Before the Environment Court at Auckland ENV-2013-AKL-000174 In the Matter of the Resource Management Act 1991 And In the Matter of a Notice of Motion under Section 87G requesting the granting of resource consents to Waiheke Marinas Limited to establish a Marina at Matiatia Bay, Waiheke Island, in the Hauraki Gulf Statement of Rebuttal Evidence by Philip Harry Wardale On behalf of Waiheke Marinas Ltd Dated 23 September 2014 1
Introduction 1. My full name is Philip Harry Wardale. I have the qualifications and experience set out in my evidence-in-chief. 2. This statement of rebuttal evidence has been prepared in accordance with the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses. 3. I have prepared the evidence under headings which identify the issues and topics that I wish to address. These topics are: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) Operation of the marina car park Car parking Alternatives Swing Mooring use Tourism on Waiheke Island Public Access to the Berths Access to the beach and reserve Recreation within the bay Marina Area Shelter in the Matiatia Bay Marina Rules and Procedures Alternative Sites Marina and the Ferry Service Operation of the Marina Car Park 4. The evidence of Thomas Greeve queried the use of traffic barrier arms as the means of managing access to the marina car park. Allen Davies, in paragraph 21 of his evidence, suggests that berth holders will abuse the parking area to enjoy a car park close to the ferry terminal. I explain below the proposed management and operation of the barrier arms. 5. Traffic barrier arms are the preferred method used by many marinas to manage the access and egress of cars into berth holder only car parking. In Auckland, berth holder car parking at Westpark, Gulf Harbour, Half Moon Bay, Pine Harbour and Bayswater Marina are all managed using barrier arms. Marinas 2
outside of Auckland such as Whitianga also choose to use barrier arms to manage access to the car park. 6. At the proposed Waiheke Marina each marina berth holder will be provided with a card granting access through the barrier arms. The same personalised card will provide the marina berth holder access to their marina pier, which is common practice at most other marinas that have barrier arms. 7. The personalised cards will be registered against the holder s name, and will include cross references identifying the vessel and vehicle (car registration) associated with that person. 8. I consider the proposed barrier arms will benefit the operation of the proposed marina as they will provide a level of efficiency and access control to the marina that is paramount in this location as it will: (a) Stop other vehicles accessing the parking area, thereby limiting any additional cars travelling through and into the key hole area; (b) Provide an exact record of each vehicles access and egress time; and (c) Identify the car parking usage patterns of berth holders, both as a group and as individuals. 9. The data collected from barrier arms will play an important role in identifying any berth holder that is misusing the car park to travel on the ferry rather than visit his/her berth. This is enabled by assessing the data for example cross referencing the time of entry and exit and length of stay of vehicles, along with associated data such as whether the marina berth holder accessed their marina pier after entry into the car park. 10. I am familiar with the need to manage berth holder car parking in this manner after managing the Bayswater Marina for 17 years where the exclusive berth holder car parking area is adjacent to the Bayswater ferry terminal. At Bayswater we used the reporting 3
available from the barrier arm system to identify those berth holders that were using the exclusive parking area as their own ferry terminal parking place. Relying on the contracted marina rules I was able to successfully manage any issues over the abuse of the car parking privileges. Accordingly I have no concerns over the ability to do the same at the Waiheke Marina, which is less than half the size of the Bayswater Marina. Car Parking Alternatives 11. In paragraph 65 of Mr Serjeant s evidence he refers to whether a land based site for parking is practicable, and states.my view.is that if the marina was to be approved a parking arrangement within the mixed use area needs to be organised. 12. The landscape surrounding the proposed marina has been described by others. In short, in the valley in close proximity to the site, there are limited parcels of land available upon which parking could be established (taking into account the realistic walking shed, and topography). Much of the potential land available is owned by Auckland Council Property Ltd (ACPL) and is subject to a Mixed Use zoning. 13. In late 2012 I had discussions with Don Lindberg from ACPL to investigate if there were general parking options on the ACPL mixed use property. The outcome was that ACPL indicated it did not wish to commit to contractual arrangements providing for guaranteed long term marina car parking over and above the publicly available use on a casual basis of the current area for any overflow marina parking. 14. In 2013 I also held preliminary discussions with the land owner (Swordfish Holdings Limited) of the adjacent privately owned property to make similar investigations. However this property is subject to a number of long term leases for existing parking for the ferry terminal which could not be summarily terminated, and therefore long term leases were not available. Nor did the private owner wish to sell the property. It became apparent that 4
like many marina developments in New Zealand the creation of a reclamation (or parking deck) as part of the development was the only way to guarantee ongoing car parking availability. Both the ACPL and Swordfish Holdings properties are shown on the plan attached as Appendix A. Swing Mooring Use and Efficiency 15. The evidence of David Waters (para 10-16) suggests that there are moorings in Te Huruhi Bay outside his home which are regularly vacant and used infrequently, but the harbourmasters office has confirmed that mooring permits are issued for all the moorings. 16. I have made enquiry with the harbourmasters office whilst preparing this evidence and confirm their earlier advice that all moorings within each of the 16 separate Mooring Management Areas (MMA s) around Waiheke have valid mooring permits on issue. The harbourmasters office also confirmed that the 16 MMA s were over capacity as provided for by the existing coastal plan allowances. 17. The harbourmasters office also confirmed to me that they currently have a waiting list of 80 people who are waiting for a mooring within Matiatia Bay. This reinforces my opinion that Matiatia Bay is a favoured location for boaties on Waiheke Island, as compared to all the alternative MMA sites around the island where the harbourmaster confirms they currently have no other active waiting lists. 18. I believe that boaties favour Matiatia Bay as it offers one of the most sheltered mooring areas, relatively deep water, with the convenience of access by regular public transport, which in turn provides an overriding level of passive security over their stored vessel. These facets of Matiatia are relevant for the existing moorings and the proposed marina. 19. Mr Waters expresses concern about the efficient use of the moorings outside his home. Under the permit system managed 5
by the Harbourmaster s office a permit holder is the only one able to use the mooring and must relinquish the permit if its use is no longer needed, or (as Mr Waters states) the mooring is not required for periods greater than 6 months. 20. I cannot comment on the process the Harbourmaster uses to audit usage rates of individual moorings. I do however note the superior efficiency potential (from a usage perspective) of a marina berth in comparison to a mooring. 21. The restriction under the terms of all mooring permits results in the permit holder being unable to sublease the mooring to others during periods when the mooring is not in use by the permit holder. Such periods may be during periods of vessel maintenance or extended cruising periods. In addition, use of moorings by other parties can be, from a safety perspective, problematic, because moorings are designed to hold a certain weight of vessel (with that weight limit not being evident from the surface, nor may a mooring holder themselves necessarily be aware of the relevant weight particularly if it is an older mooring) and need to be periodically maintained (the maintenance state of the mooring also not being evident from the surface). 22. This contrasts with the management of a marina berth under a standard marina berth licence where the sublease of a marina berth for long or short periods is allowed for and is common practice in most marinas where demand exists. The presence of a marina manager enables this process to be efficiently and safely arranged. There is the potential for an unused or empty marina berth to be made available to visitors on a short or long term basis. An obvious example might be a berth holder heading to the Bay of Islands on their vessel for January, and electing to make the berth available for short term sublease through the marina manager during that period. 23. In my opinion, a marina at Matiatia Bay will become New Zealand s first destination marina. I consider that a destination marina is one where vessels will choose to travel to the marina for 6
short or longer terms not just as a place to park but as a place to berth before visiting the area and exploring further afield. In my view available berths will be subleased on a very regular frequency based upon the attractiveness of Waiheke as a destination. Tourism on Waiheke Island 24. Mr Greenaway s evidence is to the effect that a marina in Matiatia Bay will be a deterrent to tourists to the island and will negatively impact on overall tourism numbers visiting the island. In paragraph 13(b) he suggests that the proposed marina will reduce their comprehension of Waiheke as a unique, non Auckland City, island destination. I do not agree that a boutique marina such as that proposed is out of place on an island, and is by implication only appropriate in a city. 25. I have visited several island and other destinations where a marina supports and contributes to the overall offering at that destination. 26. I have previously visited Hamilton Island off the eastern coast of Australia, where people travel to the island to enjoy the beaches, relaxation and other recreational pursuits on offer on the island. 27. To get to the island by water, visitors can travel by ferry or by private vessels. Hamilton Island s main ferry terminal is adjacent to, and in fact part of, the Hamilton Island marina. I have attached as Appendix B an aerial image of Hamilton Island showing the gateway to the island. 28. Another example I have researched is a developed destination known as Hilton Head Island (www.hiltonheadisland.com). Hilton Head Island is considered an island although it now has a connecting road bridge so is not solely reliant upon water based transport to the island. The island is 35 miles from Savannah in Georgia in the United States. 7
29. Hilton Head offers a host of recreation and relaxation opportunities. Its website lists the activities within the island as Arts, Bike Rentals, Family Fun, Marinas, Fishing and Water sports, Golf Park, Tennis and Worship. Marinas form part of the tourist offering. 30. In my opinion a marina at Waiheke Island, particularly where berths are available for rental, will provide an alternative for boaties that wish to visit Waiheke Island, and can offer a secure berth for charter operators. 31. A well-built and well managed marina can, in my opinion, support and encourage new visitors to Waiheke including international cruising vessels. 32. In my experience, securing a vessel in a marina also gives a boat owner more confidence about leaving the vessel for periods of time to go enjoy the local attractions (this occurred regularly at Bayswater). In this case, the use of the proposed marina in Matiatia Bay by a visiting vessel owner will allow the owner and his guests to leave the vessel in the marina knowing that the vessel is secure before travelling to areas around the island. Public Access to the Marina Berths 33. Areas of the marina will be available during daylight hours allowing public access to the long and wide southern access pier, along with access to a gangway to climb up to the primary breakwater, with its south facing viewing platform. 34. The individual piers (A, B C & D) are proposed to be accessible only to berth holders using their access cards in a similar way as occurs at other marinas such as Westhaven, Orakei or Half Moon Bay Marina. 35. I am of the view that publicly accessible parts of the marina will be of interest to members of the public and tourists. 36. I understand that at Orakei Marina, after an initial period where all security gates, including those onto piers, were opened during daylight hours, gates to piers are now locked 24/7. However a 8
member of the public can visit the marina office and request an access card enabling the visitor to access the piers and view vessels in the marina during daylight hours. 37. I consider that such a procedure could be provided for at the proposed Waiheke marina thereby allowing visitors the opportunity to supplement their viewing opportunities from along the southern access pier and primary breakwater by giving them controlled access to the individual piers. Access to the Beach and Reserve 38. In paragraph 13(d) of Mr Greenaway s evidence he suggests that the recreational use of the beach to the north of the marina reclamation will be impacted by the marina. 39. I disagree. The marina berths are well away from the beach, and have no direct effect. The marina design provides for a promenade and viewing area around the outside of the marina reclamation or parking deck, linking to both the southern access pier and primary breakwater and a timber boardwalk which will allow tourists the ability to access the beach without needing to wade through water (at high tide) nor climb over the small headland on an unformed path. Those looking to access the beach from the ferry will be able to elect to progress straight onto the beach using the boardwalk, or head there by way of the promenade and viewing areas on the marina which will offer both a different view of the Bay (particularly from out on the breakwater) and views of the vessels in the marina itself. 40. In paragraph 31 of Judith Pemberton s evidence she suggests that the marina development will impede access to the historic reserve. This is incorrect. In my opinion the marina will improve and promote the access to the historic reserve. Improvement not only includes the timber boardwalk noted above, but also the upgrading of the car park and entry into the walking track immediately adjacent the marina car park which will allow better visualisation and recognition for the reserve. 9
Boating Recreation within the Bay 41. In paragraph 7(c) of Nigel Drake s evidence he suggests that the marina will impact upon the local Kayak hire company s ability to continue to offer kayaking excursions around the perimeter of Matiatia Bay. 42. I recall a number of locals raising a similar concern in regard to Bayswater Marina when it was proposed and I have recently been involved with a marina in Rose Bay in Sydney where similar concerns were raised. 43. I can confirm that modern marina gangways which make the connection from the land to the floating pontoons system are designed in a way to allow sufficient space for water users such as kayakers to travel underneath the gangway without any limitation. 44. For the proposed marina at Matiatia Bay a modern gangway will allow a kayaker to travel unimpeded around the eastern end of the bay, under the marina gangway, past the eastern side of pier A, and follow the existing shoreline travelling west. They will exit the proposed marina area to the North West by paddling inside the secondary breakwater before continuing west. This route will not result in kayakers using marina fairways. Marina Area 45. Christine Gisby in paragraph 15 of her evidence suggests that the proposed marina will occupy 50% of Matiatia Bay. Mr Hall in paragraphs 13-16 of his evidence addresses the variety of statements he has seen regarding the area that the marina will occupy in Matiatia Bay. 46. The estimates given and included in evidence from Christine Gisby is incorrect and inflated. Attached as Appendix C is a plan prepared by International Marina Consultants ( IMC ) which includes calculations for the various areas of the various components of the marina. These areas have been compared 10
to the area of the entire bay. The bay has been demarcated by IMC using an estimated high water mark and a line between the two headlands. 47. As shown on the plan, the area of the marina has been shown as the marina pontoons and the exclusive occupation areas adjacent the marina pontoons, the underwater footprint of the two breakwaters and a generous calculation of the water area around the pile moorings and the southern access pier. 48. Applying the above approach, in total the proposed marina, including the reclamation, marina and two breakwaters will account for 10.8% of the Matiatia Bay. The table below breaks this calculation down in the various components of the marina: Marina Component Area m² % of Matiatia Bay Marina Berths 22,625 8% Reclamation 3,081 1.09% Primary Breakwater 3,159 1.12% Secondary Breakwater 1,658 0.59% Approximate Total Area of Matiatia Bay 281,889 100% Note: Reclamation and Breakwaters area is the footprint area, not at high water 11
Shelter in Matiatia 49. Mr Waters (para 17) suggests that the north eastern end of Matiatia Bay is a favoured location for vessels to anchor during periods of adverse weather from the north. 50. As noted already in my evidence, it is proposed the marina will have access to a number of berths (through the standard licence agreements) to rent either short or longer term to vessel owners short term rentals may be available to those who wish to shelter from adverse weather events. I also note the navigation safety joint witness statement records at 7 b. that there are a number of suitable anchorages within close proximity to Matiatia Bay offering equivalent shelter. Marina Rules and Procedures 51. I have already outlined in my evidence in chief the importance of an appropriate set of rules when operating a modern marina which is common practice at most New Zealand marinas. The proposed rules, coupled with direct action by management, will address a number of common marina issues which have been raised in evidence. Mr Davies in paragraph 30 of his evidence raises concerns regarding noisy halyards. The evidence in chief of Mr Smith explains in paragraph 16 how these matters are quickly and easily dealt with. 52. I am very familiar with such an issue after managing the Bayswater Marina which was very exposed to the predominant south westerly wind. My staff and I used a similar technique as that described by Mr Smith. Alternative Sites 53. The statements of evidence Mr Sejeant (paragraph 42-44) suggest that Kennedy Point would be an alternative location for the development of a marina at Waiheke. 12
54. Potential alternative locations have been addressed in evidence in chief of Mr Leman and Mr Dunn. In addition to the various factors identified in those statements, I consider there are significant benefits in co-locating a marina where there is a developed public transport node such as that at Matiatia. 55. In paragraph 44 of Mr Serjeant s evidence he states he doubts whether the lack of public transport is an issue for marina berth owners. At Bayswater Marina we lobbied for the development of a public transport network to be established post the development of the marina to include a ferry service and a connecting bus service. As a marina operator I value the developed public transport network adjacent the proposed marina site and consider these significant. 56. In addition to the buses and ferry service, Matiatia also has a taxi rank which is most beneficial to an arriving vessel owner. I also consider that the bus PT services provide alternatives for locals to come and go to the marina without using a vehicle, and in some instances depending upon their eligibility for a Gold Card, could travel to and from the marina at certain times for free. 57. Whilst Kennedy Point has a ferry service to and from Half Moon Bay, and occasionally Wynyard Quarter, the sailing time is longer and the connecting bus service runs only twice a day to connect with the 10am and midday sailings from Half Moon Bay and there are no awaiting taxis, nor hire car companies that are well established and available at Matiatia. Marina and the ferry service 58. Mr Drake (paragraph 7(e)) and others have alleged that vessel s accessing and exiting the marina may adversely affect the efficient on time operation of the ferry service to and from the island. 59. After managing Bayswater Marina I consider these concerns are unfounded. At Bayswater Marina the ferry service to and from Auckland city operates from a marina berth on one of the marina 13
piers, it shares the marina fairways and marina channel with recreational craft and it is not separated from the marina in the same way the proposed marina at Matiatia will be. 60. In my 17 years at Bayswater Marina I was not aware of any issues resulting from the close co-location of ferry and recreational vessels particularly when one considers that the Bayswater ferry is a more frequent service operating every 30 minutes during the peak commuter times and hourly at other times. 61. Also of note is that the Bayswater ferry operates with a total of 415 vessels within the adjoining marina as compared to the 160 berths proposed at Matiatia. I accept the regular ferry operating to Bayswater is smaller than those that operate to Matiatia but both services share many of the Fullers vessel fleet. Philip Wardale 23 September 2014 14
Appendix A: Plan showing the land owned by Auckland Council and Swordfish Holdings Ltd 15
Appendix B: Aerial image of Hamilton Island s Gateway showing Marina and Ferry Terminal. Ferry & Ferry Terminal Yacht Club Marina New Berths under construction More recent image showing additional new berths post marina redevelopment. 16
Appendix C: Area plan of Matiatia Bay showing area of marina as compared the overall bay 17