PROPOSED NORTHERN RUNWAY FOR AUCKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT TO ALTER DESIGNATIONS 1100 AND 1102

Transcription

1 PROPOSED NORTHERN RUNWAY FOR AUCKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED NOTICES OF REQUIREMENT TO ALTER DESIGNATIONS 1100 AND

2 GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS Aircraft Noise Contours ANNA ASAN Auckland Unitary Plan CIAs CMA CVAs db Designated Northern Runway Existing Runway GDP HANA L dn MANA NORs NOR Report The High Aircraft Noise Area, the Moderate Aircraft Noise Area, and the Aircraft Noise Notification Area. Aircraft Noise Notification Area: which is the area generally between the 55 db Ldn and 60 db Ldn future aircraft noise contours as shown on the Aircraft Noise Overlay Map for Auckland International Airport. Activities Sensitive to Aircraft Noise: which means any dwellings, boarding houses, tertiary education facilities, marae, integrated residential development, papakainga, retirement village, supported residential care, educational facilities, care centres, hospitals and healthcare facilities with an overnight stay facility. Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in Part. Cultural Impact Assessments. Coastal Marine Area. Cultural Values Assessments. Decibel. The unit of sound level. Expressed as a logarithmic ratio of sound pressure P relative to a reference pressure of Pr=20 µpa i.e. db = 20 x log(p/pr). The northern runway provided for in the existing conditions of Designation 1100 with an operational length of 2,150 metres. The current operational southern runway. Gross Domestic Product. High Aircraft Noise Area: which is the area generally within the 65 db Ldn future aircraft noise contours as shown on the Aircraft Noise Overlay Map for Auckland International Airport. The day night noise level which is calculated from the 24 hour LAeq with a 10 db penalty applied to the night-time ( hours) LAeq. Moderate Aircraft Noise Area: which is the area generally between the 60 db Ldn and 65 db Ldn future aircraft noise contours as shown on the Aircraft Noise Overlay Map for Auckland International Airport. Notices of Requirement to alter Designations 1100 and 1102 in the Auckland Unitary Plan. The report and assessment of environmental effects accompanying the NORs. NZCPS New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement OLS Obstacle Limitation Surfaces: which are defined areas around and above an aerodrome intended for the protection of aircraft within the vicinity of an aerodrome

3 Proposed Northern Runway RESA REPA The location of the second runway determined as the preferred runway option from the assessment of alternatives (known as Option 3), located to the north of the Existing Runway with an operational length of 2,983 metres. Runway End Safety Area. Runway End Protection Areas, which refers to those areas where the chance of an incident where an aircraft would impact the ground is of a level (statistically) that may represent a public hazard. RMA Resource Management Act TKITA TORA Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority. Take-off run available: The length of runway declared available and suitable for the ground run of an aeroplane taking off

4 FORM 18 (Designation 1100) NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT BY AUCKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED FOR AN ALTERATION TO EXISTING DESIGNATION 1100 UNDER SECTION 181 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 TO: Auckland Council Private Bag Auckland 1142 FROM: Auckland International Airport Limited ("Auckland Airport") PO Box Manukau Auckland 2150 Auckland Airport, as a requiring authority under section 167 of the Resource Management Act 1991 ("RMA"), gives notice of a requirement to alter Designation 1100 in the Auckland Unitary Plan. Auckland Airport was approved as a requiring authority by notice in the New Zealand Gazette. A copy of the relevant Gazette notice and Order in Council are attached as Appendix 1. The site to which the requirement applies The site to which the alteration applies is Auckland International Airport at George Bolt Memorial Drive, Mangere. The site to which the requirement relates is owned by Auckland Airport (refer Appendix 2 for a schedule of titles owned by Auckland Airport). The nature of the proposed work The alteration is to enable the construction and operation of a longer second runway, to the north of the existing runway at Auckland Airport. Designation 1100 already enables the use of the designated land at Auckland Airport for runways and other aircraft operations, as well as expressly providing for a second runway of 2,150 metres (operational length), to be located to the north of the existing runway and west of the alignment of George Bolt Memorial Drive. The proposed alterations to Designation 1100 do not seek to alter the area of land already designated. Rather, they propose to amend the conditions of Designation 1100 to enable the construction and operation of a second runway of 2,983 metres (operational length). The proposed alterations to Designation 1100 are described in section 2 of the attached report ("NOR Report"). The nature of the proposed conditions The proposed conditions are attached as Appendix 4. The proposed alterations to the conditions of Designation 1100 will enable the construction of a longer second runway, north of the Existing Runway. No changes are sought to the area of land already designated for airport purposes under Designation

5 The effects of the alteration on the environment, and the ways any adverse effects will be mitigated An assessment of the potential effects and a summary of the proposed measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate any potential adverse effects of the alterations are set out in section 7 of the NOR Report. In summary, the construction and operation of a longer second runway will enable Auckland Airport to, by 2044, provide a range of positive effects including: increased operational capacity to process up to 40 million passengers; creation of up to 27,000 new full time jobs; a $1.4BN lift in household incomes; and a $2BN lift in Auckland's GDP. Potential adverse effects associated with the Proposed Northern Runway include: noise effects; archaeological effects; cultural effects; and ecological effects. The assessment of environmental effects (described in section 7 of the NOR Report) concludes that any potential adverse effects arising from the construction and operation of a longer second runway can be adequately managed so that adverse effects are avoided, remedied or mitigated. Proposed alterations to the conditions to avoid, remedy or mitigate any potential adverse effect are attached as Appendix 4 to the NOR Report. Alternative sites, routes and methods have been considered to the following extent Auckland Airport undertook an extensive option evaluation process before the Proposed Northern Runway option was selected. Existing environmental values within northern and southern "areas of influence" were assessed. Ten runway options were then developed and a process to identify a preferred runway option followed that assessment phase. The preferred runway option selection process involved a multi-criteria analysis of social, environmental, economic and cultural criteria. Consultation with various key stakeholders has also assisted this process. The assessment of alternatives is described in more detail in section 6 of the NOR Report. The alteration is reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of the requiring authority In the 50 years since Auckland Airport opened, the Airport has evolved and grown from only several hundred thousand passengers in 1966 to 19 million in By 2044, passenger numbers are predicted to increase to 40 million per year. To cater for the predicted growth in passenger numbers and the aircraft that will be needed to cater for the growth, the Designated Northern Runway needs to be 72 metres further north than is currently provided for in Designation 1100, and extended from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres (operational length). The Proposed Northern Runway will be located to the north of the new integrated terminal and will run parallel with the Existing Runway. Moving the Designated Northern Runway further north and extending the length of that Runway will provide greater capacity needed to accommodate the anticipated passenger growth. The Proposed Northern Runway will primarily support larger planes such as A380, B777 and B787 but will also accommodate transpacific and north-bound domestic flights. A longer second runway will also provide operational resilience in the event that the Existing Runway needs to

6 be closed. By maximising the use of the Existing Runway, the Proposed Northern Runway is expected to be operational by Auckland Airport's objectives for the alteration are to: ensure that over the next years, the aeronautical capacity of the runway system can efficiently meet forecast demand by increasing the maximum runway operational length of the Designated Northern Runway from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres; ensure that the runway system continues to meet terminal operational requirements by increasing separation distance between the two runways from 1,950 metres to 2,022 metres; and minimise the effects of aircraft noise impacts on the surrounding community as far as practicable whilst also minimising adverse environmental and cultural effects. The proposed alterations are reasonably necessary for achieving these objectives. The following resource consents are needed for the proposed activity and have been applied for Resource consents are held for earthworks, stormwater diversion and discharge, and reclamation of permanent streams in association with the implementation of Designation It is anticipated that these resource consents permit the construction of the Proposed Northern Runway without the need for any additional regional consents. As detailed design of the Proposed Northern Runway progresses, any further consents needed will be sought accordingly. The following consultation has been undertaken with parties that are likely to be affected Auckland Airport has consulted with those parties considered to have a particular interest in the Proposed Northern Runway: Central and Local Government Representatives Ministry of Education New Zealand Transport Agency Auckland Transport Civil Aviation Authority Board of Airlines Representatives New Zealand Inc. Air New Zealand Airways New Zealand Affected landowners within the proposed expanded area of the Aircraft Noise Contours Mana whenua Housing New Zealand Corporation Heritage New Zealand Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group Auckland: The Plane Truth Ernest Kirk The consultation undertaken are described in section 12 of the NOR Report. Auckland Airport attaches the following information required to be included in this notice by the District Plan, Regional Plan or any regulations made under the RMA No specific information is required to be included in this notice by the Auckland Unitary Plan

7 ... Kellie Roland Manager Airport Planning Date: 14 August 2017 Address for service: c/- Russell McVeagh Level 30, Vero Centre 48 Shortland Street PO Box 8 Auckland 1140 Attention: Lauren Eaton lauren.eaton@russellmcveagh.com

8 FORM 18 (Designation 1102) NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT BY AUCKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED FOR AN ALTERATION TO EXISTING DESIGNATION 1102 UNDER SECTION 181 OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991 TO: Auckland Council Private Bag Auckland 1142 FROM: Auckland International Airport Limited ("Auckland Airport") PO Box Manukau Auckland 2150 Auckland Airport, as a requiring authority under section 167 of the RMA gives notice of a requirement for an alteration to Designation 1102 in the Auckland Unitary Plan. Auckland Airport was approved as a requiring authority by notice in the New Zealand Gazette. A copy of the relevant Gazette notice and Order in Council are attached as Appendix 1. The site to which the requirement applies The sites to which the requirement relates are, for the most part, not owned by Auckland Airport. A schedule of titles is attached as Appendix 30. The nature of the proposed work Alterations to Designation 1102 seek to update the relevant specifications for obstacle limitation surfaces, restrictions relating to runway end protection areas, requirements for non-aeronautical ground lights adjacent to extended runway centre lines pertaining to both the Existing Runway and Proposed Northern Runway. The proposed alterations to Designation 1102 are described in section 8 of the NOR Report. The nature of the proposed conditions The purpose and explanatory commentary for Designation 1102 is proposed to be altered to reflect the revised specifications obstacle limitation surfaces, restrictions relating to runway end protection areas, and requirements for non-aeronautical ground lights adjacent to extended runway centre lines pertaining to both the Existing Runway and Proposed Northern Runway, which is proposed to be altered as a result of the alterations proposed to the Designated Northern Runway in Designation 1100 and to ensure compliance with the Civil Aviation Authority's Advisory Circular AC129-6 (Revision 5). The proposed conditions to Designation 1102 are attached as Appendix

9 The effects of the alteration on the environment, and the ways any adverse effects will be mitigated The effects of the proposed alterations to Designation 1102 are technical in nature and affect land owned by Auckland Airport. In respect of land not owned by Auckland Airport, the changes do not otherwise create any additional effects on landowners over and above the underlying zoning provisions (specifically in relation to the height of buildings and structures). Alternative sites, routes and methods have been considered to the following extent The extent and geometry for each specification within Designation 1102 is based on the approach category of the runway in addition to threshold coordinates and the aerodrome datum. Therefore, Designation 1102 is contingent on Designation 1100 insofar as the coordinates of the Existing Runway and Proposed Northern Runway are set by that designation. As such, no alternative sites, routes or methods can reasonably be considered in respect of Designation The alteration is reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of the requiring authority The alterations are necessary to allow Auckland Airport to operate the aerodrome in a safe and efficient manner. The alterations meet Auckland Airport's objectives insofar as they: ensure that over the next years, the aeronautical capacity of the runway system can efficiently meet forecast demand by increasing the maximum runway operational length of the Designated Northern Runway from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres; ensure that the runway system continues to meet terminal operational requirements by increasing separation distance between the two runways from 1,950 metres to 2,022 metres; and minimise the effects of aircraft noise impacts on the surrounding community as far as practicable whilst also avoiding or minimising other adverse environmental and cultural effects. The proposed alterations are reasonably necessary for achieving these objectives. The following resource consents are needed for the proposed activity and have been applied for No resource consents are required to give effect to Designation The following consultation has been undertaken with parties that are likely to be affected Auckland Airport has consulted with those parties considered to have a particular interest in the second runway: Central and Local Government Representatives Ministry of Education New Zealand Transport Agency Auckland Transport Civil Aviation Authority Board of Airlines Representatives New Zealand Inc. Air New Zealand Airways New Zealand Affected landowners within the proposed expanded area of the Aircraft Noise Contours Mana whenua Housing New Zealand Corporation Heritage New Zealand

10 Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group Auckland: The Plane Truth Ernest Kirk The consultation undertaken are described in section 12 of the NOR Report. Auckland Airport attaches the following information required to be included in this notice by the District Plan, Regional Plan or any regulations made under the RMA No specific information is required to be included in this notice by the Auckland Unitary Plan.... Kellie Roland Manager Airport Planning Date: 14 August 2017 Address for service: c/- Russell McVeagh Level 30, Vero Centre 48 Shortland Street PO Box 8 Auckland 1140 Attention: Lauren Eaton lauren.eaton@russellmcveagh.com

11 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO DESIGNATION SITE DESCRIPTION BACKGROUND ENVIRONMENT BASELINE REPORTS FOR ALTERATIONS TO DESIGNATION ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES FOR DESIGNATION ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO CONDITIONS OF DESIGNATION PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO 1102 AND ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ASSESSMENT OF RELEVANT PLANNING PROVISIONS IN RELATION TO ALTERATIONS TO DESIGNATIONS 1100 AND REASONABLY NECESSARY OTHER MATTERS STAKEHOLDER AND COMMUNITY CONSULTATION NOTIFICATION CONCLUSION SCHEDULE OF APPENDICES

12 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Auckland Airport connects Auckland with New Zealand and New Zealand with the world. It is fundamental to the prosperity of Auckland and is critical to New Zealand's trade and tourism market. Based on current projections, over the next 30 years Auckland Airport will contribute up to 27,000 new full time jobs, provide a $1.4BN lift in household incomes, and a $2BN lift in Auckland's GDP. 1.2 With 99% of visitors to New Zealand arriving by air, the aviation sector is "a fundamental driver of tourism". 1 As stated in a recent Tourism 2025 report: 2 There has been a major step-change in New Zealand's connectivity with the world. More airlines are flying to and from New Zealand, operating with increased capacity on more routes, right around the Pacific Rim and beyond. New Zealand has never been as well connected via its aviation networks and further substantial capacity growth is planned. There has been matching investment in airport facilities to accommodate the growth and to promote route opportunities to airlines. A more competitive domestic aviation market has developed which has increased capacity and reduced fares on many routes. The wider tourism industry has a better understanding of its role in supporting sustainable air connections. 1.3 New Zealand's air connections with the rest of the world continue to expand at a rapid pace. Such connections are critical to both tourism and the wider economy. The development of airport infrastructure enables New Zealand to future proof its ability to compete globally as a well-connected, high value economy. 1.4 Currently handling 19 million passengers annually, 3 Auckland Airport is the third largest airport in Australasia for international traffic and the second largest cargo port in New Zealand by value. 4 In order to realise the current projected growth of 40 million passengers a year by 2044, Auckland Airport needs to continue to strengthen its aeronautical capacity. 1.5 Auckland Airport is approaching a critical time for capital investment. Major expansions to the international terminal are underway and further international developments are planned, along with the integration of domestic and international facilities. Along with the planned second runway, the forecast capital envelope for the next ten years is unprecedented in the 50 year history of Auckland Airport. 1.6 Planning for this growth requires an appreciation of balance between the needs of aviation activities, operational requirements, commercial opportunity and landside connectivity, within the wider local, regional and national planning and environmental context. To this extent, Auckland Airport published the most recent iteration of its Masterplan in The 2014 Masterplan: (a) (b) was commercially focussed; was planned, affordable, stage-able and implementable; 1 Tourism 2025, Growing Value Together, (March 2014) available at archive/grow-sustainable-air-connectivity-2/. 2 Tourism 2025, Growing Value Together Two Years On, (May 2016) available at 3 Auckland Airport, June 2017 Monthly Traffic Update, (issued 24 July 2017) and available at < 4 Arup, Second Runway Option Development, (September 2016) at

13 (c) (d) (e) (f) provided the right initial position that permits effective responses to future changes and shifts; had a time horizon of 2044 (30 year vision); considered environmental, social and cultural impacts; and enabled a high quality experience for passengers, airlines, resident workers and visitors. 1.7 The strategic drivers of the 2014 Masterplan included the need for dual future proofed runways, a resilient mid-field capable of accommodating Code-F aircraft, along with an integrated terminal with a southern location for the domestic sector and a northern location for the international sector. 1.8 Auckland Airport's key objectives in the development and delivery of a second runway include: (a) (b) (c) ensuring that over the next years, the aeronautical capacity of the runway system can efficiently meet forecast demand by increasing the maximum runway operational length of the second runway in the existing designation ("Designated Northern Runway") from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres; ensuring that the runway system continues to meet terminal operational requirements by increasing separation distance between the two runways from 1,950 metres to 2,022 metres; and minimising the effects of aircraft noise impacts on the surrounding community as far as practicable whilst also minimising adverse environmental and cultural effects. 1.9 In order to facilitate the development of a second runway that has a longer operational length (of 2,983 metres) and is located 72 metres further to the north than the Designated Northern Runway ("Proposed Northern Runway"), Auckland Airport needs to alter Designation 1100 to enable the construction and operation of the Proposed Northern Runway as shown on Figure 1 below In order to ensure that Auckland Airport does not become capacity constrained, Auckland Airport needs to seek the necessary planning approvals by way of alterations to its existing Designations now. Delays from aircraft using the current operational southern runway ("Existing Runway") are currently projected to be within benchmark levels. However, based on forecast growth, delays are projected to exceed benchmark levels by 2027 (with delays significantly exceeding benchmark levels by 2032). As a result, a second runway that is capable of accommodating long haul international flights is projected to be required by Figure 1 shows the operational length of the Proposed Northern Runway, which is the length of runway available and suitable for the ground run of an aircraft taking off and is otherwise known as the Take-Off Run Available ("TORA") and the total length, which includes the operational length and the Runway End Safety Areas

14 Figure 1 - Proposed Northern Runway 1.11 As a result of the proposed alterations to Designation 1100, Auckland Airport is also required to alter Designation 1102 as the location of the Runway End Protection Areas ("REPA") and Obstacle Limitation Surfaces ("OLS") are determined by the location of the Proposed Northern Runway. Alterations are also proposed to Designation 1102 to comply with the Civil Aviation Authority's Advisory Circular AC129-6 (Revision 5) The effects of these proposed alterations are discussed in detail in the assessment of environmental effects in this NOR Report and the supporting technical reports that have been prepared in respect of these NORs. 2. PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO DESIGNATION Auckland Airport seeks to alter the conditions of Designation 1100 in the Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in Part ("Auckland Unitary Plan") to provide for a second runway that has a longer operational length and is located 72 metres further to the north than the Designated Northern Runway. 2.2 No changes are sought to the extent of land designated for airport purposes under Designation A schedule of properties to which Designation 1100 applies is attached at Appendix Auckland Airport proposes, through amendments to the conditions of Designation 1100, to increase the operational length of the Designated Northern Runway from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres. The increased length will provide increased capacity to Auckland Airport's current operations and allow greater operational flexibility in terms of the use of the Proposed Northern Runway for wide-bodied aircraft

15 2.4 The separation distance between the Existing Runway and the Designated Northern Runway is to be increased from 1,950 metres to 2,022 metres. The 72-metre additional separation allows for independent, simultaneous operations from both runways as well as allowing sufficient space in the midfield area for accommodating larger Code F (e.g. A380, B777 and B787) aircraft stands between terminal piers. 2.5 The locational effect of changes to the Designated Northern Runway are illustrated in Figure 2 below. Figure 2 - Locational effect of proposed alterations to the Designated Northern Runway 2.6 As a result of the change to the length and location of the Designated Northern Runway, the extent of the Aircraft Noise Contours also change. Auckland Airport seeks that the Aircraft Noise Contours in Designation 1100 be altered to reflect the extent of the Aircraft Noise Overlay contours in the Auckland Unitary Plan, 6 as shown in Figure 3 and Appendix 3. A plan showing the comparison of the existing designated Aircraft Noise Contours and the proposed Aircraft Noise Contours is also included in Appendix 3. 6 The Aircraft Noise Contours in the Aircraft Noise Overlay were confirmed through the Auckland Unitary Plan process and are now operative

16 Figure 3 - Proposed Aircraft Noise Contours 2.7 Amendments to the conditions relating to the noise mitigation package for dwellings and the reporting of noise monitoring and methods for reducing aircraft noise are also proposed. The proposed alterations to the conditions of Designation 1100 and a summary table explaining each of the proposed amendments is attached in Appendix SITE DESCRIPTION 3.1 Auckland Airport is located on the eastern side of Manukau Harbour. As illustrated in Figure 4, the land containing the runway and terminal buildings lies to the south of Oruarangi Creek and to the west of Pūkaki Creek and is surrounded to the west and south by the Manukau Harbour. Figure 4 identifies the extent of the area of land designated under Designation

17 Figure 4 - Site location plan of Auckland Airport 3.2 Ground transport access to the Airport is from two main locations, from the north along George Bolt Memorial Drive (State Highway 20A) and from the east along Puhinui Road (State Highway 20B) and across a bridge over the Pūkaki Creek. 3.3 Further Auckland Airport landholdings lie to the east of Pūkaki Creek. Much of this land, like most of Auckland Airport's extensive landholdings, are designated for airport purposes. A schedule of titles to which Designation 1100 relates is attached at Appendix 2. The only Auckland Airport landholding not so designated is the land to the south of Puhinui Road. That land is subject to a Light Industrial zoning and lies within Puhinui Sub Precincts A and B in the Auckland Unitary Plan, which provides for limited airport related activities. 3.4 The Airport land is undulating, with the highest point located along a natural east / west ridge in the centre of the site (generally in the area currently designated for the second runway). The land falls away from this high point to the east and north. Land to the south around the Existing Runway is generally low lying with sections of the Existing Runway having been reclaimed. 3.5 The Manukau Harbour is an important ecological resource and contains large areas for wader and shorebird roosting and feeding. An important geological feature, the Ihumatao fossilised kauri forest, lies in the intertidal area to the west of the Proposed Northern Runway. 3.6 Areas to the north of the Proposed Northern Runway and between the Proposed Northern Runway and the Existing Runway have been or are being developed for a range of airportrelated activities, as well as warehousing, heavy transport and distribution activities. 3.7 The environment on and around the area proposed for the Designated Northern Runway has already been significantly modified. Earthworks and some associated stream works were carried out in 2007 and 2008 to form the northern runway platform (based on the Designated Northern Runway layout) west of George Bolt Memorial Drive, together with a taxiway between the existing international terminal and the Designated Northern Runway

18 4. BACKGROUND Masterplanning 4.1 Due to the nature of airport infrastructure and the significant investment required to develop that infrastructure, long term planning is critical to the development of airports. In this regard, airport operators typically carry out masterplanning exercises. The concept of masterplanning is explained in the Second Runway Option Development Report (attached as Appendix 5): 7 A masterplan is a strategic planning document and delivery tool. It sets the context within which individual projects are conceived and delivered to achieve the best value. Masterplans are high level documents that cover a wide range of spatial scales and timescales (typically of the order of years) leaving the detail about individual buildings, spaces and infrastructure requirements to a more detailed design phase. Masterplans are not rigid blueprints to be achieved at all costs, rather they show how places can work for the better in the future and what needs to be coordinated and controlled to achieve this over time. Masterplans are typically reviewed and updated every 5-10 years and will evolve over time. There is no statutory requirement for Airport Authorities in New Zealand to undertake masterplanning. It is, however, standard practice at many airports in New Zealand (as well as elsewhere worldwide) to develop strategic documents that establish the pathway for long term planning and investment. 4.2 In order to ensure that it can meet the projected levels of demand, Auckland Airport is continuously planning the development of its landholdings by masterplanning their use and development. Auckland Airport has previously published two Masterplans, in 1990 and in The proposed layout of the runway system in the 1990 and 2005 Masterplans are illustrated in Figures 5 and 6 below. The 1990 Masterplan proposed a consolidated terminal precinct comprising an international and domestic terminal along with a circa 3,000 metres northern runway. 7 Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at

19 Figure Masterplan Figure Masterplan 4.4 The 2005 Masterplan identified a shorter northern runway based on accommodating predominantly domestic aircraft movements and utilising a domestic terminal located to the north of the existing international terminal. 4.5 In 2012, Arup was commissioned to develop a new Masterplan for Auckland Airport. The approach taken was to design and deliver a spatial plan of the Airport (airside and landside) with a time horizon out to

20 4.6 The Masterplan, which is the Airport's 30 year vision, was adopted by Auckland Airport in 2014 ("2014 Masterplan"), and is attached at Appendix 6. As set out in the Second Runway Option Development report (attached as Appendix 5), the 2014 Masterplan identified that: 8 Auckland Airport is currently a destination airport, acting as an international gateway to New Zealand based on its robust domestic-international and domestic-domestic hub operation. This was validated by the fact that in 2013 Auckland experienced the second highest throughput of international passenger traffic behind Sydney in the Australasian region. Since the development of the Masterplan, Auckland Airport now has the third highest throughput behind Melbourne, but it still remains a strong hub operation in the region. 4.7 Over a thirty-year time horizon, it was recognised that as other Australasian airports become constrained, Auckland Airport has the potential to become a principal gateway for Australasia through the consolidation of links with secondary Australian airports such as Perth, Adelaide and Cairns The 2014 Masterplan also noted that aviation growth is most efficiently provided for when configured at an airport which can act as an international "hub". This allows consolidation of routes, optimisation of airline and alliance operations and maximisation of aircraft load factors Given Auckland Airport's proximity to Asia, Australia and the Americas, the location and time zone between Asia, Americas, and Australia, the growth in flights and passengers, specifically from South America and Asia, the rise of household incomes and the strengthening trading partnership between China and Brazil, Auckland Airport is considered to be best proposition for an airline considering New Zealand as a destination To facilitate the "gateway" proposition, the 2014 Masterplan proposed the following changes to earlier terminal and airfield configurations: (a) (b) an integrated terminal with a southern location for the domestic sector and a northern location for the international sector; an increased separation between the centreline of the southern and northern runway to allow for independent, simultaneous operations from both runways as well as allowing sufficient space in the midfield area for accommodating larger Code F (e.g. Airbus A380, B777, B787) aircraft stands between terminal piers; and (c) an extension of the northern runway to a longer configuration of approximately 2,810 metres with a Take Off Run Available ("TORA") of 3,110 metres (which assumed the use of the Runway End Safety Area as a starter strip). 8 Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at This reflects that international visitors often travel to both New Zealand and Australia on the same trip and therefore need to connect through a particular gateway. 10 Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at

21 Figure Masterplan Auckland Unitary Plan process 4.11 As a result of the runway alignment proposed in the 2014 Masterplan, Auckland Airport determined that the Aircraft Noise Contours (as they applied within the Operative Manukau District Plan) would need to be amended through the Auckland Unitary Plan process Auckland Airport lodged a submission on the Auckland Unitary Plan seeking to expand the Aircraft Noise Contours in relation to the land use provisions contained in the Aircraft Noise Overlay. The revised contours sought by Auckland Airport were based on modelling of the northern runway proposed in the Masterplan and how that runway and the Existing Runway would be used When the Auckland Unitary Plan was notified, Auckland Airport was not in a position to seek the more detailed changes that would have been required to amend the Aircraft Noise Contours in Designation Auckland Airport considered that by seeking to amend the Aircraft Noise Contours through the Unitary Plan process for land use purposes, it was acting in a prudent and responsible manner as confirmation of the Contours in the Aircraft Noise Overlay would ensure that Activities Sensitive to Aircraft Noise ("ASAN") would not unknowingly establish near the Airport and later be subject to high or moderate levels of aircraft noise. The Independent Hearings Panel on the Auckland Unitary Plan endorsed the view that Auckland Airport had "acted responsibly in bringing this matter forward" through the Auckland Unitary Plan process and recommended that the Aircraft Noise Contours be included in the Unitary Plan The Aircraft Noise Contours in the Aircraft Noise Overlay control the use of land within those areas, while the Aircraft Noise Contours in Designation 1100 control the amount of aircraft noise that can be generated within those areas. 13 Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel, Report to Auckland Council Hearing Topic 045 Airports (July 2016), at page

22 4.15 The Council subsequently accepted the expanded Aircraft Noise Contours in its decisions and the Aircraft Noise Overlay provisions are now operative in the Auckland Unitary Plan. Auckland Airport cannot generate increased levels of aircraft noise (associated with the operation of a second runway) unless it alters the Aircraft Noise Contours in Designation 1100 through this NOR Report. Auckland Airport's existing Designations 4.16 Auckland Airport is a Requiring Authority pursuant to section 167 of the RMA in relation to three designations in the Auckland Unitary Plan as follows: (a) (b) (c) Designation 1100 covers the bulk of the Auckland Airport's land holdings and authorises the use of the land for activities for the operation of the Airport and related purposes subject to certain conditions. Designation 1101 authorises the use of land in the Renton Road area for aircraft operations and maintenance purposes. A separate set of conditions specific to the Renton Road area applies. 14 Designation 1102 contains a range of aeronautical safety restrictions as follows: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) restrictions on the height of obstacles (such as buildings or trees) in the areas shown on diagrams attached to the Designation; restrictions on the rate of heat discharges (e.g. from industrial air discharge stacks) in the areas shown on diagrams attached to the Designation; restrictions on the location of buildings and the congregation of people in the REPA shown on diagrams attached to the Designation; and restrictions on glare from non-aeronautical lighting in the areas shown on diagrams attached to the Designation. Resource consents held by Auckland Airport 4.17 The following existing earthworks, stormwater discharge and stream works consents are held by Auckland Airport for the entire Designation 1100 area: ARC No ARC No ARC No Regional consent for diversion and discharge of stormwater within the area of Designation 1100 north of the Existing Runway in accordance with section 14(1)(a) and 15(1)(a) and (b) of the RMA. Expiry: 31 December 2029 Regional consent to authorise 469 hectares of earthworks within the area of Designation 1100 north of the Existing Runway in accordance with section 9(3) of the RMA. Expiry: 1 December 2030 Regional consent to authorise the reclamation of, and the placement of stormwater pipes on, the bed of approximately 1968 metres of perennial watercourses within the area of Designation 1100 north of the Existing Runway in accordance with section 13 of the RMA. 14 Designation 1101 is not subject to the NORs and no alterations are proposed to it

23 Resource consents required Expiry: 1 December It is anticipated that the existing consents listed above permit the construction of the Proposed Northern Runway without the need for any additional regional consents. As detailed design of the Proposed Northern Runway progresses, any further consents needed will be sought accordingly For completeness, it is noted that navigational aids and airport light structures are permitted activities in the Auckland Airport Coastal sub-precinct of the Auckland Unitary Plan (A52 of Table I ) and navigational aids and airport light structures are permitted activities in the General Coastal Marine zone (A129 of Table F ). Subject to these coastal plan provisions being formally approved by the Minister of Conservation, resource consent will not be required for any navigation lighting structures required for the Proposed Northern Runway. 5. ENVIRONMENT BASELINE REPORTS FOR ALTERATIONS TO DESIGNATION To understand both the existing environmental values of the Airport area, as well as the potential constraints of land and sea based runway options, northern and southern "areas of influence" were identified to the north and south of the Existing Runway, as illustrated in Figure 8. Figure 8 - Northern and Southern "Areas of Influence" 5.2 A range of subject matter experts were engaged in 2015 to identify the existing environmental values within each of the areas of influence and how those values would be affected by the development of a second runway either to the north or the south of the Existing Runway ("Proposed Second Runway"). 5.3 The environmental baseline reports covered the following matters:

24 (a) Archaeology (prepared by Clough and Associates and attached as Appendix 7); (b) Aircraft Noise (prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics and attached as Appendix 8); (c) Ecological values (prepared by Bioresearches and attached as Appendix 9); (d) Coastal processes (prepared by Tonkin and Taylor and attached as Appendix 10); (e) Landscape and visual values (prepared by Isthmus and attached as Appendix 11); (f) (g) Geotechnical (prepared by Tonkin and Taylor and attached as Appendix 12); and Cultural Values Summary Report (prepared by Chetham Consultants Limited and attached as Appendix 13). 5.4 The environmental baseline reports concluded that there are a range of environmental values in the northern and southern areas of influence that might be affected by the construction and operation of a Proposed Second Runway. In respect of the northern area of influence: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) There are a number of archaeological sites likely to be located at the eastern and western ends of the northern area of influence. 15 The impact of aircraft noise from a Proposed Second Runway within the northern area of influence would likely be greater than a runway within the southern area of influence. 16 The marine environment within the northern area of influence is of high ecological value because it encompasses a variety of quality habitats that support dense populations of marine invertebrates. Vegetation within this area of influence is of low ecological value (as it is dominated by farmed or managed land), but there is a significant area of wetland located which is of higher ecological value and the market lettuce garden is a major bird roost. The northern area of influence is of low ecological value to long-tailed bats but is of potential value to herpetofauna. 17 The potential reclamation associated with a Proposed Second Runway in the northern area of influence is of similar scale to the reclamation needed to create the Existing Runway and would have similar effects to those that were observed from the construction of the Existing Runway. While there is likely to be increased siltation on the intertidal areas to the north, it will not significantly affect tidal currents as it is situated centrally on a large intertidal flat. 18 The location of a Proposed Second Runway within the northern area of influence would result in the least adverse landscape effects. Any reclamation into the Manukau Harbour would potentially affect biophysical aspects of natural character including potential destruction of the Ihumatao Fossil Forest. 19 The northern area of influence traverses variable topography and earthworks to form the design platform would extend through a range of geotechnical units, including 15 Clough, Proposed Northern Runway and Southern Runway Options, Auckland International Airport, Mangere: Archaeological Constraints Assessment, (March 2016) at page i. 16 Marshall Day Acoustics, Second Runway Baseline Report Noise, (May 2016), at Bioresearches, Auckland International Airport Limited Proposed Second Runway Environmental Baseline Assessment, (July 2016) at pages Tonkin and Taylor, Proposed Second Runway Environmental Baseline Report Coastal Process Issues, (October 2015) at page Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Second Runway Landscape Baseline Report, (October 2015) at

25 volcanic ash/tuff, very stiff to stiff clayey silts and loose silty sands, which would need to be considered for design and construction of a Proposed Second Runway in this area In respect of the southern area of influence, the environmental baseline reports concluded that: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Locating the Proposed Second Runway in this area would affect a number of archaeological sites, but archeologically these sites are of limited significance and have largely been destroyed. 21 Manukau East would be the suburb with the highest noise impact from a Proposed Second Runway within this area of influence. While the noise level would be comparable to Otara for the northern area of influence, the overall noise impact would be lower as there are fewer ASAN. 22 Wiroa Island, which is located within this area of influence, could include areas of wetland that would be relatively undisturbed and therefore of moderate to high ecological value and is also a major bird roost. As with the northern area of influence, the southern area of influence is of low ecological value to long-tailed bats but is of potential value to herpetofauna. 23 A Proposed Second Runway in this area of influence is likely to have a significant impact on coastal processes and the operating hydraulic regime. 24 The southern area of influence has greater landscape values and represents significant constraints for development as a Proposed Second Runway as it would potentially affect biophysical aspects of natural character, including the partial destruction of Wiroa Island In addition to the environmental baseline reports, a Cultural Values Summary Report (attached as Appendix 13) was prepared which summarises the Cultural Values Assessments ("CVAs") that were received from Te Ākitai o Waiohua, Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority ("TKITA"), Ngāti Te Ata and Ngāti Tamaoho. While these mana whenua generally do not support the development of the a second runway, they all indicated a strong desire to continue to work collaboratively with Auckland Airport to ensure positive cultural outcomes can be achieved through the NOR Report process, if the Proposed Second Runway has to proceed. 5.7 As outlined in the Cultural Values summary report, the site is bordered to the east by Te Ākitai Waiohua residing at Pūkaki. The Proposed Second Runway (in the northern area of influence) sits adjacent to the Pūkaki Peninsula (separated by the Pūkaki Creek), which is notable for both its continued occupation by Te Ākitai Waiohua since pre-european times and because it features other sites of specific cultural or historic significance to the people of Te Ākitai Waiohua. Te Ākitai Waiohua has a strong spiritual (Taha wairua) association with Pūkaki and 20 Tonkin and Taylor Proposed Second Runway Environmental Baseline Report Coastal Process Issues, (October 2015) at page Clough, Proposed Northern Runway and Southern Runway Options, Auckland International Airport, Mangere: Archaeological Constraints Assessment, (March 2016) at page i. The report also noted that many of those sites were scheduled as Sites and Places of Value to Mana Whenua in the notified version of the Unitary Plan. Those sites are no longer scheduled in the Auckland Unitary Plan. 22 Marshall Day Acoustics, Second Runway Baseline Report Noise, (May 2016) at Bioresearches, Auckland International Airport Limited Proposed Second Runway Environmental Baseline Assessment, (July 2016) at pages Tonkin and Taylor, Proposed Second Runway Environmental Baseline Report Coastal Process Issues, (October 2015) at page Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Second Runway Landscape Baseline Report, (October 2015) at

26 the wider Puhinui Peninsula in the Manukau Harbour, which gives its people a sense of meaning and purpose. Given the location of Pūkaki Marae within the Moderate Aircraft Noise Area ("MANA"), cultural values to be considered encompass not only environmental, geological, coastal, archaeological, and ecological features, but also the noise and vibration effects on the hau kāinga and marae. 5.8 Common themes drawn from the CVAs indicate that the cultural values of most significance and most probability of being affected are heritage sites and wāhi tapu, the Harbour and nearby waterways. Any reclamation of the Manukau Harbour is not supported and should be avoided. Similarly, layout options that would physically impact waterways such as Pūkaki and Tautauroa Creeks could potentially cause adverse cultural effects. The CVAs identified that longer-term sustainable design elements should be incorporated as the project progresses to address mana whenua issues around the treatment of stormwater entering waterways and the harbour Each of the baseline reports described above, were then used to provide foundation for the assessment of alternatives process described in Section ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES FOR DESIGNATION 1100 Overview of assessment of alternatives process 6.1 Under section 171(1)(b) of the RMA, a requiring authority is required to consider alternative sites, routes and methods of undertaking the work if the requiring authority does not have an interest in the land sufficient for undertaking the work, or it is likely that the work will have a significant adverse effect on the environment. 6.2 When assessing a notice of requirement, the territorial authority must have particular regard to whether adequate consideration has been given to alternative sites, routes or methods. A requiring authority is not required to demonstrate that every possible alternative has been considered nor whether the outcome chosen by the requiring authority was the best option. 6.3 Auckland Airport anticipated that its proposed alterations to Designation 1100 may result in significant adverse effects and therefore, determined that an assessment of alternatives was necessary. The following section outlines the alternatives that Auckland Airport identified and assessed as part of its process to determine the location of a second runway. This includes an analysis of the process that Auckland Airport carried out to develop ten runway options (comprising eight runway options to the north of the Existing Runway and two runways to the south) to be assessed against a range of criteria. As discussed below, the process for developing these ten runway options was iterative and the runway lengths of some options were refined as a result of situational constraints. Development of northern runway options 6.4 As discussed in the Second Runway Option Development report (attached as Appendix 5), eight northern runway options were developed considering the following factors: 27 (a) Runway length (TORA) - the distance aircraft can fly to and from Auckland is directly linked to the length of the runway. As such, two runway lengths were selected to be included in the option development: 26 Chetham Consultancy Ltd, Mana Whenua Cultural Values of the Proposed Second Runway, (December 2015) at page Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at

27 (i) (ii) 3,110 metres (TORA) - this is the longest runway that can be accommodated without entering Pūkaki Creek or the Manukau Harbour, which would require coastal reclamation; and 3,535 metres (TORA) - this represents the longer runway option, capable of accommodating all long-haul flights with no payload restrictions. (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Airfield master grading - minimising the volume of bulk earthworks, and achieving an earthworks balance, as far as practicable. To achieve this, the target was to elevate the runway, parallel taxiways and aprons to levels that supported a potential balance whilst simultaneously meeting both geometric standards and opportunities for height gains in the future terminals piers and aprons. Aircraft performance - due to the complex nature of aircraft, their performance can vary due to aircraft type, weather, elevation and runway surface. How well an aircraft can perform in particular conditions affects the length of runway required for it to operate effectively. Therefore, it is important to assess which aircraft are using the runway and the conditions in which they will be operating when determining runway length and position. Reclamation requirements - marine reclamation is an extremely costly process; therefore, the impact of any geometric layout on the extent to which reclamation will be required was considered when developing options. Initial assessment of option constructability to determine any complexities or constraints associated with the construction of the runway, assessments of option constructability were undertaken. Surface road changes to ensure that the impact of runway options on the surface road network is minimised. 6.5 The eight northern options comprise four base options (1-4) each with two possible runway TORAs 3,110 metres (A) and 3,535 metres (B) as follows: 28 Options Drawing Reference Description 1A/1B sk400 The sketch details the longer runway options which were analysed as per the 2014 Masterplan. There are two identified runway lengths (TORA): A minimum runway length of 3,110 metres (TORA) which allows for maximum payload for the majority of studied aircraft that are likely to be able to operate the route economically. A longer runway length of 3,535 metres (TORA) which allows for maximum possible payload for all studied aircraft that are likely to be able to operate the route economically and covers the range of runway lengths requested by the airlines. Both options have a coastal impact on Tautauroa Creek (a tributary of Pūkaki Creek). 28 Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at

28 Options Drawing Reference Description 2A/2B sk401 In order to minimise the coastal impact on Tautauroa Creek, the two runway lengths described above were relocated to the east as illustrated in the sketch. The result of this relocation is that the runway length of 3,535 metres affects the Manukau Harbour whilst the runway length of 3,110 metres is still accommodated on land. 3A/3B sk402 In order to provide an at-grade transport corridor at the eastern end, the two runway lengths (3,110 metres and 3,535 metres) were relocated further to the west of the Tautauroa Creek. The result of this further relocation to the west is that both runway lengths have a Manukau Harbour coastal impact. 4A/4B sk403 In order to minimise the impact on the future transport network, the two runway lengths (3,110 metres and 3,535 metres) were located so that the eastern extent of the runway was west of George Bolt Memorial Drive. The result of this relocation is that both runway lengths have an increased coastal impact on the Manukau Harbour. Refinement of runway length 6.6 As part of the design development process of the runway options for assessment, and as discussed in the Second Runway Option Development Report, the runway length was further refined having regard to the following considerations: 29 (a) (b) (c) a 30 metre setback for runway construction from the Tautauroa Creek; a 20 metre setback from Watercare's South Western Interceptor at the eastern end of the northern runway; and a 30 metre setback for runway construction from the Manukau Harbour at the western end of the northern runway. 6.7 Considering the factors above, the runway length was refined to have an overall runway length of 2,983 metres (TORA). In confirming this option as operationally viable, Auckland Airport took into account airline requirements and payload penalties on take-off. Southern runway options 6.8 In September 2014, Arup were commissioned by Auckland Airport to conduct an operational assessment of a runway to the south of the Existing Runway. 6.9 Arup developed and assessed five possible southern runway options as listed below and illustrated in the drawings included as Appendix C to the Second Runway Option Development report (as attached in Appendix 5): 29 Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at

29 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Southern Option 1 - with a 2,100 metre separation from the Existing Runway; Southern Option 2 - with a 1,500 metre separation from the Existing Runway; Southern Option 3 - with a 1,035 metre separation from the Existing Runway; Southern Option 4 - with a 760 metre staggered separation from the Existing Runway; and Southern Option 5 - with a 380 metre separation from the Existing Runway Arup concluded, after a desktop analysis of a range of factors, that: 30 (a) (b) a new southern runway is operationally feasible; and a new southern runway layout with a runway and terminal configuration mirroring the 2014 Masterplan to the south with 2,100 metre runway separation (Southern Option 1) would perform best operationally if the Proposed Second Runway were to be located to the south of the Existing Runway Southern Option 1 also was anticipated to have a number of non-operational impacts including: 31 (a) being the most expensive option due to the large land reclamation and terminal / transport development requirements; (b) (c) being most likely to create the greatest environmental impacts on marine habitat; and affecting the largest area of residential housing with aircraft noise compared to the next best option in operational terms (Southern Option 3) To further test the environmental benefits and costs of the various options studied, the two best performing southern second runway options (Southern Option 1 and Southern Option 3) were chosen for a more thorough environmental assessment, along with the eight proposed northern options. Summary of runway options for further evaluation 6.13 The ten options chosen for further evaluation in 2016 against environmental and aeronautical criteria were as follows (drawings of each option are attached as Appendix 14 and as Appendix D to the Second Runway Option Development report in Appendix 5). In summary, the ten runway options are: Option Number Drawing Reference Description Option 1 SK400 Northern Option: Total length of 3,410 metres comprising Runway End Safety Areas ("RESA") and an operational runway 30 Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at Arup, Second Runway Option Development Report, (September 2016) at

30 Option Number Drawing Reference Description length (defined in the designation as being equivalent to the TORA of 3,110 metres. Eastern extent necessitates reclamation of Tautauroa Creek (approximately 8 hectares). Western extent terminates approximately 500-metres from Manukau Harbour edge (western boundary). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 2 SK401 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535 metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 31 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 360 metres east of George Bolt Memorial Drive. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 3 SK402 Northern Option: Total length 3,283 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 2,983 metres. Full, land-based option. No reclamation needed. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 4 SK403 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535 metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 60 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 30-metres west of George Bolt Memorial Drive. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 5 SK404 Northern Option: Total length 3,410 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110 metres. Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 11 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 250-metres from Tautauroa Creek edge (eastern boundary). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 6 SK405 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535 metres. Eastern extent necessitates reclamation of Tautauroa Creek (approximately 0.1 hectares). Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 19 hectares). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 7 SK406 Northern Option: Total length of 3,410 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110 metres

31 Option Number Drawing Reference Description Western extent necessitates reclamation of Manukau Harbour (approximately 40 hectares). Eastern extent terminates approximately 750-metres from Tautauroa Creek edge (eastern boundary). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 8 SK407 Northern Option: Total length of 3,835 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,535 metres. Eastern extent necessitates reclamation of Tautauroa Creek (approximately 8 hectares). Western extent terminates 10- metres from the Manukau Harbour edge. Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Option 9 SK408 Southern Option: Total length of 3,410 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110 metres. Manukau Harbour reclamation (approximately 250 hectares). Assumes a separation distance of 1,035 metres. Option 10 SK409 Southern Option: Total length of 3,410 metres comprising RESA and an overall TORA of 3,110 metres. Manukau Harbour reclamation (approximately 715 hectares). Assumes a minimum separation distance between the centreline of the runways of 2,022 metres. Evaluation of runway options 6.14 Once the ten runway options for further evaluation were identified, the subject matter experts (who carried out environmental baseline reports) were engaged to develop a range of evaluation criteria and their reasons for identifying those criteria. Each expert then scored each of the ten runway options using a comparative scoring system as shown below. Half scores were acceptable, resulting in an overall total range of 13 possible scores: 3 Significant Positive Effect Moderate Positive Effect Minor Positive Effect Neutral or Less than Minor Positive or Adverse Effect Minor Adverse Effect Moderate Adverse Effect -3 Significant Adverse Effect

32 6.15 The following experts carried out an assessment of each of the ten runway alternatives: (a) Aircraft Noise (prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics and included in Appendix 15); (b) Archaeology (prepared by Clough and Associates and included in Appendix 16); (c) Aviation operations (prepared by Arup and included in Appendix 17); (d) Coastal processes (prepared by Tonkin and Taylor and included in Appendix 18); (e) Cultural (prepared by Chetham Consultants Limited and included in Appendix 19); (f) Ecology (prepared by Bioresearches and included in Appendix 20); and (g) Landscape and visual (prepared by Isthmus and included in Appendix 21) Following the completion of the scoring of each of the runway options by the above experts Auckland Airport engaged Insight Economics to undertake an independent review of the multicriteria analysis and the criteria used in the assessment of alternatives prepared by each of the experts. A copy of the Multi-Criteria Analysis report by Insight Economics is attached as Appendix 22. The report considered that the criteria chosen had "significant breadth and depth" Insight Economics then grouped the criteria in the form of a quadruple bottom line analysis with equal weight given to each grouping under the following headings: (a) (b) (c) (d) economic criteria; social criteria; cultural criteria; and environmental criteria The scores for each criterion were transformed into a scale from 0 to 100. The following table shows the overall scores for each option using the criteria groups and weightings that were employed in the Insight Economics report (a copy of the full scoring matrix is contained in the Insight Economics report attached in Appendix 22). 32 Insight Economics, Multi-Criteria Analysis of Options for a Second Runway, (September 2016) at page

33 6.19 To test sensitivity, the options were reassessed without any criteria groups or weights, the results of which are shown in the table below Having regard to the above analysis, Insight Economics' concluded: 33 Option 3 scored the highest in terms of the environmental criteria. This is because Option 3 is the only option in which no reclamation of the marine environment is required. As a result, it has no effect on the coastal marine area and the ecological assessment concluded that it has the lowest effect on marine habitats. Further, the landscape and visual assessment concluded that Option 3 would have the least effects on natural character, would have the lowest visibility and would be in keeping with the character of the airport environs. Option 3 scored the highest in terms of the cultural criteria for a number of reasons, including that Option 3 was one of the options that had the least adverse effect on the cultural values of the Manukau Harbour and the cultural waterways of significance to Mana Whenua. While Option 3 did not score the highest on the economic criteria (as this option has the shortest runway length), the shorter runway length in this particular location meant that Option 3 received a higher score than some of the other northern runway options in respect of the social criteria. The noise assessment 33 Insight Economics, Multi-Criteria Analysis of Second Runway Options, (September 2016) at

34 determined that Options 1 and 8 would have the most significant adverse effect on the community in terms of noise exposure, change in noise level and the number of aircraft events. While the noise assessment determined that the southern runway options would have the least adverse effects on the community, the southern runway options received the lowest scores from an aviation operational perspective due to the potential impacts on Ardmore, longer taxi times and the need to cross a live runway to access a southern second runway from the existing terminals and aircraft stands. Taking into account all of the evaluation criteria, the raw scores and the scores using the criteria groupings and weighting, Option 3 is the preferred option out of the multi criteria analysis As a result of the outcomes of the multi-criteria analysis, which were independently reviewed by Insight Economics, Option 3 (with an operational length of 2,983 metres) was selected by Auckland Airport as the preferred runway alignment for the second runway. Sensitivity analysis 6.22 Following the completion of the multi-criteria analysis, Auckland Airport sought to confirm whether Option 3 would meet its objectives, which are: (a) (b) (c) to ensure that over the next years, the aeronautical capacity of the runway system can efficiently meet forecast demand by increasing the maximum runway operational length of the Designated Northern Runway from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres; to ensure that the runway system continues to meet terminal operational requirements by increasing the separation distance between the two runways from 1,950 metres to 2,022 metres; and to minimise the effects of aircraft noise impacts on the surrounding community as far as practicable whilst also minimising adverse environmental and cultural effects In addition to Auckland Airport's objectives, Auckland Airport tested Option 3 against the following additional matters: (a) (b) the consent-ability of the runway in terms of the ability for Auckland Airport to use existing, and obtain any new, resource consents necessary to complete the construction of the runway; and the high-level capital and operating costs for the construction and maintenance of the runway Taking into account the above matters, Auckland Airport determined that Option 3 would meet its objectives and was the preferred option for the runway from an operations perspective for the following reasons: (a) by locating the runway to the north of the Existing Runway, it would align with the future integrated terminal (with the international terminal extending north) and airfield layout;

35 (b) (c) (d) it is capable of accommodating Code-F aircraft and is suitable for nearly all long-haul flights; it avoids any reclamation, which increases the "consent-ability" of the runway and reduces potential capital costs; and while the Proposed Northern Runway is not the longest possible runway, the overall length provides sufficient airfield capacity to accommodate the forecast growth in aircraft movements at Auckland Airport beyond Auckland Airport's sensitivity analysis confirmed that Option 3, determined from the assessment of alternatives, will meet its operational needs and will cater for the forecast growth and demand of passengers over the next 30 years. Conclusion on assessment of alternatives 6.26 Auckland Airport has considered a range of alternative alignments and locations for a Proposed Second Runway, which satisfies the requirements of section 171(1)(b) of the RMA. 7. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO CONDITIONS OF DESIGNATION 1100 Statutory framework for assessment of effects 7.1 Section 181(1) of the RMA provides that a requiring authority may at any time give notice of its requirement to alter its designation. An alteration to a designation is processed as if it were a new notice of requirement, unless the alteration involves no more than a minor change to the effects on the environment associated with the use or proposed use of the land or involves only minor changes to the boundaries of a designation. As the proposed alterations to Designation 1100 will involve a more than minor change to the effects on the environment, the alteration to the designation should be considered as if it were a new notice of requirement, and the Council must consider the effects on the environment of allowing the requirement In considering the effects of the alteration to Designation 1100 on the environment, the focus of the assessment must be on the effects of the alteration rather than a re-assessment of the designation in its entirety. As such, the assessment of effects for Designation 1100 is focussed on the effects of amending the conditions of the Designation to enable the Designated Northern Runway to be extended from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres and the Designated Northern Runway to be shifted 72 metres north. The assessment of effects of the alteration to Designation 1100 is discussed in detail below. Socio-economic effects 7.3 Insight Economics Limited estimated that in 2013, Auckland Airport directly contributed $322 million in regional GDP, 330 fulltime equivalent jobs and $36 million in household incomes 34 RMA, section 171(1)

36 (see Appendix 23). Including flow-on effects, its contribution that year was $415 million in regional GDP, 1,730 fulltime equivalent jobs and $92 million in household incomes Combined with the estimated impacts of Auckland Airport itself as a company, the overall operation of Auckland Airport and associated activity contributed the following to Auckland's economy in 2013: 36 (a) (b) (c) $3.5 billion in value added (GDP); 33,100 jobs; and $1.9 billion in household incomes. 7.5 In addition to the significant economic activity that occurs in and around it, the Airport plays a number of other important roles in the regional and national economies. One of the most significant is its role in international tourism. In 2013, tourism contributed almost 9% to national GDP, and 72% of all international visitors arrived at Auckland Airport. 37 Over time, the Airport's contribution is likely to grow as it is the main gateway for visitors from China New Zealand's fastest-growing and highest-yielding visitor market. 7.6 Just as Auckland Airport has a dominant share of international tourist arrivals, so too does it have a dominant share of international air freight. In 2013, Auckland Airport moved 92% of airborne imports and 81% of airborne exports by weight. By value, it carried 94% of air imports and 72% of air exports Given the unprecedented growth at the Airport since 2013, it can be expected that the above figures in relation to the significant economic activity that occurs in and around the Airport will have increased. 7.8 The removal of the current constraint on the Designated Northern Runway's operational length to allow the construction and operation of a runway with an operational length of 2,983 metres will assist in ensuring that over the next years the aeronautical capacity of Auckland Airport's runway system can efficiently meet forecast demands for runway use. Similarly, the increase in separation distance between the two runways to from 1,950 metres to 2,022 metres will ensure that the Airport's runway system continues to meet forecast operational requirements to accommodate larger aircraft. The Proposed Northern Runway will deliver a step-change in capacity and resilience, by enabling a second, long-haul capable runway at Auckland Airport. 7.9 As discussed below, Auckland Airport has also updated and improved its noise mitigation package for dwellings to include (among other amendments) a heat pump to enable occupants to have heating in winter and cooling in summer, which will provide greater comfort for residents affected by high and moderate aircraft noise levels. The positive economic and social benefits deriving for people and communities from the updated mitigation package will result in an improved internal living environment for people living in the High Aircraft Noise Area ("HANA") and MANA. 35 Insight Economics, Estimating the Regional Economic Importance of Auckland Airport, (February 2014), section 4.6, page Insight Economics, Estimating the Regional Economic Importance of Auckland Airport, (February 2014), section 5.10, page Insight Economics, Estimating the Regional Economic Importance of Auckland Airport, (February 2014) section 1, page Insight Economics, Estimating the Regional Economic Importance of Auckland Airport, (February 2014) section 7.2, page

37 Cultural effects 7.10 Cultural Impact Assessments ("CIAs") were prepared by Te Ākitai Waiohua and TKITA, which were in turn summarised by Chetham Consulting Limited (as attached in Appendix 24) in the context of the relevant RMA Part 2 matters to assess: (a) (b) (c) the implications of the Proposed Northern Runway on the knowledge and practice of Kaitiakitanga by mana whenua over their taonga; whether the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are affected by the Proposed Northern Runway; and the ecological, cultural, social and economic effects of the Proposed Northern Runway on mana whenua, their values and taonga In respect of Kaitiakitanga the summary concludes that "active participation of mana whenua throughout the NOR Report process can be seen as the contemporary expression of kaitiakitanga" and that there are further opportunities for participation through the following stages of the NOR Report including the Outline Plan of Works stage Similarly, with regard to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, the summary concludes that these principles have been addressed through early and on-going engagement with mana whenua in relation to the Proposed Northern Runway. Memoranda of Understanding entered into between Auckland Airport and TKITA, and Auckland Airport and Te Ākitai Waiohua, also provide for engagement that involves regular kanohi ki te kanohi (face to face) discussions and joint identification of projects where partnership can occur In respect of ecological effects, including water quality and taonga species, the summary concludes that overall the alteration to Auckland Airport's existing designation will not result in more than minor adverse effects on mana whenua culture and values as the effects on the highly significant cultural values of the Manukau Harbour have been avoided through selection of a fully land based option. There will also be opportunities to mitigate any further potential effects through the ongoing involvement of mana whenua at the detailed design phase With regard to cultural effects in relation to cultural landscapes, the TKITA CIA assesses the effects on the Ihumatao cultural landscape and several of the individual wāhi tapu within the runway footprint as large and adverse. As a result, TKITA generally do not support the development. However, these effects can be confined to an acceptable level provided that mana whenua are afforded ongoing input into landscape and built design at the detailed design stage. 41 Future development at the western end of the Proposed Northern Runway does, however, have the potential for moderate to high adverse effects on wāhi tapu that will be unable to be avoided Having regard to the CIAs and the potential adverse effects, the summary makes a number of recommendations. 42 Auckland Airport has accepted these recommendations and has proposed the following additional conditions in Designation 1100: Chetham Consulting, Auckland Airport Proposed Northern Runway Cultural Effects of assessment, (2016) at pages Chetham Consulting, Auckland Airport Proposed Northern Runway Cultural Effects of assessment, (2016) at pages Chetham Consulting, Auckland Airport Proposed Northern Runway Cultural Effects of assessment, (2016) at pages Chetham Consulting, Auckland Airport Proposed Northern Runway Cultural Effects of assessment, (2016) at pages See Proposed Conditions of Designation 1100 attached as Appendix

38 (a) (b) (c) (d) Auckland Airport shall consult with Te Ākitai Waiohua, TKITA and Makaurau Maori Trust when preparing any relevant plans, including Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management plans as part of any Outline Plan for the Northern Runway. Auckland Airport shall consult with Te Ākitai Waiohua, TKITA and Makaurau Maori Trust when developing an agreed Koiwi Protocol and Interment Plan and an iwi/cultural monitoring programme prior to any works recommencing for the Northern Runway. Auckland Airport shall obtain an archaeological authority for under Section 44(a) of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 prior to the start of any earthworks on the Northern Runway with the potential to affect archaeological remains. Auckland Airport shall undertake a full archaeological investigation to identify, investigate and record subsurface archaeological remains at the western end of the Northern Runway. Archaeological effects 7.16 The assessment of archaeological effects undertaken by Clough and Associates Limited is included in Appendix 25. The assessment takes into account the previous archaeological assessments and investigations undertaken in the area (described in the Archaeological Baseline Report and Baseline Addendum), 44 and incorporates the results of new field inspection and geophysical survey to identify the likely archaeological effects and risks associated with the Proposed Northern Runway The report concludes that while there are 13 recorded archaeological sites (which relate to both Maori and early European settlement) within the Proposed Northern Runway alignment, 11 of those are already within the Designated Northern Runway. Therefore, only two additional sites are affected by the Proposed Northern Runway, neither of which are present today Other recorded archaeological sites and the results of geophysical survey indicate that there are likely to be more subsurface archaeological remains at the western end of the Designated Northern Runway to the north of the previous earthworks, and within the area affected by the Proposed Northern Runway. However, the area affected by the Proposed Northern Runway to the east of George Bolt Memorial Drive has been extensively modified, and geophysical survey did not identify any potential subsurface archaeological remains Further, the surviving recorded site relating to European settlement consists of a historic house at 8 Ihumatao Road, located on the southern boundary of the Designated Northern Runway and the construction of the Proposed Northern Runway is likely to require the removal of the historic house at 8 Ihumatao Road The report states that the archaeological potential for new sites over most of the Proposed Northern Runway is low. The potential adverse effects on archaeological values overall are, therefore, likely to be "no more than moderate, provided that comprehensive archaeological 44 The archaeological environmental baseline reports, assessment of alternatives and assessment of effects were also peer reviewed by Matthew Campbell of CFG Heritage. 45 Clough, Proposed Northern Runway, Auckland International Airport, Mangere: Assessment of Effects on Archaeological Values, (September 2016) at page i. 46 Clough, Proposed Northern Runway, Auckland International Airport, Mangere: Assessment of Effects on Archaeological Values, (September 2016) at page

39 investigation to ensure archaeological information recovery and cultural protocols are put in place prior to works being carried out and appropriate mitigation is undertaken", in accordance with the following recommendations: 47 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) An archaeological authority must be applied for under Section 44(a) of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act and granted prior to the start of any earthworks with the potential to affect archaeological remains. Earthworks at the western end of the Proposed Northern Runway should be preceded by full archaeological investigation to identify, investigate and record subsurface archaeological remains in this area, and to ensure that any koiwi present are not damaged. Cultural protocols should be agreed with mana whenua prior to the start of the archaeological investigation, and should include provision for the discovery, disinterment and reinterment of any koiwi that may be present. Earthworks in the near vicinity of the house at 8 Ihumatao Road should be monitored by an archaeologist so that any associated subsurface remains can be investigated and recorded to recover information relating to the history of the property. A Historic Heritage Management Plan should be prepared to guide future works, which should be included in the Construction Environmental Management Plan Auckland Airport accepts these recommendations and has proposed to include conditions to address the key aspects of these recommendations in its proposed alterations to Designation Ecological effects 7.22 The assessment of ecological effects undertaken by Bioresearches Limited is attached as Appendix 26. The assessment notes that Auckland Airport holds existing consents for earthworks and stream works over the entire area of the Proposed Northern Runway including the area subject to this NOR Report, which enable the in-filling of the existing streams and the raupo wetland at the western end of the proposed runway. The assessment notes mitigation for the loss of those habitats has already been undertaken at Puhinui Creek in consultation with the Council The assessment concludes that, in respect of freshwater habitats, the effects of the Proposed Northern Runway development have been addressed and mitigated in the context of existing earthworks and stream works consents. 49 The effects on vegetation and flora, reptiles and terrestrial birds are concluded to be less than minor and a Lizard Management Plan will appropriately address the capture and relocation of copper skinks (and any other species) that are located during site vegetation clearance While a high tidal market garden area (dominated by South Island pied oystercatcher) will need to be removed, the assessment concludes that is unlikely to diminish the population of shorebirds using the Manukau Harbour. It will, however, put pressure on other existing high tidal roost sites and/or result in birds seeking new areas to roost which has the potential to 47 Clough, Proposed Northern Runway, Auckland International Airport, Mangere: Assessment of Effects on Archaeological Values, (September 2016) at pages See proposed conditions 22 and 23 of Designation 1100 attached as Appendix Bioresearches, Assessment of Environmental Effects, (August 2016) at

40 increase the risk of bird strike on aircraft but that effect has been pre-empted by long-term, forward coastal bird roosting behaviour planning by Wildlife Hazard Management personnel Auckland Airport accepts these conclusions and the recommendation that Wildlife Hazard Management and Reptile Management Plans should be prepared as part of any Outline Plan of Works prepared for the Proposed Northern Runway. Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects 7.26 The assessment of landscape, natural character and visual effects undertaken by Isthmus is included in Appendix 27. In undertaking the assessment, Isthmus divided the landscape in the vicinity of the Proposed Northern Runway into three geographic areas: 51 (a) (b) (c) Airport environs; Pūkaki (eastern end); and Manukau Harbour (western end) Isthmus' assessment concludes that potential adverse effects have been avoided by an option that does not extend into the Coastal Marine Area ("CMA"), and by the buffering provided by the existing airport to the south and by the warehouse area to the north of the Proposed Northern Runway. 52 The report concludes that: (a) (b) (c) The Proposed Northern Runway is appropriate in terms of its natural and urban landscape context, and is in keeping with the existing and anticipated character of the Airport. Further, the report states that the existing airport will provide a buffer between the Proposed Northern Runway and the areas to the south and the warehousing activities on land to the north will provide a buffer between the Proposed Northern Runway and other activities further to the north. 53 The alteration will not change the effects on the part of the Manukau Harbour at the western end of the Proposed Northern Runway, such effects being already anticipated by the Designated Northern Runway. While there is potential for adverse effects on the Ihumātao fossil forest if navigation aids were to be required in the Harbour, such aids are not part of the current application and would require a separate coastal permit application. 54 This is the same situation as pertains to the existing designation. There will be only moderate adverse effects on the landscape and natural character of Pūkaki Creek at the eastern end of the Proposed Northern Runway because the works will be set back some 600m from the main arm of the Pūkaki Creek. Such effects are considered acceptable Bioresearches, Assessment of Environmental Effects, (August 2016) at Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Northern Runway Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects, (September 2016) at Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Northern Runway Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects, (September 2016) at Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Northern Runway Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects, (September 2016) at While this statement is correct at the time of writing in respect of the Operative Auckland Regional Plan: Coastal, the regional coastal plan provisions of the Auckland Unitary Plan will become operative once the Minister of Conservation has formally approved them and under those provisions a coastal permit for navigation aids is not required. 55 Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Northern Runway Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects, (September 2016) at

41 (d) While there will be moderate adverse visual effects from a limited area beyond the eastern end of the Proposed Northern Runway, these effects are acceptable given the airport context, separation distance, and the buffering and screening provided by the warehouse area being developed on Timberly Road Isthmus concludes that the Proposed Northern Runway is an appropriate development in its context and that the adverse effects of these alterations to the Designated Northern Runway will be "moderate and acceptable". Mitigation is limited to the treatment of earthwork batters and contouring which can be appropriately addressed as part of an Outline Plan of Works. The assessment does not consider that any particular conditions on the designation are necessary to mitigate the effects. 57 Noise Effects 7.29 The assessment of noise effects undertaken by Marshall Day Acoustics is included in Appendix 28. As with the other assessments of environmental effects, the focus of this assessment is on a comparison of the noise effects generated by the proposed runway configuration and the designated runway configuration (ie the noise impact from the designated runway configuration is used as a "baseline"). The assessment of noise effects has been carried out using a runway mode of operation (RMO3) for the proposed runway configuration which is the "worst case" scenario. The expanded Aircraft Noise Contours proposed to be included in Designation 1100, match the extent of the aircraft noise contours in the Aircraft Noise Overlay of the Auckland Unitary Plan which are the outer envelope of three different operational and runway scenarios The assessment examines potential noise effects of the Proposed Northern Runway utilising a range of metrics: (a) (b) (c) the Miedema and Oudshoorn relationship which is used to estimate the number of people likely to be highly annoyed at various levels of aircraft noise; the change in noise level the community might experience, due to a change in airport operations. Both of these techniques use the noise metric Ldn which is a noise exposure metric which combines the loudness of the event and the number of events experienced; and a "Number Above" assessment, which considers the number of aircraft noise events above a specified noise level, which people are exposed to Having regard to these methods, the assessment of noise effects concludes that the proposed runway configuration will change the overall noise effects from the designated runway configuration as follows: (a) Number of people highly annoyed: the proposed runway configuration (relative to the designated runway configuration) will increase the noise effects from the northern runway and will decrease the noise effects from the Existing Runway with an overall increase of 253 being people highly annoyed (3%) Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Northern Runway Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects, (September 2016) at Isthmus, Auckland International Airport Proposed Northern Runway Landscape, Natural Character and Visual Effects, (September 2016) at Marshall Day Acoustics Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at 3.5 and Appendix K. 59 Marshall Day Acoustics Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at

42 (b) (c) Number of people experiencing noticeable change in noise level (>5dB): the number of people who will experience a moderate change in noise level (5 to 8 db) compared to noise in 2014 will reduce by 5,778 under the proposed runway configuration and the number of people experiencing a significant change in noise level (>8 db) will increase by 6,004. Overall, there will be more people (227) exposed to a noticeable change in noise level for the proposed runway configuration. 60 Difference in noise level (designated vs proposed): there is no significant change in the noise level in most areas but there is a moderate to significant increase for an area around Naylors Drive, Mangere under the proposed runway configuration (5% of people under the Aircraft Noise ccntours). 61 About 900 people in Mangere would experience significantly higher levels of noise (8 to 12dB) under the proposed runway configuration than they would under the designated runway configuration. However, most of these people will be exposed to an overall noise environment of between 55 db to 60 db Ldn Aircraft Noise Notification Area ("ANNA") with some people (360) exposed to 60 db to 62 db Ldn (MANA). 62 While Designation 1100 includes a night time restriction over the eastern end of the Designated Northern Runway (which is not proposed to be changed), some residents in Mangere will experience some aircraft noise at night with aircraft taking off to the west. The single event noise levels which will be expected in this area are, however, within the night time noise limits in residential zones in the Unitary Plan (of 75 db LAmax). 63 There are four educational/care facilities that will also experience a higher noise level (4-9 db) under the Proposed Northern Runway scenario. Their overall noise environment is 55 db to 60 db Ldn (the ANNA). 64 (d) Number of aircraft noise events: the number of aircraft events experienced in Papatoetoe West and Papatoetoe East decreases under the proposed runway configuration and the number of aircraft events increases for Otara, Ormiston and Mangere. 65 The number of people exposed to aircraft noise events under the proposed runway configuration relative to the designated runway configuration will result in an overall reduction of 6,639 people exposed to aircraft noise events (9%) The assessment of noise effects also outlines the existing conditions in Designation 1100 that avoid, remedy or mitigate the adverse effects of aircraft noise. These conditions include controls on the overall noise output from the Airport, an interim noise limit on the use of the Designated Northern Runway, a night time restriction on flights over Papatoetoe from the Designated Northern Runway, and a requirement to maintain a Noise Management Plan. 67 Marshall Day Acoustics supports these conditions and recommends that they be retained, subject to the following amendments to manage the effects of the alterations to Designation 1100 and improve the workability of the conditions: (a) increase the interim noise limit (condition 6) from 55 db to 58.5 db to allow for the projected level of "opening activity" to take place on the Proposed Northern Runway; and 60 Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at Marshall Day Acoustics, Assessment of Noise Effects, (February 2017) at section

43 (b) update the Noise Management Report (condition 9) to an Annual Noise Management Report to improve the way in which information relating to aircraft noise is collected and reported to the community In addition to the conditions outlined above, condition 10 of Designation 1100 requires Auckland Airport offer to install a noise mitigation package to eligible landowners of "Existing Buildings" being used as an ASAN within the HANA and MANA. The existing noise mitigation package comprises a mechanical ventilation system, ceiling insulation and a mechanical extractor fan, designed to achieve and internal noise environment of 45 db Ldn. As a result of the proposed alterations to the Aircraft Noise Contours, Auckland Airport has proposed to amend the definition of "Existing Building" to enable those existing ASAN within the expanded areas of the Aircraft Noise Contours, as at the date the NORs are confirmed, to also qualify for a noise mitigation package The existing noise mitigation package was introduced in 2001 through the previous Designation 231 of the Manukau District Plan and was rolled over into Designation 1100 in the Auckland Unitary Plan. Auckland Airport engaged Aecom and Marshall Day Acoustics to undertake a technical and acoustic review of the existing noise mitigation package (see the report attached as Appendix 29), to determine whether any improvements could be made to it As a result of the review of the noise mitigation package, Aecom and Marshall Day Acoustics recommended that the noise mitigation package for dwellings be updated to include a heat pump and a revised ventilation system. 68 This updated package will improve the internal environment for residents affected by moderate and high levels of aircraft noise and will enable heating in winter and cooling in summer, while keeping windows and doors closed. As a result of a review of the acoustic internal criteria in the existing designation conditions (of 45 db Ldn), Marshall Day Acoustics also recommended that the internal noise criterion be lowered from 45dB Ldn to 40dB Ldn, where it is reasonably practicable to achieve this level, which will result in a better internal noise environment for residents Auckland Airport has accepted the recommendations and has proposed alterations to the conditions of Designation 1100 to effect the changes, as shown in Appendix 4.. Transportation effects 7.37 The Proposed Northern Runway will extend across the land currently occupied by George Bolt Memorial Drive, as well as the current northern Auckland Airport Park and Ride car parking area. The Proposed Northern Runway will result in changes to the existing roading layout Effective land transport connections to and from the Airport are essential. The Airport's transport network needs to integrate with the wider regional transport network to ensure the development of sustainable, safe and efficient infrastructure. As part of its overall transport network planning, Auckland Airport seeks to: (a) (b) target a major shift in mode of travel through the development of a system of bus and high occupancy vehicle transit lanes around the Airport, to operate in conjunction with those across the wider region (developed by the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland Transport); provide a sequence of major airport transport network improvements to increase arterial/terminal capacity while improving reliability, resiliency and safety; and 68 Aecom and Marshall Day Acoustics also carried out a review of the noise mitigation package for educational facilities and it was recommended that the existing conditions of Designation 1100 be retained without amendment

44 (c) implement demand management strategies to support the operation of the road network In relation to George Bolt Memorial Drive in particular, Auckland Airport has undertaken preliminary feasibility and concept design work to determine the possible roading layout following the construction of the Proposed Northern Runway. There are a range of options available in relation to the alignment of SH20A, intersections upgrades and delivery of a rapid transit service between the city and the Airport Maintaining connections to Auckland Airport is fundamental to the on-going operation of Auckland Airport and connectivity through the Airport Precinct to the north and east. Any network design will be refined in consultation with the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland Transport as detailed design of the Proposed Northern Runway is progressed. Summary of Effects 7.41 Auckland Airport has prepared the NORs to alter Designation 1100 in order enable the construction of a second runway which is located 72 metres north of the position in the existing Designation and the operational length extended from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres Auckland Airport's primary objectives of the alteration to the Designations seek to: (a) (b) (c) ensure that over the next years, the aeronautical capacity of the runway system can efficiently meet forecast demand by increasing the maximum runway operational length of the Designated Northern Runway from 2,150 metres to 2,983 metres; ensure that the runway system continues to meet terminal operational requirements by increasing separation distance between the two runways to 2,022 metres from 1,950 metres; and minimise the effects of aircraft noise impacts on the surrounding community as far as practicable whilst also minimising adverse environmental and cultural effects This report has assessed the potential environmental effects associated with the proposed alterations to Designation 1100 as required by section 171(1) of the RMA. It has been demonstrated that the effects on the environment can be avoided, remedied or mitigated, provided that the recommended amendments to the conditions are adopted. 8. PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO 1102 AND ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS Designation Designation 1102 includes specifications for OLS, 69 restrictions relating to REPA, requirements for non-aeronautical ground lights adjacent to extended runway centre lines. 70 These specifications were developed in accordance with the Civil Aviation Authority's Advisory Circular AC139-6, which sets out aerodrome design requirements for: 69 Obstacle limitation surfaces are defined areas around and above an aerodrome intended for the protection of aircraft in the vicinity of an aerodrome. 70 For existing Designation 1102, see Auckland Unitary Plan, Chapter K Designations

45 (a) Applicants for the grant of and holders of an aerodrome operator certificate under the requirement of Civil Aviation Rule Part Aerodromes Certification, Operation and Use. (b) Aerodromes used by aeroplanes conducting air transport operations under Part 121. (c) Any other aerodromes used by aeroplanes conducting air transport operations under Parts 125 and As an aerodrome operator and holder of an Aerodrome Operator Certificate under the Civil Aviation Rule Part 139, Auckland Airport is subject to the requirements of AC As set out in the preceding sections of this NOR Report, following a comprehensive assessment of alternatives, the Proposed Northern Runway (Option 3) was assessed as the preferred runway option on the basis that it achieved Auckland Airport's objectives for which the alterations to designation are sought. 8.4 The sites to which Designation 1102 relate are, for the most part, not owned by Auckland Airport. A schedule of titles is attached as Appendix 30. Obstacle Limitation Surfaces 8.5 In respect of the OLS, section of AC139-6 requires each runway to be served by such surfaces, and surrounded by an obstacle free strip. The aerodrome as a whole should be surrounded by an obstacle free circuiting area. 8.6 Although the types of OLS are the same for different runways, the specifications for the extent and geometry for each specification are based on the approach category of the runway in addition to threshold coordinates and the aerodrome datum. Therefore, confirmation of the Proposed Northern Runway was necessary before the required alterations to Designation 1102 could be determined. 8.7 OLS are necessary to enable aircraft to maintain a satisfactory level of safety while manoeuvring at low altitude in the vicinity of the aerodrome. These surfaces should be free of obstacles and subject to control. Where obstructions infringe these surfaces they may, subject to the conduct of an aeronautical study, be removed, reduced in height or marked and lit. 8.8 Advisory Circular AC139-6 (Revision 5) was revised in August 2016 and contains new provisions in respect to OLS. On this basis, Airbiz were engaged to undertake a technical review of the standards pertaining to the OLS as they relate to the Existing Runway 71 and the and Proposed Northern Runway. Airbiz identified that changes to AC139-6 necessitated changes to the existing specifications and diagrams within Designation 1102 in respect of both the Existing and Proposed Northern Runways, with changes made to the text of Designation 1102 as well as the associated diagrams accordingly. A copy of the Airbiz report is attached as Appendix The spatial extent of the revised OLS is illustrated in Figure The Existing Runway is not proposed to be altered through the NORs. Auckland Airport has however, taken this opportunity to review the obstacle limitation surfaces to ensure compliance with AC

46 Figure 9 - Spatial extent of OLS for both the Existing and Proposed Northern Runways 8.10 Designation 1102 also includes a proviso that "no chimney shall discharge effluent through the Approach Slopes shown on Figure 2 to this designation at a velocity in excess of 4.3 metres per second". On the basis that the eastern threshold of the Designated Northern Runway is proposed to be extended 833 metres east from the Designated Northern Runway, Figure 2 to the Designation has been updated accordingly, as illustrated in Figure 10. Figure 10 - Specification for discharges to air rates through OLS

47 Runway End Protection Areas 8.11 National authorities in many jurisdictions around the world define and apply land use controls within areas beyond each end of airport runways. Within these areas, the chance of an incident where an aircraft would impact the ground is of a level (statistically) that may represent a public hazard. These areas are termed REPA There is no New Zealand regulation applicable to the development and application of REPA in New Zealand. Based on a literature review of worldwide practice undertaken by Airbiz (see Airbiz Report attached in Appendix 32), it was recommended that a risk based approach be applied to the location and size of the REPA of Auckland Airport. On this basis, Navigatus Consulting was engaged to undertake a technical review of the methodologies available and recommend a risk-based methodology appropriate for Auckland Airport. A copy of Navigatus Consulting's report is attached as Appendix Applying a risk-based approach to the development of the REPA has meant that the spatial configuration has changed from that currently detailed in Designation It is noted that both REPA sit entirely within Auckland Airport's landholdings, with the exception where it extends across the CMA, east of the Existing Runway, as illustrated in Figure There are no REPA shown on the western threshold of both the Existing and Proposed Northern Runways on the basis that they are adjacent the Manukau Harbour. Figure 11 - Runway End Protection Areas for the Existing and Proposed Northern Runways 8.15 Amendments are proposed to the text of Designation 1102 to reflect the above changes, noting the landuse restrictions applying to land within the defined REPA have been retained but revised

48 Non-Aeronautical Ground Lights Adjacent to the Extended Runway Centre Line 8.16 Sections and 5.32 of AC139-6 provide that non-aeronautical ground light/s near an aerodrome which may endanger the safety of aircraft, cause confusion or prevent the clear interpretation of aeronautical ground lights by reason of its intensity, configuration or colour, should be extinguished, screened or otherwise modified so as to eliminate such a possibility The Proposed Northern Runway will be an Instrument runway (code number 4) meaning under AC139-6, a defined area extending at least 4,500-metres in length from the threshold and runway end and 750 metres either side of the extended centre line should be mapped, and the use of non-aeronautical ground lights managed within this area. Figure 12 - Non-Aeronautical Ground Lights Adjacent to the Extended Runway Centre Line 8.18 Requirements for non-aeronautical ground lights adjacent to the extended runway centre line for the Proposed Northern Runway are not currently included within Designation Amendments are proposed to the text of Designation 1102 to reflect the above change, and a plan showing the spatial extent of the requirement (as illustrated in Figure 12) has been inserted in Designation Summary of Effects 8.19 The proposed alterations to Designation 1102 are a direct consequence of: (a) confirmation of the location of the Proposed Northern Runway; and (b) changes to the Civil Aviation Authority's Advisory Circular AC139-6 (Revision 5) There is no appreciable change to the extent and application of the OLS on properties outside of Auckland Airport's landholdings. The OLS does not impose building height restrictions greater than those already applying to the underlying zoning, noting that vegetation / trees are an exception to this. A plan showing the degree of change (between the existing and proposed OLS) is included as Appendix