|
Governing Body
14 December
2017
|
|
America's
Cup 2021 - decision on location and infrastructure requirements
File No.: CP2017/25946
Purpose
1. To agree a preferred location in Auckland for the America’s
Cup event for which resource consent applications should be lodged and as a
basis for negotiation with the Crown.
2. To agree on the strategy for progressing the resource consent applications
for the Americas Cup bases through a direct referral to the Environment Court.
Executive
summary
3. On the 23 November 2017 Auckland Council’s Governing Body
resolved to approve two options as a basis for continued negotiations with the
Crown and Emirates Team New Zealand (ETNZ). The options were:
· A
cluster of bases located on a 75m extension to Halsey Wharf, 75m extension to
Hobson Wharf, and atop Wynyard Wharf (the “Wynyard Basin”)
· A
cluster of bases located on the Western and Eastern side of Wynyard Wharf and
Site 18 (the “Wynyard Point”)
· The option of a 230 metre extension of Halsey St Wharf into the
Harbour was rejected
4. The introduction of the Wynyard Point option was to explore a goal
of no incursion into the harbour, to respond to the concerns of some
stakeholders and by request of Minister Parker.
Figure
One: Wynyard Point and Wynyard Basin Options.
5. Staff
advice at the Government Body meeting was that:
· The base
locations on the Western side of the wharf were subject to unsuitable wave
conditions
· Site 18
was not preferred as a development proposal is pending for a marine refit
facility on this site, in accordance with the Waterfront Plan.
6. Throughout the location analysis process, ETNZ have been unequivocal
about their preference for the Halsey Wharf extension. At the 23rd
November meeting, ETNZ accepted that the Wynyard Basin option (with a scaling
back of the incursion into the harbour), was a compromise they could work with.
It is now ETNZ’s expectation that work continues to refine and ensure
that the bases in the Wynyard Basin are fit for purpose – both land and
water space.
7. After the 23 November 2017 Governing Body meeting, the Crown asked
Panuku for more information on a variant of the Wynyard Point option. This
variation contains the following features:
· A
cluster of bases on Hobson Wharf, Halsey Wharf and Wynyard Quarter extending
out on to Wynyard Wharf
· A 74
metre extension to Hobson Wharf accommodating one double base
· A wharf
extension of 15 metres to Halsey Wharf (instead of 75m) accommodating only two
single bases (compared to four double bases in the Wynyard Basis option)
· Three
double and one single base on Wynyard Wharf east and on the site at 56-90
Brigham Street (the “ASB car park site”). An extension across
Brigham Street, to link the bases to the Wharf and enable water space access.
Figure Two:
Wynyard Point (variant), using ASB carpark
8. All
parties have a desire to ensure that investment decisions take into account a
broader range of considerations than just the economic, including
environmental, social and cultural values. The decision does also need to be
fit for purpose for ETNZ and the event itself.
9. Profiles of the Wynyard Basin option and Wynyard Point (variant) in
delivery, event and legacy mode are provided as Attachment A. Analysis of the
Wynyard Point variant is outlined in the body of this report. The analysis was
informed by:
· The
criteria developed and agreed by the Council Group and central government
agencies (MBIE and Treasury) to assess potential base locations for AC36 (refer
table One and Attachment B.
· Key
timing assumptions (Table One)
· Technical information and commercial agreements that is available to
Panuku as the place shaper and developer of this area on behalf of Auckland
Council.
10. It is staff advice that the Wynyard Point (variant) option cannot
meet all of the location analysis criteria. In particular, this option:
· Increases
the risk of delivery timeframes - due to the complexities of existing lease
requirements and the further work required to assess consenting issues
including the use and development of contaminated land
· Increases
the risk around cost, due to the likely need to cease or move adjoining
hazardous substances operators
· Cannot
contribute in the longer term as legacy for future Americas Cup events (post
2022), as this land is earmarked for the much-anticipated public open space
that has been a feature of the Wynyard Point dialogue since 2005
· Does not provide enough land and water space for eight team bases
(as required).
11. In particular:
· proposed
bases at 56-90 Brigham Street (known as ASB carpark) are sandwiched between two
operating hazardous substance facilities which create an unacceptable risk
profile for the public, is contrary to the specialist risk advice received to
date and would prevent the high profile double bases used in a way which would
be acceptable for the AC36 event.
· To
address the issue the existing hazardous facilities would need to cease for a
period of time or move, which would require prohibitively expensive costs
relating to modifying or breaking existing leases and paying for the relocation
costs for those operators affected. There is insufficient time to move and
relocate the hazardous facilities by 2019.
· To get
access to the water, the proposed bases at Hamer Street would encroach over
Brigham Street which requires ‘stopping’ the road. Road stopping
cannot be consented in time and is unlikely to be approved under the current
statutory and case law criteria, however would be possible under a legislative
solution. On safety and operational grounds, the road stopping is unlikely to
be supported by the hazardous facilities operators and Fire and Emergency New
Zealand (formerly the NZ Fire Service) will seek to mitigate the risks of any
option
· There are contamination issues relating to development of land on
Wynyard Point. Further technical work would be needed to assess what
might be acceptable to make the site at Brigham Street useable within the required
timeframes.
12. Staff
consider that these are significant issues to address and represent serious
challenges to deliverability. The Wynyard Point (variant) option would not
obtain the necessary consents and approvals either at all or certainly within
the timeframe available. Any realistic form of legislation could not
address all of these matters.
13. The
above has been communicated to the Minister in a memo on the 30th of
November. The executive summary of the memo is provided (Attachment
Three).
14. At
the time of writing this report the Minister has committed to further
investigating the Wynyard Point (variant) option to ensure that he is confident
that all options have been be exhausted. Panuku and Auckland Council have been
working to ensure that the Minister receives all of the additional information
requested and has access to technical experts to inform his decision.
15. As
reported in the 23 November report, the Wynyard Basin Option does meet the
criteria for delivery, event and legacy. Importantly, this option is
consistent with the intent of the Waterfront Plan 2012 and refreshed in 2017
(Figure Three). The team continues to work on detailed design and
improvements – the extensions to both Halsey and Hobson Wharves are
currently 74m.
16. It should be clearly stated that the Wynyard Basin option still has
some challenges and risks and the team has been working through detailed design
(visual and urban design), environmental and operational issues to ensure that
the:
· New
infrastructure is an appropriate fit within Wynyard Quarter and can be
delivered and used to the high standards that the Council and public have come
to expect in this area of the waterfront
· Option can be consented and delivered to meet the milestones
provided in this report
17. Key
tenant meetings have been held and negotiations are to be expected. To enable
delivery, the Council needs to progress procurement processes in the New Year
so that when consent is granted there are teams ready to start site clearance
and construction.
18. All
work related to AC36 has been developed under a compressed timeframe. A
team has been established to lodge resource consent for the Wynyard Basin by
the 15th of January 2018. The team has been engaged and is working to the
timeframes in Table Three.
19. Panuku
has also been liaising and updating stakeholders to keep them informed about
progress. These are stakeholders who are likely to be affected by the location
decision or who have an active interest as businesses or residents in the area.
20. Auckland
Council staff and central government officials continue to lead engagement with
mana whenua on the legacy opportunities for the wider City Centre and
Waterfront, including the America’s Cup. On the 23rd of
November the Regional Kaitiaki Forum confirmed their position regarding
relationships being at the appropriate level and with the appropriate
representatives. This was reinforced through hui between the Minister, Mayor
and mana whenua representatives on 1st of December.
21. Considering all of the above, Auckland Council needs to make a
decision about the preferred location option to enable progress with the
resource consent, procurement and delivery.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Governing Body:
a) support Emirates Team New Zealand to host the America’s Cup
in Auckland in 2021
b) approve
the Wynyard Basin (Halsey Wharf Extension, Hobson Wharf Extension and Wynyard
Wharf East Extension) location option as a basis for negotiation with the
Crown and Emirates Team New Zealand
c) note
that the Mayor and the Chief Executive were given delegated authority under
resolution GB/2017/145 to continue negotiations with the Crown and Emirates
Team New Zealand
d) delegate
authority to the Mayor and Chief Executive to complete negotiations and lodge
the resource consent application
e) note
that the Crown remains committed to further investigating the Wynyard Point
(variant) Option and will not reach a final view until further due diligence
on this option has been completed
f) agree
to use the single hearing process through direct referral to the Environment
Court, available under the Resource Management Act 1991, and lodge the
resource consent applications for the approved option in January 2018.
g) acknowledge
that the costs required for planning, consenting and procurement of the
approved option and associated infrastructure will commence in this financial
year
h) agree
to explore, with Crown representatives, additional or alternative measures
that may provide greater certainty or efficiency of process.
i) refer this report and decisions to Cabinet to inform their
decision making.
|
Comments
Waterfront
Context
Waterfront and City Centre
Downtown Vision and Programme of Works
22. At
its 5 September 2017 meeting, the Planning Committee approved the direction and
intent for updated implementation of the City Centre Master Plan and Waterfront
Plan (PLA/2017/111).
Councillors adopted the vision for what the downtown waterfront could look like
over the time horizon of the next LTP (10 years). The starting point was the
Waterfront Plan in 2012 that has outlined a planning horizon out to 2030.
23. Collectively the plans outline that each of the city centre wharves
have a role to play to serve the city and community’s needs:
a. Wynyard Wharf –
Auckland’s premier waterfront public space with a headland park, mixed
use development, and a marine and cultural precinct
b. Halsey Wharf, Hobson
Wharf and water space – a permanent water-based event space supporting
the growth of sporting, recreational, cultural, community, commercial and
tourist activities that improves access to the Waitemata Harbour
c. Queens Wharf - transitioning
from the primary cruise terminal, back to a public wharf and supporting
modernised ferry infrastructure and services
d. Captain Cook Wharf -
transitioning from a freight use into New Zealand’s primary cruise
terminal
e. Princes Wharf and
Queens Wharf Basin - to accommodating better ferry infrastructure and public
access to the downtown basin.
Figure Three: Waterfront Plan
and City Centre Master Plan (10+ years)
24. Figure
Three above represents the vision that could be achieved over the next 10-15
years. The figure shows the summation of the Waterfront Plan (2012) and
City Centre Masterplan (2012) and the update of those strategies that was
presented in September 2017 to inform the 10-year long term plan discussions.
25. Figure Four shows the same long-term vision, but further refreshes
it with what can be expected through the Wynyard Basin option for AC36 and in
the broader downtown area –replacement of Wynyard Crossing, Eastern
Viaduct/Te Wero public open space, Wynyard Crossing upgrade, Quay Street
seawall, Quay Street upgrade, Downtown Public Spaces, Phase 1 of the ferry
terminal reconfiguration and the bus interchange. This downtown work will cost
approximately $260 million, of which approximately $80 million is currently
funded within the next four years.
Figure Four:
Opportunities for accelerating projects through to 2021 – with the
Dispersed Option
26. In order to progress planning, consenting and procurement of these
projects, Council will need to begin spending money in this financial year.
Consideration
of the Wynyard Point Option
Feedback
to the Minister
27. The
introduction of the Wynyard Point options, from the Government’s
perspective, is to address a goal of limited incursion into the harbour and
managing cost. Another key goal is to ensure that there is a strong positive
legacy value and that Auckland can continue to host America's Cup regattas for
many years to come without repeating the exercise of finding new space on the
waterfront.
28. Table One identifies the decision criteria and assumptions around
timing by which this option has been analysed.
Table One: High
level description of decision criteria and assumptions around timing
|
Criteria
|
High level
description
|
|
Delivery
|
Whether the
bases be delivered in the timeframe required
|
|
Event
|
The extent to
which the bases provide the best outcome for servicing the needs of AC36
event
|
|
Legacy:
|
The extent to which any investment delivers a
sustainable benefit beyond the event itself
|
|
Other:
|
The impact on business as usual, including existing
land uses, services and activities prior to, during and post event
|
|
High Level assumptions
|
|
Be fit for purpose and deliver on the event
requirements for AC36 (eight syndicate bases)
|
|
Be designed and consented by June 2018
|
|
Be constructed and operation by mid-late 2019
|
|
Can best deliver on the strategic plans for
Auckland’s waterfront
|
|
Offer the best opportunity for legacy for Auckland
and New Zealand.
|
29. Panuku
and Auckland Council have been working to ensure that the Minister receives all
of the additional information requested and has access to technical experts to
inform his decision regarding the viability of the Wynyard Point Option
outlined in Figure Two.
30. It is council staff advice that the Wynyard Point option cannot meet
all of the location analysis criteria. In particular, this option:
· Increases
the risk of delivery timeframes, due to the complexities of existing lease
requirements and the further work required to assess the contamination issues
on land
· Increases
the risk around cost, due to the likely need to cease or move adjoining
hazardous substances operators
· Cannot
contribute in the longer term as legacy for future Americas Cup events (post
2022), as this land is earmarked for the much-anticipated public open space
that has been a feature of the Wynyard Point dialogue since 2005
· Does not
provide enough land and water space for eight team bases (as required)
31. More detail is provided in Attachment C, but the summary of issues
is outlined below:
· The
bases are sandwiched between two operating hazardous substance facilities which
creates an unacceptable risk profile for the public and would prevent the high
profile double bases used in a way which would be acceptable for the AC36 event
· To
address the issue above the existing hazardous facilities would need to cease
for a period of time or move, which would require:
o Prohibitively expensive costs
relating to breaking existing leases
o Relocation costs for those
landowners / businesses on Wynyard Point affected by the proposal (no known
alternative location)
o A need to obtain resource consents for the alternative location,
with construction before the industry was relocated.
· To get access to the
water the bases would encroach over Brigham Street which requires
‘stopping’ the road. Road stopping cannot be consented in time and
is unlikely to be approved under the current statutory and case law criteria.
This process requires consultation with stakeholders including emergency
services.
· There are
contamination issues relating to development of land on Wynyard Point.
Further technical work would be needed to assess what might be acceptable to
make the site at Brigham Street useable within the required timeframes
· The option does not
provide enough land and water space for eight team bases (as required)
· Assuming the above
could be overcome, the construction timeframe would likely take 16-18 months.
The base on Hobson and Halsey Wharf can be delivered early but the base
construction on Hamer Street be constrained by relocation issues and associated
consents.
32. In
addition to the above, the Minister has signalled that Site 18 be used for
overflow bases. As noted in previous reports, this site is subject to an
upcoming development agreement, for use a marine refit facility – to
service working boats (ferries), commercial vessels (fishing boats, charter
vessels) and recreational boats, including superyachts.
33. Site
18 has been scheduled in for development in the LTP and if it could not be
developed would represent a land receipt loss of $35m over 2021 –
2023.
34. Other
financial impacts of this option include loss of income to Auckland Council of
8.2m from ceasing or moving on commercial tenants before 2022.
35. The Minister has been advised that there is no further resource from
within the Council family that can be diverted to the Wynyard Point Option.
Notwithstanding this, staff will continue to provide material that will be
helpful to the Minister, including as support for a consent application if
required. Auckland Council will continue working on the Wynyard Basin Option to
ensure that we can meet the January date for lodgement of resource consent
applications.
Progressing
the Wynyard Basin Option
Engagement
36. Panuku has continued to work and engaged with the following key
stakeholders:
· Emirates
Team New Zealand
· The
Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron (RNZYS)
· Challenge
Group – Viaduct Harbour Holdings Limited, representatives from the City
Centre Advisory Group, Urban Auckland and Stop Stealing our Harbour
· Mana
whenua
· Government
Agencies – Treasury, Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment
(MBIE), Te Puni Kokiri, Office of Treaty Settlements
· Council
Controlled Organisations – Auckland Tourism Events and Economic
Development (ATEED), Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA), Ports of Auckland Ltd
(POAL), and Auckland Transport (AT)
· Key
tenants and developers in the Wynyard Quarter, including Sanfords, Sealink,
Stolthaven, BST, ASB, Maritime Museum, Fuwah, Precinct, Willis Bond, Goodmans
and Tramco
37. A
letter of support from Sealink is provided as Attachment D.
38. A
stakeholder event is scheduled for the 19th of December, which will
cover off waterfront and downtown projects including AC36 and the Downtown
Programme. Letters and information leaflets are also being developed and
circulated prior to the end of this year.
39. Panuku
also started to engage in August with mana whenua through the Panuku Mana
Whenua Governance Forum. The iwi represented below, were amongst the first
partners Panuku engaged with and substantive material around the criteria and
the location analysis was shared. Technical specialists were also
provided to assist mana whenua with their feedback on the emerging
options.
40. Attendance of mana whenua representatives at the Forum hui for AC36
include:
· Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki
· Te
Rūnanga o Ngāti Whatua
· Ngaati
Whanaunga
· Ngāti
Whatua o Kaipara
· Te
Ākitai Waiohua
· Te
Patukirikiri
· Ngāti
Tamaterā
· Ngāti Maru.
41. Panuku
are engaging directly with mana whenua who do not participate in the Mana
Whenua Governance Forum administered by Panuku.
42. Recognising the importance of mana whenua as a Treaty partner,
together with government, we are continuing to explore with mana whenua how
they can be appropriately engaged with governance, how to provide for economic,
environmental and cultural interests and how to ensure that the ability to
complete Treaty settlement negotiations and recognition of customary interest
under the Marine and Coastal Areas (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 will not be
compromised.
Consent
Strategy
43. An
expert team has been established to work through the concept for the option
that was presented to the Governing Body and develop this with design and
operational detail. Testing and resolution of issues is still underway
and work will continue over the New Year.
44. Due
to the tight timeframes for preparation and lodgement, the team is going to
extraordinary lengths to prepare all the necessary material required to respond
to the complex planning and RMA consenting requirements. There are also a
significant number of associated activities that require consent and these are
likely to be located near to, or included within, the AC36 base facilities.
45. The
timing available to undertake the consenting for Wynyard Basin means that the
only realistic option that is available is through single hearing process
undertaken either under existing RMA single hearing processes or through
special legislation.
46. Of
the existing single hearing RMA processes, direct referral to the Environment
Court is recommended as the preferred approach for consenting the
infrastructure required. It is an established procedure that will involve
public notification by the Council and a single hearing before the Court where
any concerned members of the public or community groups who submitted can
participate. Subject to a consent application being lodged in January 2018, a
decision from the Court is anticipated by late July 2018/early August 2018.
47. Central Government may wish to consider additional or alternative
measures that may provide greater certainty or efficiency of the consent
process. Given the tight consenting and construction timeframes, council
will need to lodge consents early in the New Year, with the submission period
beginning after January 2018. The lodgement of consents under the direct
referral process does not preclude Central Government from enacting any
measures and it ensures that council remains on the critical path for delivery
in 2019.
Cost
of delivery
48. As previously reported based on current assumptions it is expected
that the Wynyard Basin Option:
· Will
cost approximately $124m for infrastructure and event overlay (supporting
berthage)
· Will require negotiation with commercial tenants and private
landowners, which have contractual rights on land and water. Additional funds
are needed to allow for relocation and provision of new infrastructure. The
work to date as indicated a total of $18m for relocation. Negotiations
total are unquantified at this stage.
49. In
addition to the infrastructure and event overlay directly required for the
America’s Cup village and bases there is associated work required in the
broader downtown area. This will ensure both the AC36 and APEC events in 2021
are delivered to the world class level expected. The investment for this
associated work is approximately $260 million. Of this $80 million is funded
but needs to be re-phased and $180 million of additional funding to be
allocated through the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
50. Auckland
continues to work with Central Government on the investment required to enable
the America’s Cup to be hosted in Auckland. Central to this is an
integrated holistic understanding of the full costs of delivery, inclusive of
infrastructure and a hosting agreement. While there has been considerable media
speculation on the nature and content of a hosting agreement, no detail is yet
available on the hosting agreement costs and rights and responsibilities. It is
therefore expected that negotiations on total costs and funding will continue
into the New Year.
51. The Mayor has indicted that here is no funding available for a
hosting agreement and that investment in necessary infrastructure is the extent
of the Council’s contribution.
Delivery
Timeframes
52. The
team has been working to plan out a detailed programme for construction and
delivery of the event overlay (refer Table Two). This was originally
reported as 10 months and with further interrogation has been revised up to
14-16 months to complete the entire infrastructure for the base
construction. The challenge for the delivery team will be to find ways to
stage construction and work on multiple sites at one time. The focus
would be on ensuring that the ETNZ base to be completed by mid-2019 and all
bases by the end of 2019.
53. The above brings in to focus the importance of a decision on
location and the need for Auckland Council to finalise a procurement strategy
and get contractual negotiations underway with suppliers for construction
works. There are likely to be synergies with the procurement that is
required to progress the Downtown Programme of works outlined above.
Table Two:
Resource consent programme
|
Activity
|
Time
Period
|
Description
|
|
Resource
Consent
|
October 2017
– 12 January 2018
|
Application
preparation
Draft
Assessment of Environmental Effects
Stakeholder
consultation
|
|
15 January
|
Consent
Lodgement with Auckland Council
|
|
February
|
20 day public
submission period
|
|
5 April
|
Environment
Court filing (note. following timeframes are indicative)
|
|
May
|
Pre-hearing
meetings and conferencing
|
|
End June
– Early July
|
Hearing
|
|
End of
July/Early August
|
Decision
(appeal period follows)
|
|
Procurement
|
February-
July 2018
|
Procurement,
engagement, contracts, early contractor involvement in design
|
|
Construction
– infrastructure and event overlay
|
July 2018-
December 2019
|
Demolition,
construction (wharf and buildings)
|
|
Pre event
|
December
2019- September 2020
|
Remaining
event overlay (e.g. buildings pontoons, fanzone)
|
|
Event
|
December
2020-March 2021
|
|
Implementation
Local
board views and implications
54. A letter has been sent to all local boards with information that was
presented to the Governing Body in November. Next steps will be to update
Local Boards from the 14th of December meeting and there will be
opportunities for discussion and further information about the project in the
New Year.
Māori
impact statement
55. The
Waitematā Harbour is of extremely high spiritual, ancestral, cultural,
customary and historical importance ngā mana whenua o Tāmaki
Makaurau. Each mana whenua group has its own views in relation to the
Harbour and how their values will be impacted by proposals within this
space.
56. The
AC36 has provided a catalyst for Auckland Council and central government to
lead engagement with mana whenua at appropriate levels and on significant
issues. Auckland Council sought direction from the Regional Kaitiaki
Forum hui on 23 November. This was followed by an invitation from the Minister
and the Mayor to mana whenua representatives to meet on 1 December for a
discussion on the base locations. This was a productive and positive
first step into the discussions that will be held over AC36 and other related
city centre and waterfront projects.
57. The
mana whenua representatives have clearly identified a preference to coordinate
engagement across proposals in the city centre and waterfront location as a
means of understanding the collective impacts and potential, and to streamline
engagement on what mana whenua consider as activities with similar impacts and
effects.
58. An
external advisor selected by mana whenua has been commissioned to progress a
co-designed engagement strategy for this purpose. In addition, Panuku is
resourcing independent specialists to provide mana whenua with technical
support for the consenting processes and applications.
59. With
the America’s Cup base location, the mana whenua representatives requested
a workshop be held after the Governing Body makes a decision or provides
further direction on the base location. Taking a collective approach to
engagement was signalled as a priority, especially given the time pressures to
commence statutory consenting processes.
60. A mataawaka engagement approach is being considered, with further
work required to understand the spectrum of opportunities in the commercial,
tourism, education, and skills training space and how this aligns with central
government and council’s partnership approach with mana whenua.
High Level Risks
61. The high level risks associated with the infrastructure options
component of AC36 are outlined in Table Three.
Table Three: High
level risks
|
Category
|
Risk
Description
|
|
Delivery
– decision
|
· The tight timeframe for the
infrastructure and location decision
· Local and Central government commitments
to funding before end of 2017
· Delays in decision making which would mean
insufficient time to complete design, obtain resource consent, procure and
construct infrastructure by mid-late 2019
|
|
Third party
negotiations
|
· Length of negotiation with third parties
in the Wynyard Quarter affecting project start
· Legacy agreements made through AC36
negotiations that impact on ability to develop land and water space in WQ in
the future
· Cost for relocation and associated
infrastructure more than anticipated
|
|
Engagement
and negotiation with Iwi
|
· The ability to engage with Iwi over the
location decision prior to resource consents being lodged in January
· Timing of Crown engagement on Treaty
claims on the Waitematā
|
|
Public and
Stakeholder engagement
|
· The ability to engage with stakeholders
over the location decision prior to resource consents being lodged in January
|
|
Private
sector commitments
|
· The ability to scope and get indicative
private sector commitments in a timeframe to progress conversations around
the opportunity to contribute to infrastructure costs and agree on value of
return
|
|
Host
agreement
|
· Costs for the America's Cup event include
infrastructure and event delivery costs. It is likely that the latter will be
identified in a Host Agreement that is yet to be tabled by ETNZ.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩ 
|
Summary profiles of Wynyard Basin Option and Wynyard
Point (variant) Option
|
17
|
|
b⇩ 
|
Decision-making Criteria
|
19
|
|
c⇩ 
|
Briefing to Minister - Executive Summary
|
21
|
|
d⇩
|
Sealink - Letter of Support
|
27
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Fiona Knox – Strategic Projects
Manager, Panuku Development Auckland
|
|
Authorisers
|
David Rankin – Chief Operating
Officer, Panuku Development Auckland
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer, Auckland
Council
Stephen Town - Chief Executive, Auckland Council
|
