Approval Process.

• Public water supply is required to ensure an acceptable water supply for each
lot, including for fire-fighting purposes.

• Public connections are to be constructed in accordance with the Water and

Wastewater Code of Practice.

• Plans approved under Resource Consent do not constitute an Engineering Plan

Approval and should not be used for the purposes of constructing public
reticulation works in the absence of that approval.

Specific conditions – water permit WAT60419009

Definitions

Words in the ground dewatering (take) and groundwater diversion consent conditions have specific
meanings as outlined in the table below.

Bulk Excavation Includes all excavation that affects groundwater

excluding minor enabling works and piling less than
1.5m in diameter.

Commencement of Means commencement of Bulk Excavation and/or the

Construction Phase commencement of the taking or diversion of
Dewatering groundwater, other than for initial state monitoring
purposes.

Completion of Means when the retaining wall drainage is in place

Construction Phase and connected to the stormwater network.
Dewatering

Commencement of Means commencement of Bulk Excavation or

Excavation excavation to create perimeter walls.

Page 22 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Completion of Means when the Code Compliance Certificate (CCC)
Construction is issued by Auckland Council

Completion of Means the stage when all Bulk Excavation has been
Excavation completed and all foundation/footing excavations
within 10 meters of the perimeter retaining walls have
been completed.

Condition Survey Means an external visual inspection or a detailed

condition survey (as defined in the relevant
conditions).

Damage Includes Aesthetic, Serviceability, Stability, but does

not include Negligible Damage. Damage as described
in the table below.

External visual A condition survey undertaken for the purpose of

inspection detecting any new external Damage or deterioration of
existing external Damage. Includes as a minimum a
visual inspection of the exterior and a dated
photographic record of all observable exterior
Damage.

RL Means Reduced Level.

Services Include fibre optic cables, sanitary drainage,

stormwater drainage, gas and water mains, power and
telephone installations and infrastructure, road
infrastructure assets such as footpaths, kerbs, catch-
pits, pavements and street furniture.

SQEP Means Suitably Qualified Engineering Professional

Category Normal Description of Typical Damage General

of Degree of Category
Damage Severity
(Building Damage Classification after Burland (1995), (after Burland
and Mair et al (1996)) – 1995)
0 Negligible Hairline cracks. Aesthetic
Damage
1 Very Fine cracks easily treated during normal redecoration.
Slight Perhaps isolated slight fracture in building. Cracks in
exterior visible upon close inspection. Typical crack
widths up to 1mm.
2 Slight Cracks easily filled. Redecoration probably required.
Several slight fractures inside building. Exterior cracks
visible, some repainting may be required for weather-
tightness. Doors and windows may stick slightly.
Typically crack widths up to 5mm.

Page 23 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 3 Moderate Cracks may require cutting out and patching. Recurrent Serviceability
cracks can be masked by suitable linings. Brick pointing Damage
and possible replacement of a small amount of exterior
brickwork may be required. Doors and windows sticking.
Utility services may be interrupted. Weather tightness
often impaired. Typical crack widths are 5mm to 15mm or
several greater than 3mm.
4 Severe Extensive repair involving removal and replacement of
walls especially over door and windows required. Window
and door frames distorted. Floor slopes noticeably. Walls
lean or bulge noticeably. Some loss of bearing in beams.
Utility services disrupted. Typical crack widths are 15mm
to 25mm but also depend on the number of cracks.
5 Very Major repair required involving partial or complete Stability
Severe reconstruction. Beams lose bearing, walls lean badly and Damage
require shoring. Windows broken by distortion. Danger of
instability. Typical crack widths are greater than 25mm but
depend on the number of cracks.

Table 1: Building Damage Classification

Advice Note:

In the table above the column headed “Description of Typical Damage” applies to masonry
buildings only and the column headed “General Category” applies to all buildings.
Duration

41. The take (dewatering) and groundwater diversion consent WAT60419009 must expire
on 19 June 2058 unless it has lapsed, been surrendered or been cancelled at an
earlier date pursuant to the RMA.

Provide for a review under section 128

42. Under section 128 of the RMA the conditions of this consent WAT60419009 may be
reviewed by the Manager Resource Consents at the Consent Holder’s cost:

Within six (6) months after Completion of Dewatering and subsequently at intervals of
not less than five (5) years thereafter in order:

To deal with any adverse effects on the environment which may arise or potentially
arise from the exercise of this consent and which it is appropriate to deal with at a later
stage

To vary the monitoring and reporting requirements, and performance standards, in

order to take account of information, including the results of previous monitoring and
changed environmental knowledge on:

1) ground conditions

2) aquifer parameters

3) groundwater levels; and

4) ground surface movement

Page 24 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Notice of Commencement of Construction Phase Dewatering

43. The Council must be advised in writing at least ten (10) working days prior to the date
of the Commencement of Construction Phase Dewatering.

Design and Construction of Earthworks and Retaining Walls

44. The design and construction of the earthworks to form building platforms for Buildings
A & G and the retaining wall proximate to Building G must be undertaken in
accordance with the specifications contained in the following documents:

• “Geotechnical Plan Review of Preliminary Development Plans 18 Westpoint

Drive, Hobsonville (Lots 1 to 15)”, dated 12 December 2022, Doc. Ref.
AKL2022-0216AB, Rev.0.

• “Groundwater Draw-Down and Boundary Effects Report”, dated 9 May 2023,

Doc. Ref. AKL2022-0216AC Rev 1.

Excavation Limit

45. The Bulk Excavation must not extend 0.6m below the Finished Floor Levels (FFLs) for
Buildings A & G as shown on the Engineering drawing titled “Brigham Creek Business
Park 18 Westpoint Drive – Design Contours”, prepared by Civil Focus Drawing No.
22023-200 Rev A, dated 21 March 2023.

Performance Standards

Damage Avoidance

46. All excavation, dewatering systems, retaining structures and works associated with the
diversion or taking of groundwater, must be designed, constructed and maintained so
as to avoid Damage to buildings, structures and Services on the site or adjacent
properties, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the asset owner.

Additional Surveys

47. Additional condition surveys of any building, structure, or Service must be undertaken,
if requested by the Council, for the purpose of investigating any Damage potentially
caused by ground movement resulting from Construction Phase. Dewatering d or
retaining wall deflection. A written report of the results of the survey must be prepared
and/or reviewed by a SQEP and the report must be submitted to the Council.

The requirement for any such additional condition survey will cease six (6) months after
the Completion of Construction Phase Dewatering unless ground settlement or building
deformation monitoring indicates movement is still occurring at a level that may result
in Damage to buildings, structures, or Services. In such circumstances the period
where additional condition surveys may be required will be extended until monitoring
shows that movement has stabilised and the risk of Damage to buildings, structures
and Services as a result of the dewatering is no longer present.

Access to Third Party Property

48. Where any monitoring, inspection or condition survey in this consent requires access to
property/ies owned by a third party, and access is declined or subject to what the

Page 25 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Consent Holder considers to be unreasonable terms, the Consent Holder must provide
a report to the Council prepared by a SQEP identifying an alternative monitoring
programme. The report must describe how the monitoring will provide sufficient early
detection of deformation to enable measures to be implemented to prevent Damage to
buildings, structures or Services. Written approval from the Council must be obtained
before an alternative monitoring option is implemented.

Contingency Actions

49. If the Consent Holder becomes aware of any Damage to buildings, structures or
Services potentially caused wholly, or in part, by the exercise of this consent, the
Consent Holder must:

a) Notify the Council and the asset owner within two (2) working days of the Consent
Holder becoming aware of the Damage.

b) Provide a report prepared by a SQEP (engaged by the Consent Holder at their cost)
that describes the Damage; identifies the cause of the Damage; identifies methods
to remedy and/or mitigate the Damage that has been caused; identifies the potential
for further Damage to occur and describes actions that will be taken to avoid further
Damage.

c) Provide a copy of the report prepared under (b) above, to the Council and the asset
owner within ten (10) working days of notification under (a) above.

Advice Note:

It is anticipated the Consent Holder will seek the permission of the damaged asset to
access the property and asset to enable the inspection/investigation. It is understood
that if access is denied the report will be of limited extent.

Notice of Completion

50. The Council must be advised in writing within ten (10) working days of when
Construction Phase Dewatering has been completed.

Advice Note:

The Consent Holder is advised that the discharge of pumped groundwater to a

stormwater system or waterbody will need to comply with any other regulations, bylaws
or discharge rules that may apply.

Advice notes
1. Any reference to number of days within this decision refers to working days as
defined in s2 of the RMA.

2. For the purpose of compliance with the conditions of consent, “the council” refers to
the council’s monitoring officer unless otherwise specified. Please email
monitoring@[Link] to identify your allocated officer.

3. For more information on the resource consent process with Auckland Council see
the council’s website: [Link]. General information on

Page 26 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 resource consents, including making an application to vary or cancel consent
conditions can be found on the Ministry for the Environment’s website:
[Link].

4. If you disagree with any of the above conditions, and/or disagree with the additional
charges relating to the processing of the application(s), you have a right of objection
pursuant to sections 357A and/or 357B of the Resource Management Act 1991. Any
objection must be made in writing to the council within 15 working days of your
receipt of this decision (for s357A) or receipt of the council invoice (for s357B).

5. The consent holder is responsible for obtaining all other necessary consents,
permits, and licences, including those under the Building Act 2004, and the Heritage
New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014. This consent does not remove the need to
comply with all other applicable Acts (including the Property Law Act 2007 and the
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015), regulations, relevant Bylaws, and rules of law.
This consent does not constitute building consent approval. Please check whether a
building consent is required under the Building Act 2004.

6. The granting of this, or any other, resource consent does not fetter the ability of
Healthy Waters to fully assess and provide (or withhold) its written approval in terms
of the Totara Creek Network Discharge Consent.

7. Details and specifications for the provision of infrastructure (e.g. public/ private
drainage, location, and types of connections) and access (including drainage of
accessways, construction standards etc) are subject to a separate EPA and/or
Building Consent approval process.

8. Should it become apparent during the EPA and/or Building Consent process that a
component of the granted resource consent cannot be implemented changes to the
proposal will be required. This may require either a variation to this subdivision
consent or a new consent. Similarly, should the detailed design stage demonstrate
that additional reasons for consent under the AUP are triggered (e.g. after detailed
survey the access gradient increases to now infringe or increase an approved
infringement to a standard in the plan), a new or varied resource consent is required.

9. It is the responsibility of the consent holder to ensure that all information submitted
and assessed as part of the subdivision consent is correct and can be implemented
as per the subdivision consent (without requiring additional reasons for consent).
Any subsequent approval processes (such as the EPA) do not override the necessity
to comply with the conditions of this resource consent.

10. Be clear that EPA approval = Bylaw approval (refer to NDC consent conditions) and
approval under the Building Act.

11. If, at any time during site works, sensitive materials (koiwi/human remains, an
archaeology site, a maori cultural artefact, a protected NZ object), contamination or a
lava cave greater than 1m in diameter) are discovered, then the protocol set out in
standards E11.6.1 and E12.6.1 of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) must
be followed. In summary these are:

Page 27 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 a. All earthworks will cease in the immediate vicinity (at least 20m from the site of the
discovery) and the area including a buffer secured to ensure all sensitive material
remains undisturbed.
b. The consent holder must immediately advise Council, Heritage New Zealand Pouhere
Taonga and Police (if human remains are found) and arrange a site inspection with
these parties.
c. If the discovery contains koiwi, archaeology or artefacts of Maori origin, representatives
from those Iwi groups with mana whenua interest in the area are to be provided
information on the nature and location of the discovery.
d. The consent holder must not recommence works until the steps set out in the above-
mentioned standards have been followed and commencement of works approved by
Council.

Advice Notes - Structure and Obstacle Heights

12. No permanent or temporary obstacle (including but not limited to structures,

construction equipment, cranes and trees) may penetrate the Obstacle Limitation
Surface for RNZAF Base Whenuapai (as identified in Designation 4311 - Whenuapai
Airfield Approach and Departure Path Protection) without the prior approval in writing
of the New Zealand Defence Force. It is recommended that applicants contact the
New Zealand Defence Force to discuss requirements (email:
environment@[Link]).

13. Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) rules and regulations apply in relation to the height of
permanent and temporary obstacles (including but not limited to structures,
construction equipment, cranes and trees) within the Obstacle Limitation Surface for
RNZAF Base Whenuapai. All persons carrying out work under this resource consent
and any related building consent must therefore comply with all obligations arising
under CAA rules and regulations, including obligations to notify the Director CAA as
outlined in Civil Aviation Rules Part 77 (Objects and Activities Affecting Navigable
Airspace). Parties are advised to contact CAA for further information.

Delegated decision maker:

Name: Brogan McQuoid

Title: Team Leader, Resource Consents

Signed:

Date: 19 June 2023

Page 28 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)

 Resource Consent Notice of Works Starting
Please email this form to monitoring@[Link] at least 5 days prior to
work starting on your development or post it to the address at the bottom of the page.

Site address:

AREA (please tick Auckland Auckland Hauraki

the box) CBD☐ Isthmus☐ Gulf Islands ☐ Waitakere ☐

Manukau ☐ Rodney ☐ North Shore ☐ Papakura ☐ Franklin ☐

Resource consent number: Associated building consent:

Expected start date of work: Expected duration of work:

Primary contact Name Mobile / Address Email address

Landline

Owner

Project manager

Builder

Earthmover

Arborist

Other (specify)

Signature: Owner / Project Manager (indicate which) Date:

Once you have been contacted by the Monitoring Officer, all correspondence should be sent
directly to them.
SAVE $$$ minimise monitoring costs!
The council will review your property for start of works every three months from the date of issue of
the resource consent and charge for the time spent. You can contact your Resource Consent
Monitoring Officer on 09 301 0101 or via monitoring@[Link] to discuss a likely
timetable of works before the inspection is carried out and to avoid incurring this cost.

Page 29 of 49 August 2022 RC 6.20.04 (V5)