Surveying+Spatial Issue 84 December 2015

SURVEYING+

SPATIAL

December 2015 Issue 84

Tunnel Vision: high definition survey of Sydney’s Lane Cove Tunnel RMA reform – will it sort the housing crisis?

2015 NZIS and NZSEA Awards

www.surveyors.org.nz

VERSATILITY IN THE FIELD. FLEXIBILITY FOR YOUR WORKFLOW.

Trimble R2 GNSS Receiver

Achieve sub-metre to centimetre level positioning accuracy

Whether you’re a surveyor who requires centimetre accuracy or a GIS professional who needs sub-metre accuracy, the Trimble® R2 GNSS receiver gives you the flexibility to choose a solution based on the accuracy and GNSS performance level that suits your application.

The compact, durable Trimble R2 can be paired with a Trimble handheld or personal smart device. Plus, enjoy a simple and fast one-button start up so you can begin collecting data straight away. Select from a range of correction sources, including Trimble RTX™ services, for accurate, real-time data just about anywhere.

To find out how the versatile Trimble R2 can bring flexibility to your workflows, visit Trimble.com/R2forGIS or Trimble.com/R2forSurvey

www.geosystems.co.nz | 0800 GEOSYS

© 2015, Trimble Navigation Limited. All rights reserved. Trimble and the Globe & Triangle logo are trademarks of Trimble Navigation Limited, registered in the United States and in other countries. RTX is a trademark of Trimble Navigation Limited. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. GEO-081 (11/15)

Pair with professional or consumer mobile devices for easy data collection

Start collecting data fast with a quick setup and one-button operation Integrate with proven Trimble Geospatial software for a complete field-to-office solution Get highly-accurate positions in real-time wherever you are with a range of correction sources

SURVEYING+

SPATIAL

December 2015 Issue 84

COVER IMAGE: A point cloud from the high definition survey of the Lane Cove Tunnel in Sydney. See page 7 for more details.

11

ARTICLES 7

Tunnel Vision

11 NZIS 2015 Awards of Excellence 14 Construction Contracts Amendment Act 2015 – What does this mean for surveyors?

16

15 Land Development in New Zealand – Top five emerging trends for 2016 (and beyond) 16 2015 NZSEA Awards 24 Precise GNSS Positioning with the Emerging Satellite Systems in NZ 29 Health and Safety Reforms are Coming – Are you ready?

30 The Emersons Revisited 32 Cadastral Survey of the Year 2015

24

37 Lawyers and Surveyors Working Together 42 Two New NZIS Fellows

REGULAR FEATURES 2

Editorial

3

Surveyor-General

4

Professional Stream News

20 BCB Commentary 22 Perspective 27 Legal Column 36 Technology

37

41 University Happenings 44 Obituary

• EDITORIAL

Christmas Countdown Diane Moriarty ISSUE 84 DECEMBER 2015 SURVEYING+SPATIAL A publication of the New Zealand Institute of Surveyors – Te Rōpū Kairūri o Aotearoa ISSN 2382-1604 www.surveyors.org.nz EDITOR Diane Moriarty survey.editor@yahoo.co.nz All rights reserved. Abstracts and brief quotations may be made, providing reference is credited to Surveying+Spatial. Complete papers or large extracts of text may not be printed or reproduced without the permission of the editor.

Correspondence relating to literary items in Surveying+Spatial may be addressed to the editor. Papers, articles and letters to the editor, suitable for publication, are welcome.

Papers published in Surveying+Spatial are not refereed. All correspondence relating to business aspects, including subscriptions, should be addressed to: The Chief Executive New Zealand Institute of Surveyors PO Box 5304 Lambton Quay Wellington 6145 New Zealand Phone: 04 471 1774 Fax: 04 471 1907 Web address: www.surveyors.org.nz Email: nzis@surveyors.org.nz Distributed free to members of NZIS. Published in March, June, September and December by NZIS. DESIGN & PRINT MANAGEMENT KPMDesign – www.kpmdesign.co.nz info@kpm.co.nz TO ADVERTISE Email: nzis@surveyors.org.nz or contact Jan Lawrence +64 4 471 1774

2

Wow, it’s that time of year already! I had to do a double take the other day when my eldest daughter informed me that it was only two months until Christmas.

She was right of course as most six year olds generally know the exact number of days until Santa arrives from October onwards.

As usual our Christmas edition brings the results of all the annual awards hosted by the NZIS. We have coverage of the NZIS Awards of Excellence, New Zealand Spatial Excellence Awards, two new Fellows and a new award Cadastral Survey of the Year. This award, introduced by the NZIS Cadastral Professional Stream and sponsored

by LINZ, rewards the best cadastral project in New Zealand for the past year. Three awards were presented Gold, Silver and Bronze and a write up on the winning survey can be found on page 32.

Credit must be given to the Cadastral Stream for their initiative and drive to bring this award to fruition. It serves as a challenge for the remaining professional streams to put into place similar awards in their areas of expertise.

Conference has been and gone for another year. Particular highlights for me were economist Shamubeel Eaqub who spoke frankly about the effects of automation and urbanisation on the New Zealand economy and the issues surrounding Auckland’s housing crisis (Leigh Auton also shares his thoughts on the Auckland housing crisis in the perspective column on page 22). Dr Scott Stevens of NIWA spoke of natural hazards and climate change and the impacts of sea level rise, which was quite sobering considering the number of New Zealanders who live within close proximity to our coast.

Emeritus professor John Hannah followed this talk with his ideas of how we as spatial professionals can play a role in monitoring, mitigating and adapting to this climate change. Another standout for me was Nick Williamson of Mashmatix.com who spoke of ‘Disruptive Innovation’ as featured in his article in the June edition of the magazine. Nick’s unprecedented use of social media for consultation on a district plan change is groundbreaking and inspiring and challenges us as a profession to start thinking outside of the box. I am sure most of you will have heard of and used Facebook or Twitter, but how many of you are familiar with the likes of Trello, Loomio, Skitch, or Streetmix? These are just a few of the tools freely available online that can allow us to work smarter and save clients money. There were of course many other excellent speakers and I will endeavour to chase up as many as I can to contribute to the magazine over the coming year.

I hope you are all looking forward to some time off over the Christmas break to spend with family and friends. I know I will be hitting the beach and hoping the El Nino weather cycle brings us the dry summer that has been predicted.

Merry Christmas!

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

• SURVEYOR-GENERAL

Canterbury Property Boundaries Bill Mark G. Dyer Kia ora koutou, You will have seen mention in my columns over the past year of the work going on in Canterbury to resolve issues with locating property boundaries.

Surveying and establishing property boundaries is never a simple task, but it’s never been as complicated as it is in some areas of Christchurch following the Canterbury Earthquake sequence.

Minister for Land Information Louise Upston announced on 3 November that the Government has introduced new legislation to help resolve the problems that ground movement has created in some parts of Canterbury.

If passed, the Canterbury Property Boundaries (And Related Matters) Bill will provide that property boundaries in greater Christchurch have moved with earthquake related ground movement. This direction will give surveyors more certainty in what the law is, and how it is to be applied when they approach surveying boundaries in affected areas.

Importantly, the Bill also provides that surveys conducted during the period between the earthquakes and the time the Bill is passed, will continue to determine boundaries providing certainty and confidence to landowners that they do not have to be concerned about decisions they took in relation to those surveys.

There is no doubt that surveyors have stepped up to support the rebuild by continuing to professionally fulfil their duties in a time when the situation is confused at best. Liability for surveys undertaken in such uncertain conditions is a key concern for surveyors, and the fact that the draft Bill addresses this is thanks to the collaborative and cooperative approach that both NZIS and ICS members and leaders took to developing a legislative response.

While the wheels of government may at times feel like they are moving incredibly slowly, when we consider the implications of this decision for so many people, it makes the need for a considered and careful response all the greater.

Collaborating on issues and opportunities invariably results in a better outcome. When we look at the way in which New Zealand’s survey system functions, it relies on this collaboration between surveyors and the government to work. We all have responsibility for ensuring the quality and accuracy of the data we collect, whether defining property boundaries, determining compliance, or setting the regulatory environment in which this work takes SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

place. Of course, this responsibility equally applies to all kinds of surveys where others rely on the information and advice to inform better decisions.

There are a couple of significant opportunities for collaboration that I would like to highlight here.

You all have the opportunity to provide feedback on the Canterbury Property Boundaries (And Related Matters) Bill through the Select Committee process, and I encourage you to do so either collectively or individually.

Liability for surveys undertaken in such uncertain conditions is a key concern for surveyors . . .

You will also all have the opportunity to collaborate on a review of the Rules for Cadastral Survey in 2016. I know that many of you have views on how these could be amended to make them easier to follow and to apply, and I look forward to hearing those views as we work through the review process.

Whether providing feedback on the Canterbury Property Boundaries (And Related Matters) Bill, or contributing to the Rules review, I encourage you to consider the following. It’s very difficult to change things based on people holding a view that they are bad, or wrong. However, when feedback includes reasons, and suggestions for improvement or solutions then together we can make meaningful changes.

It’s been a long and busy year, and I am certainly looking forward to taking some time out to reflect on the challenges of 2015 and prepare myself for what 2016 has to bring.

I hope that wherever you are over the holidays, you get the chance to relax, unwind, and spend time with loved ones.

Nāku noa, nā Mark

3

• PROFESSIONAL

STREAM NEWS

Cadastral The Conference in Wellington was a highlight for the Cadastral Stream, with Darren Hocken presenting the awards for Cadastral Survey of the Year. Congratulations to the finalists and to the winner Tony Nikkel, for a fine piece of work in the hill country in behind Motueka. Thanks to Darren Hocken and his team of judges for getting this annual award off the ground and we look forward to even more entrants next year. Thanks also to LINZ for sponsoring the prizes.

There was an excellent turnout throughout the country for the Cadastral Dataset QA workshop and the feedback received from members is that the session was well received. Thanks to Karl Wilton, Andrew Blackman, Steve Mydlowski and Garth Falloon for presenting and to Darren Hocken and Vanessa Delegat for organising this nationwide series. Watch this space for more workshops on Cadastral matters over the coming months.

There has been a good response to requests for nominations for a new working group to look at the Cadastral Survey Act and to provide a report on which elements of the Act should be reviewed. The Cadastral Stream will work through those nominations to select a group that has a good balance of skills and experience to represent the profession in this important review. The report from this working group will be delivered to NZIS Board and used as the basis for lobbying for changes to the Act. Best wishes to Matt Ryder who is taking over the role of Cadastral Stream Chair, and thank you to everybody that has contributed to all things cadastral during my time as stream chair, and a big thanks to the Cadastral Stream Leadership team.

Stefan Kiss, Retiring Cadastral Stream Chair

Engineering Surveying Alice the Tunnel Boring Machine (Waterview Connection in Auckland) has finished her 4.8km journey at time of writing this. She came in within 1cm of where she was meant to be, so clearly there will be no sudden manoeuvres required of drivers when the tunnels are opened in early 2017. This is a great achievement by all involved in the project, and we give special acknowledgement to the tunnel survey team who spent two years traversing the tunnels to ensure the highest accuracy was achieved.

4

There is no shortage of major construction projects in and around Auckland and Christchurch, with plenty more on the horizon. New construction methods and technologies are also requiring the expertise of the ‘spatially savvy’, creating a greater demand for surveyors, as well as a growing need for advocacy from the NZIS and our stream.

Any help and feedback from members about advocacy is always welcomed.

If you have a great story that you wish to share with the Engineering Surveyors, please get in touch. You can also check us out on LinkedIn and start a chat, just search for “Engineering Surveyors NZ”.

Michael Cutfield, Engineering Surveying Stream Chair

Hydrography Inaugural hydrographic training paper offered The University of Otago, in partnership with the Hydrographic Academy of the Marine Learning Alliance (MLA) (Plymouth, UK) will be offering an inaugural Southern Hemisphere practical hydrographic training paper in December 2015. This paper is part of a post graduate programme students can study via e-learning with MLA and can also be taken by School of Surveying students. It will be a great chance to showcase our marine facilities and environment to a variety of international professionals and will greatly benefit the School of Surveying by ensuring we maintain our knowledge of the latest hydrographic surveying techniques and equipment. For more information on the MLA please visit: https://www.mla-uk.com/ or email emily.tidey@otago.ac.nz

Conference review The speakers on climate change, rising sea levels and storm intensity provided much to consider in determining marine/land boundary interfaces. The concept of using flood levels from the 10 percentile of a storm curve to set levels on shore is gaining recognition from planners and urban designers.

The Hydrographic session had a small but interactive audience and hearty discussion was had in regard to the content of the two presentations ‘Lidar for marine surveys’ and ‘Professional certification of Hydrographers’ and the techniques and application of each.

Land Development and Urban Design Following on from the good work carried out by Brett Gawn in the initial setup phase of this stream a formal

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

working committee has now been established with the following members volunteering to help with moving this stream forward and serving the membership and Institute in relation any relevant matters.

The new Committee is: Phil Cogswell (Chair), Brett Gawn, Phil Rhodes, Paul Turner, Richard Bromley, Scot Plunkett and one to be added from the Young Professionals Group.

The committee had several skype meetings prior to conference with the major focus on formalising the terms of reference for the stream and establishing the main functions of the group and areas of interest that would be encompassed. The conclusions were that the main scope of our stream was: • Planning – including policy, strategy and consents.

• Urban design and spatial planning.

• Land development infrastructure design.

• Urban development feasibility and economics.

• Low intensity urban design ( LIUD ) This covers a wide range of fields and several overlaps have been identified, particularly with the Engineering Surveying stream who we will liaise with in this regard.

Wellington conference was a success and the relevant stream sessions were of a very high standard and well worth attending. Of particular interest was the presentation by Andrew McPhail (Calibre Consulting) on the Enviro development certification, which is an Australian model that could be implemented here. The stream will look closer at this concept and seek some feedback from members to establish if it is worthwhile pursuing.

We look forward to developing the stream and working with the membership moving forward.

Positioning and Measurement The end of 2015 sees the P&M stream conclude the year’s theme ‘GNSS for Cadastral Surveying and other Purposes’.

Some highlights have included the Surveying + Spatial Stories (June & December), conversations on the P&M Stream LinkedIn Page and the Deformation webinar now available online: https://youtu.be/0Wh0kDKJ4yw (C Pearson) https://youtu.be/tg1kKhIkIGk (C Crook) https://youtu.be/dvRfEvFyIxI (N Donnelly) The P&M Stream hosted a Face to Face meeting on 14 October, prior to the NZIS conference in Wellington.

Thanks to those able to attend or sent their apologies. At this meeting our theme for 2016 was determined: “Network RTK”. Let us know on our LinkedIn page your expe-

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

riences with Network RTK in New Zealand: Do you use it?

Does it provide the results you require? And how would you like to see it develop?

Rachelle Winefield, Positioning and Measurement Stream Chair

Spatial The NZIS conference was well attended by the Spatial stream with one session of Spatial presentations ensuring presence of the stream. As we are still building membership of the stream it is an excellent level of visibility. We intend to build on this as we work towards FIG in May 2016.

The Stream committee are working on a plan for competency and certification to ensure benefit for Spatial members, we are holding a workshop in November to progress this. The viability of this depends on the number of Spatial members so the priority is to get more members through the regions as well as at conferences and other events. We want more members to help drive the requirements for competency and assessment of spatial professionals, so please do feel free to speak up and say what you want for your industry, and help us to shape the benefits of NZIS to spatial professionals.

The National Library in Wellington currently have an exhibition titled “Unfolding the Map” curated by Roger Smith of Geographx. This is an excellent exhibition tracing the history of maps in New Zealand from the very earliest recorded map to the latest technology in animation, 3D modelling and visualisation, and crowdsourcing. The exhibition runs until October 2016 and is a very rewarding experience to see what the spatial industry can do and how it contributes to New Zealand’s historical record and to the modern economy.

The New Zealand Geospatial Research Conference is being held 7-9 December at the University of Canterbury, please see http://www.nzgrc15.canterbury.ac.nz/ for details and to register. This is an inaugural conference for the spatial industry and will tie in nicely with the NZIS Spatial stream giving us greater publicity and thus member promotional opportunities.

The Spatial Excellence Awards were held on Thursday 19th December. See http://www.nzspatialawards.org.nz/ for the list of finalists and winning projects.

As you can see there is lots going on in the spatial industry at the moment and we are still building our membership drive and competency and certification landscape, so continue to watch this space!

Greg Byrom, Spatial Stream Council representative

5

GLENN STONE INSURANCE

6

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

TUNNEL VISION Chris Morris, Chief Technology Officer, North South GIS Capturing detailed spatial information underground is challenging in any scenario. When ‘the underground’ happens to be a key piece of transport infrastructure servicing millions of users annually in one of Australia’s capital cities, this challenge is extenuated.

This was a task tackled by AAM (AAM is a Geospatial Services company specialising in the collection, analysis, presentation and delivery of geospatial information) in 2014 using sophisticated terrestrial LiDAR techniques and rigorous project management to accurately map a 4 km long tunnel, with results of the survey utilised by the road operator to revolutionise the asset’s maintenance.

The tunnel at the heart of this task is approximately 4 kilometres in length and is an important amenity for the community, providing a wide number of benefits for local residents, including significant reductions in travel time through the area during peak hours.

While the tunnel is a critical part of transport infrastructure, as with any motorway it requires ongoing maintenance to ensure it can continue its smooth operation for users.

The tunnel environment presents a number of extra challenges in these routine maintenance tasks. Regular shutdowns of the tunnel are scheduled to enable staff and contractors of the tunnel operator to safely access the asset to check the various safety systems, however it is clearly of benefit to minimise the disruption that a tunnel shut down represents to the numerous road uses - especially given in mind that for a toll road, the road users are essentially the customers.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL SURVEYING+SPATIAL

••

Issue Issue 84 84 December December 2015 2015

To aid in this task, the operator wanted a new suite of tools and data to assist in managing the tunnel. These tools would allow engineers and maintenance crews, from the convenience of a desktop computer, to perform analysis and inspection of the tunnels, as well as allow them to accurately plan for and design new elements which could then be visualised virtually within the tunnel. Personnel would benefit from having a full view of the tunnel, without ever having to leave the office.

Building such a tool required a highly detailed survey, which is where AAM was contracted to provide their expert geospatial services.

The survey was carried out over a series of twelve night closures in September 2014, most of which were concurrent with regularly scheduled maintenance closures. Access to the tunnel was granted for six hours each night, meaning the entire survey had a window of 72 hours for completion. Every aspect of the survey was designed with this in mind, with a team of up to ten surveyors and three state-of-the-art ultra high-speed laser scanners deployed to ensure the survey was completed within the allocated time and to the accuracy standards that had been specified by the operator.

The first step was to establish a highly accurate control network within the tunnel, coordinated around primary control

7

points at either end of the tunnel which then ensured a horizontal accuracy of 0.005m (5mm) for the captured laser scan. The control network was also tied into AHD (Australian Height Datum) and MGA94 (Map Grid of Australia 94) to ensure that future surveys could be used to monitor any changes.

To make this task more challenging, design of the control network had to take into account access restrictions into the tunnel. Being a two way tunnel with on and off ramps, only one direction of the tunnel could be accessed at any given time. Of the twelve closure nights, six of these were in the westbound and the other half in the eastbound direction. Achieving this required a high degree of technical knowledge and expertise coupled with sound project management techniques. A specially designed braced traverse was run through each tunnel, with access to cross passage ways utilized to connect the two tunnels together.

Once the control network had been established, it was time to bring in the laser scanners.

Point cloud of tunnel entrance

“The laser scanner utilised for this survey is a fast speed and high accuracy piece of survey equipment. It is capable of measuring up to 1 million laser distance measurements per second, with an accuracy of 3mm at a 50m range” surveyor and project manager Daniel Kruimel from AAM quotes. “We conducted over 200 scans throughout the tunnel, resulting in a dense point cloud of approximately 3.2 billion points, mapping on average 1 million points for every metre of the tunnel. The point clouds alone equate to approximately 100 gigabytes of content per tunnel!”

In conjunction with the laser scanning, high resolution spherical photography was also captured. This meant that the point cloud could be colourised by the corresponding RGB pixel value, creating a near photo realistic point cloud of the tunnel. It also meant that engineers could click on any one of the photospheres and explore the image in detail.

Some of the benefits of the survey were immediately obvious, in particular a new insight into the roof of the

8

tunnel provided by the laser scans, which is difficult to depict with the naked eye due to lighting conditions. “In addition to measuring a position for each point, the scanner also provides an intensity value,” Daniel Kruimel explains. “Intensity is a function of how much of the laser is absorbed versus reflected. This will vary on different surfaces and allows us to uncover detail even in pitch black environments.” A high level of accuracy and detail will enable the client to conduct ongoing change monitoring.

Intensity View of Tunnel roof highlighting features not visible with naked eye

The point cloud was just the beginning because from these billions of data points, a number of useful products can be extracted and used in the day to day management of the tollway. Post-processing techniques were utilised to extract useful products from this raw data which are beneficial to end users of both GIS and non-GIS applications.

Feature extraction was one of the most important products because it would allow users to visualise and query data in ways not seen before. Feature extraction is a semi-automated process, but given the size and nature of the data captured in this project it took the processes and techniques that AAM staff have developed over time to make this possible. AAM were able to extract the features necessary to render both 2D and 3D models of the tunnel.

RGB Rendered Point Cloud

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

Feature Extraction from Point Cloud

3D models have the benefit of being able to be visualised in both CAD and GIS platforms. For one specific section of the tunnel undergoing an upgrade, a highly detailed feature extraction was carried out, mapping features as small as 20mm. This model was then used in a CAD package to aid in the design and manufacture of new equipment that was to be fitted to existing infrastructure within the tunnel. Engineers were able to save countless trips to site by interrogating the 3D Model in CAD and consulting the high resolution spherical photography.

Highly detailed 3D Solids model used for upgrading of gantries

Once extracted the full benefits of GIS can be brought to bear on the data. Relatively simple procedures like thematically mapping features such as pipes to show their diameter, or gantries and supports to show gradient or determine types of infrastructure from lights to safety doors could all be configured. Filtering of features also meant that it was easy for users to see just the information that they were interested in.

Whilst smart mapping provided the means to allow staff to visualise the tunnel, by using these highly accurate models, the operator was able to view the structures of the tunnel from the safety of an office. Standard GIS tools such as measuring length and area provided engineers with the opportunity to prepare for jobs before anyone sets foot in the tunnel. This saved multiple trips to the tunnel and associated disruption to traffic and potential safety risks that would have resulted from needing to examine the built structures in person, In leveraging the advantage of other spatial disciplines within AAM, the client was also presented with a webmap

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

9

interface hosted on AAM’s own geoCirrus hosting platform. By using geoCirrus, the operator can avoid purchasing costly infrastructure and software of their own, along with staff required to set up and maintain this platform.

Instead, they can utilise a rather simple monthly hosting fee to provide staff with easy access to information about the tunnel. This allows the tunnel operator to spend more time and resources focusing on what they do best – operating a n d

3D model of gantry survey

maintaining their asset.

One of the major benefits of web GIS is that it breaks down the traditional silos of information. Data is no longer restricted to specific software application like CAD and can be accessed by a wider range of staff which dramatically improves efficiency. Data is only a web browser away and can be accessed via multiple delivery platforms including smartphones and tablets. With information readily available, even in the field, engineers and maintenance crews can access the information they need without returning to the office.

With all of this information at their fingertips, staff and contractors are now able to bring a new level of efficiency to a variety of maintenance tasks. “With the visual inspection and measurement tools available from this survey,

10

our client and their stakeholders are given the opportunity to prepare for jobs before they set foot in the tunnel.

This ultimately results in less disruption for their customers, being the road users,” concludes Daniel Kruimel.

AAM are currently preparing to conduct a repeat survey of the tunnel, with the results to be presented to the client as a thematic heat map to highlight any areas where there has been significant movement since the previous survey. The repeat survey is scheduled for November/December 2015.

Further information as well as the chance to see the models in action can be found at the website below. http://goo.gl/YATxqq

One of the major benefits of web GIS is that it breaks down the traditional silos of information.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

2015 AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE Compiled by Jayne Perrin The judging panel of Tim James, Mike Benning and Jayne Perrin were pleased with the array of work being carried out by members of NZIS including the increasing use of technology and innovative applications. They considered the entries to be of high quality and encourage more members to enter the awards next year, not only to achieve the recognition they deserve but also to showcase their expertise to the surveying and spatial community.

2 0 15 GOLD A WA RD 3D Laser Scanning of the Triumphal Arch on the Bridge of Remembrance Entered by: Vanda Kadlecikova and Rowan Hallam of WOODS The judges were impressed with the innovation by WOODS to overcome professional and technical challenges in this project, as well as the progression of using modern technologies for difficult locations where interrogation and results would have been unachievable.

Many visitors to Christchurch will be familiar with the Bridge of Remembrance over the Avon River located in the heart of Christchurch. Like numerous structures throughout Christchruch the Triumphal Arch and Bridge of Rememberance were affected by the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes and were required to be bought up to 100% building code. Consequently, an enormous amount of additional strengthening needed to be added to the existing arch structure. As the arch is a category 1 historic place the designers had to fit the strengthening inside the existing cavities of the arch structure with minimal effect on the arch exterior. With 14m high major columns and 7m high minor columns, the relationship of the internal cavities of each column and arch to the external surfaces was critical. 3D laser scanning by WOODS was commissioned to capture the cavities that engineers would use for three dimensional structural design.

At the commencement of the contract the exact nature, access and layout of the cavities was not known due to the sealed nature of the structure. The features of each void were only available as each cavity was exposed. An example of such challenges is the platforms SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

that were discovered in the internal cavities. These platforms created a barrier between the scans from the top and bottom voids leaving a gap in the point cloud for the middle third of the voids. Without the ability to tie the top and bottom scans together the accuracies of each scan could not be verified. This was overcome by removing the intermediary platforms inside the narrow vertical cavities to provide access to the bottom of the cavities.

Another challenge was the data capture down the tall and narrow cavities, this was solved by inverting the scanner above the void on top of the arch structure on a bespoke bracket which allowed a greater overlap of point cloud and assisted the cloud to cloud registration by sampling a greater volume of data.

An accurate point cloud allowed the designer to proceed with confidence, identify design clashes, confirm the ability to build, and demonstrate the available space to manoeuvre the structural steel into place. Vanda Kadlecikova carried out site scanning and led the data processing, while Rowan Hallam was responsible for project planning and set up, as well as data processing and delivery.

11

2 0 1 5 SILVE R A WA RD Waterview Tunnel – The Northern Monitoring Zone Entered by: Michael Cutfield of Fletcher Construction on behalf of Well Connected Alliance (NZ Transport Agency, Fletcher Construction, McConnell Dowell Constructors, Parsons Brinkerhoff, Beca Infrastructure, Tonkin & Taylor and Obayashi Corporation) The judges commended this project for the common sense approach taken to deal with the numerous aspects of this job which provided simple and manageable, but effective solutions. Sometimes the answers don’t have to be complicated or difficult, just well executed.

Continuous real time monitoring is a complete surveying and information communications technology system designed to detect movements of 2mm or greater in the built environment. Measurements can be viewed as they happen and are processed and presented in a form that can be interpreted by anyone. NZTA required this monitoring regime as part of the Waterview connection tunnelling project to provide immediate alerts of structural movement and safety risks, and immediate identification of trends and future risks.

The Northern Monitoring Zone was designed as an array of survey marks which span across the top of the twin tunnels for a distance of 400m from their northern end. The real time monitoring allows the tunnel boring machine operators to monitor surface changes. With 55,000 vehicle movements per day Great North Road is the busiest local government owned road in the country, and is also where the tunnel boring machine (Alice) is the shallowest and in the weakest soil. Real time monitoring of this area was important for public safety and early detection in case of ground failure. Alice costs the project around $100k per day to operate and the continuous real time monitoring ensures no delays.

Level control came from ten benchmarks over the length of the project, two of those marks were on bridge columns/piles, and eight were drilled into the bedrock – in one case, this was 28m deep. These were levelled many times with a precise level and for the purpose of the continuous monitoring, the primary level control is checked against the local secondary control on a daily basis.

Survey marks needed to be measured by conventional methods but situated so they didn’t impede the public’s enjoyment of the area. On the road, specialised prisms were ordered that looked like normal cats eyes. A total

12

station needed to be on site 24/7 also, so a protective boxing was fabricated that provided protection from the weather and discouraged vandals. The real time monitoring was supported by daily precise level monitoring. A laptop received the readings; this needed to be within continuous radio range so it was kept in the security guards hut.

Using the Trimble 4D monitoring suite a web portal provides access to live updates. The major challenges that the Alliance dealt with were: • Keeping Alice’s operators, design verifiers, the local council and the client informed of any immediate ground movements; • Establishing control that is fixed and will not move with the changing seasons; • Transferring the primary control to be within range of the total stations; • Keeping survey costs affordable; and • Monitoring in public areas.

The system has since been implemented on other parts of the project with success. Well Connected Alliance indicated that the monitoring survey allowed for continuous tunnelling operations giving a net gain to the project of two weeks or approximately $1.2m.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

2 0 1 5 M E RIT A WA RD 850 Cameron Road, Tauranga Entered by: Mike Stott of Lysaght Consultants The judges identified this project as a prime example of the land development professional being capable of managing multiple stakeholders and in the ultimate position to unravel complexities of land use developments.

Lysaght Consultants played an integral part of a recent site development at 850 Cameron Road, Tauranga. 850 Ltd purchased a site that was vacant and being used as a free car park by hospital staff and visitors to the hospital. There were numerous hurdles to cross to bring this to a successful multi-use development. During the design phase Lysaght obtained land use consent to allow for the continued operation of the unofficial carpark – even though no fees were being collected from the site.

One of the significant risks for 850 Ltd was that any redevelopment of the site creating vehicle movements over and above the existing movements associated with the residential activity would require the intersection at 18th Avenue and Cameron Road to be signalised. Cameron Road would also have to be widened to accommodate the new signals. Associated road works priced in the order of one million dollars, the project would not be viable if 850 Ltd had to foot the entire bill. Lysaght’s established working relationship with Tauranga City Council helped negotiate a cost share agreement between Council and 850 Ltd. Limited notified; non-complying; land use and unit title consents completed the planning process.

850 Ltd identified the site as being in a perfect location to build a commercial development with activities that were complementary to the Tauranga Hospital campus, which is located directly across from the site on Cameron Road. After significant market research, 850 Ltd determined that the construction of three separate SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

buildings on the site specifically designed to cater for a motel, child care facility, café and associated professional medical suites was going to be the best utilisation of the site.

Lysaght’s engineering team undertook the detailed design of the widening of Cameron Road in conjunction with Traffic Design Group, and the detailed engineering design of the internal services of the development site itself.

One of the major milestones of the development was the signalisation of the intersection at 18th Avenue and Cameron Road which was required to be completed and operational before any activity could commence on the site. The delivery time for the road widening was very tight and included construction during the Christmas close down period. A good working relationship between Lysaght and Higgins Contractors allowed the commissioning of the lights to be completed one day before the childcare facility officially opened.

13

• LAND

DEVELOPMENT AND URBAN DESIGN PROFESSIONAL STREAM

Construction Contracts Amendment Act 2015 – What does this mean for surveyors?

Paul Turner, Principal, Landlink Ltd, Land Development and Urban Design (LDUD) Stream Committee Surveyors who design and administer construction contracts should not ignore the amendments to the Construction Contracts Amendment Act which was passed by Parliament on 20 October 2015 and comes into force on 1 December 2015.

The Construction Contracts Act 2002 (the Act) regulates payment provisions in construction contracts (residential and commercial buildings and civil construction), provides an adjudication framework for people with disputes under construction contracts and provides options for recovering non-payment under construction contracts.

Contracts administered under NZS 3910:2013 make their claims under the Act. Together with minor tidy up changes, the major changes brought in by the Amendment Act are as follows: 1. The definition of construction work will extend to design or engineering work (and quantity surveying services) provided under contracts entered into after 1 September 2016. This will give surveyors, architects, engineers and quantity surveyors the protection of the payment claim/payment schedule regime and also access to adjudication. Consultants will be restricted from including ‘pay when paid’ (conditional payment provisions) clauses in any agreements with subconsultants. It is expected that ‘design work’ also includes work undertaken by the Engineer to the Contract under a NZS 3910 construction contract.

2. The distinction between residential and commercial construction contracts has been removed, with the exception that it is still not possible to obtain a charging order over a residential property.

3. Disputes over rights and obligations will have the same status as disputes over the payment of money, and adjudicators’ determinations on rights and obligations will be enforceable in Court.

4. The adjudication proceedings will allow for replies within five working days of the response, and where new issues are raised, the adjudicator may allow rejoinder within a further two working days.

5. The time period during which a party may oppose a determination being entered as a judgment has been reduced from 15 working days

14

to five working days. Where a determination relates to rights and obligations, the grounds for opposing entry as judgment has been extended to include change in circumstances not caused by the defendant, which makes compliance impossible.

6. A new regime including statutory trusts for retentions comes into force on 31 March 2017.

The bottom line is that retentions monies will be protected, with some details yet to be defined.

What does this mean for Surveyors and others who act as Engineers to a Contract?

The major change is in the area of retentions, prompted by the failure of Mainzeal and the effect it had on subcontractors (Mainzeal’s use of retention money was labelled as ‘theft’ by one contractor). The retentions money does not need to be held in a separate trust account (i.e. undrawn down funds in a line of credit will satisfy the trust obligation), but proper accounting methods (yet to be defined) are now required. Interest on late retentions payments must also be paid. The minimum amount of retentions that the new trust requirements will apply to is to be defined by regulation.

Most consultants need to consider the impact of the requirements given that the monetary protection the Act offers are usually contained within their standard conditions engagement. Design, engineering and QS consultants will get the benefit of the payment protections under the Act, but will also be subject to the adjudication process either as claimants or respondents. Consultants should therefore revisit their standard documents and systems to make sure they are in line with the Act before 1 December, including being able to issue compliant payment claims and schedules, or look to ‘contract out’ of the Act by agreeing amended terms with the client via standard conditions.

Although the provisoins of the Act in regard to designer and engineering work don’t come into force until 1 September 2016, consultants should be aware of how they may be affected where they are engaged as subcontractors and how contract conditions might voluntarily bring them under the Act before that date.

Consultants have not previously had the benefit of a fast and inexpensive dispute resolution process, especially in relation to fee claims and other discrete issues. The short- ➤ SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

Land Development in New Zealand – Top five emerging trends for 2016 (and beyond) Paul Turner, Principal, Landlink Ltd, Land Development and Urban Design (LDUD) Stream Committee Here’s a bit of crystal ball gazing for 2016!

1. Houses and land parcels will get smaller, footpaths will get wider. As our population gets older (baby boomers), the evidence that there is a greater desire to have smaller homes (with correspondingly lower maintenance requirements) and to live closer to amenities and other people is growing. Correspondingly, the provincial areas will continue to struggle to attract people, jobs and money, and will continue to decline into the future.

Even though interest rates will climb through 2016, the spreading boom will be unaffected and investor buying will go well beyond Auckland for the next 18 months.

2. Peer to peer lending is making resurgence. After the failure of a number of lenders and the resultant reduction in options, companies like Harmoney are recreating a lending option for borrowers, many of whom are very keen to buy property while the market is good. This increases the ability for buyers to obtain funding and fuels the property market.

3. Government’s actions to unclog the pipeline are gaining momentum. The large amount of money being spent on major infrastructure is long

overdue – some would say 30 years overdue. The improved roading systems should improve the ability of companies to service their customers more efficiently.

4. Political and regulatory risks remain. The lag between creating workable legislation and planning documents takes some years to be properly effective. Planning decision makers may have to act ahead of proper regimes being in place in order to put into effect appropriate development to avoid a growing housing bubble.

5. Virtual reality technology will become more accessible. The technology segment has come a long way in recent times (think what our phones could do five years ago? and what they could do five years from now). The ability to visualise design work on site, through tablets and smartphones, will enhance people’s understanding of what is to be done. Virtual reality homes, showing people what they can buy before it is built, will be main stream within a couple of years.

How will you, your business and your community respond to these trends?

(continued from page 14)

er timeframes for fee disputes will be attractive, but complex technical design issues may not be able to be dealt with as promptly as the Act desires. A defendant served with a complex claim going back some time and involving other parties may not be able to reasonably respond in the timeframes required. Insurers and brokers will have to work hard to ensure that claims can be notified and managed quickly enough to

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

enable effective responses under the Act which may be covered under professional indemnity policies.

All new construction contracts will need to comply with the Act from 1 December 2015 including those administered under NZS 3910. This means that although the NZ Standard has not changed, the new provisions of the Act will apply.

15

2015 NEW ZEALAND SPATIAL EXCELLENCE AWARDS Compiled by Jan Lawrence, NZIS

This year’s Award entries once again showcased professionalism, innovativeness and creative problem solving abilities of New Zealand’s spatial professionals. Spatial solutions for the transport industry feature in this year’s winners with the Supreme Award recognising the pinnacle of achievement, going to Dale Harris of Interpret Geospatial Solutions for a unique geospatial road safety product.

The winners were announced at a gala award ceremony held in Te Marae at the Museum of New Zealand- Te Papa Tongarewa in November. Hosted once again by MC Mark Sainsbury, the ceremony was opened by the Hon, Louise Upston, Minister of Land Information and attended by Wellington Mayor, Celia Wade-Brown.

The partners making the awards possible are Land Information New Zealand, NZIS and SIBA New Zealand and this year they were supported by Diamond Partner, Eagle Technology, Gold and Master of Ceremonies Partner, Statistics New Zealand, Silver Partners, e-Spatial and NEC and Bronze Partner, Hexagon Safety and Infrastructure.

Congratulations go to all the finalists – organisations and individuals – who were recipients of Awards on the night.

NZSEA website: http://www.nzspatialawards.org.nz/

Supreme Excellence Award Representing the pinnacle of achievement in the spatial industry and showing the highest level of excellence or achievement.

Entered under the Technical Excellence category that recognises products or projects that implemented spatial solutions to an exceptionally high technical standard, overcoming significant technical challenges and delivering outstanding results for the client. In contrast with the Innovation Award, this category focuses on excellence in applying existing technology and methodologies.

Awarded to Dale Harris, Interpret Geospatial Solutions Vehicle speed and curve risk modelling for road safety Interpret Geospatial developed a spatial road safety vehicle operating speed model and curve risk assessment

16

methodology and web viewer as part of a NZ Transport Agency Signature Project for the Eastern Bay of Plenty (EBoP) in 2014. The project combined a number of existing technologies, processes and geospatial tools to develop a unique road safety ‘product’ that is now being used by the NZ Transport Agency, ACC, NZ Police and local road controlling authorities. Within the engineering and road safety sectors, this project is regarded as having the potential to revolutionise how road authorities target risk in the future.

The project is particularly effective at identifying road safety risks on low volume rural roads where existing assessment techniques, such as hot spot analysis, are unreliable. The success of this initial ‘pilot’ project has led to the roll-out of the methodology across New Zealand for a range of road safety applications, including industry training material and for use in support of the state highway speed limit review. Dale is a Senior Consultant at Christchurch-based Interpret Geospatial Solutions. She has a background in both practical GIS applications as well as transport policy and research. Her core strengths include advanced geoprocessing workflows and web GIS.

IND IVI D UA L A WA RD S Education & Professional Development Conferred on practicing teachers, facilitators or academics who have substantially contributed, through teaching, research, publication or professional activities. It acknowledges leadership not only in empowering students in the use of technologies, but also in supporting other teachers to acquire knowledge and/or promote excellence for practising academics in the fields of surveying and spatial science.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

Awarded to Mairead de Roiste, Victoria University of Wellington (VUW) Innovative teacher passionate about building geospatial capability Mairead believes effective teaching impacts beyond university. She also strongly believes in the value of the geospatial concepts and skills taught to her students and the relevance of these for students after they leave university.

Mairead’s GIS research explores issues of participation, geovisualisation, usability and meeting the needs of users and this is reflected in in her approach to teaching practice. With this approach she has succesfully expanded the number of GIS courses and nearly doubled the GIS student numbers during her tenure at VUW. She has done this through using innovative methods and engaging with the professional geospatial community.

Mairead is a Senior Lecturer in Geographic Information Science at VUW and is a passionate and enthusiastic teacher of GIS. She strongly believes in the importance of geospatial skills and knowledge to support New Zealand’s future. In collaboration with the University of Canterbury, she established the collaborative Masters and Postgraduate Diploma GIS programme at VUW and is currently the Programme Director across VUW, AUT and the University of Canterbury. She uses innovative methods to interest and engage students in GIS. Linking with industry is also a core tenet of her teaching practice.

Twitter: gistspace

Postgraduate Student of the Year Conferred on a Postgraduate student who has undertaken a research project that contributes to the ongoing progression of the surveying and spatial profession. Students eligible to enter this award include PhD and Masters Research students.

Awarded to Richard Law, MetOcean Solutions Modelling public transport accessibility with RTI As part of this research project, the arrival and departure times of every public transport vehicle at each of their stops across the greater Wellington region was recorded over a two tear time frame (the RTI system). Using the data recorded a spatio-temporal accessibility model of Wellington’s public transportation system was constructed. This enabled statistical comparisons of what is accessible on paper, and what is genuinely achievable with a particular level of confidence.

Ten different model definitions were studied, and this result held. As more cities and regions deploy RTI systems,

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

there is a strong justification to use an archive of this data when estimating accessibility.

Richard has a MGIS, awarded with Distinction in March this year. His thesis was supported with a Victoria Masters Scholarship and a grant from the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport. He is as a GIS Developer at MetOcean Solutions in Raglan and is particularly interested in OSGeo and Transportation GIS. Twitter: @alphabeta_soup

Undergraduate Student of the Year Conferred on a student who has undertaken a research project in the course of their studies that contributes to the ongoing progression of the surveying and spatial profession.

Awarded to Hamish Kingsbury, University of Canterbury Incorporating Road Safety into a Vehicle Routing Network Over the summer of 2014/15 Hamish was given the opportunity to work on a project that looked at how road safety could be incorporated into vehicle routing. This project was offered as an internship between Abley Transportation Consultants and Interpret Geospatial Solutions. Hamish completed this internship over the summer between his undergraduate Geography Degree and Postgraduate Diploma in GIS (PGDIP GIS) at the University of Canterbury.

This same project was submitted as part of the New Zealand ESRI Young Scholars Award in which Hamish placed first. The prize for this award was a trip to San Diego to attend the 2015 International ESRI User Conference. Hamish thoroughly enjoyed his time over there and discovered ways that GIS can be implemented that he never knew possible. It helped to further cement his desire to pursue a career in the spatial industry. Hamish has completed his BSc majoring in Geography. He also has an interest in Geology and Computer Science.

Professional of the Year Recognising a practitioner who is working in any of the disciplines of the surveying and spatial sciences whose professional achievements are widely acknowledged as exemplifying the highest standards of excellence and ethical conduct.

Awarded to Matti Seikkula, e-Spatial Ltd Matti Seikkula – growing the spatial pie Matti Seikkula has 26 years’ experience in systems design, software development, architecture and data modelling.

17

From a very early age he has been involved in programming and has a Master’s degree in Computer Sciences minoring in Economics, Mathematics and Statistics from the University of Joensuu, Finland.

In his capacity as CIO and Enterprise Architect for one of New Zealand’s leading spatial consultancy firms, e-Spatial. With his outside-in perspective he helps businesses understand the value proposition of spatial and this allows him to deliver outcomes for the industry above and beyond the ordinary. He engages with NZ enterprises to raise the awareness and value of spatial, thereby widening the take up and use of spatial.

Young Professional of the Year Recognising a young professional who has made significant contributions in the field of Surveying and Spatial Science and acts as a role model for others in the industry.

Awarded to Natalie Scott, Interpret Geospatial Solutions Natalie Scott: an Exceptional Professional During the past three years, Natalie has shown outstanding performance as a young professional in the geospatial industry. Her work has been presented at a variety of conferences around New Zealand and has been recognised as runner up in the 2014 Eagle Technology Excellence in GIS competition. Throughout her many roles, Natalie has shown exceptional leadership and technical innovation. She is frequently called upon by both clients and colleagues to provide solutions, and enjoys the challenges she is asked to solve. Natalie is an excellent communicator and prides herself on consistently producing quality results, both on schedule and at the agreed cost.

She is dedicated to ongoing professional development, attending and running a variety of courses and events to upskill in new areas. Natalie has successfully passed both the Esri Desktop Associate Certification and the Desktop Professional Certification. She is currently working towards attaining the Developer Associate Certification and is well on her way toward attaining certification as a GISPAP. Natalie is actively involved with a number of industry groups, such as the New Zealand Esri User Group Committee, and is committed to helping the profession attract new members.

Twitter: @InterpretGS

18

ORGA NI SATI ONA L A WA RD S Environment & Sustainability Recognising products and projects that help to resolve any issue in an environmental context.

Awarded to Wayne Tyson, Department of Conservation (DOC) Battle for our Birds The largest ever aerial pest control programme, DOC’s Battle for our Birds, was launched in 2014 using GIS as a vital planning and common communication tool. The programme was in response to the biggest seeding (‘mast’) seen in South Is beech forests for 15 years. Its aim: the protection of native birds, bats and giant land snails deemed at-risk from a seed-fuelled plague of rodents and stoats. Via 27 separate aerial 1080 operations, more than 600,000ha of forest was treated. Operations involved up to 80 staff, contractors and comprehensive GIS support.

GIS was the common language of Battle for our Birds; Maps and geospatial analyses were critical to communicating the sizeable looming problem, gaining buy-in, planning at numerous scales, consulting, obtaining consents, contracting companies, organising logistics, and ultimately sowing toxin accurately. GIS was also a vital decision making aid from the outset as scientists predicted the mast and monitored predator trends.

Innovation & Commercialisation Recognising products or projects that made a significant contribution to the industry through the introduction of a new idea, method, technology, process or application resulting in social, environmental and/or economic benefits.

Awarded to Gerard Lelieveld, Eagle Technology Group Remote Seismic Survey – A Spatial Approach A need to modernise and and unify project processes in Papua New Guinea was the basis of this project. GAMA ProjEx, specialist providers of project management and field support services in the oil and gas industry, needed processes to manage their projects and operations more effectively. But deploying in Papua New Guinea in a lowto-no infrastructure environment required outside of the square thinking. Eagle Technology provided a robust, spatial based IT solution set using both “Out Of The Box” and custom components of ArcGIS, Sitaware and Synergy software platforms, AWS cloud technology and communications devices to create a unique and leading edge scalable

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

operational management system, that allows oversight and coordination of crew, camps, vehicles, aircraft and personnel in rugged and isolated terrain.

People & Community Recognising products or projects that make a difference to national, regional or local issues and affect communities via ‘grass roots ’ initiatives, and/ or educational programs, services or tools that permit the widespread adoption, use, understanding and access to spatially enabled products or services.

Awarded to Renaldo Christians for Julie Reynolds, Scouts New Zealand Putting Scouts on the Map Scouts NZ, a not-for-profit movement aims to empower young people through adventurous activities. The location of various Scout Groups is critical and this project involved replacing a static paper pinboard location map with with a web-based mapping application to allow the regional office staff quick and easy access to all the information they needed to answer queries, and to allow the locations of scout groups to be publicly visible to increase publicity of the movement. Previously, it was difficult to locate the precise address of a particular group and it was prone to rapidly becoming out-of-date date as groups opened, closed or changed locations. As Regional Development Manager for the Upper South Island, Julie’s role is to support the leaders in the region so that they can provide the best Scouting experience for the youth.

Website: maps.interpret.co.nz/scouts/public

Spatial Enablement Recognising products or projects in which the application of spatial information, methodology and/or tools has greatly improved the outcomes of a project, process or product.

Awarded to Andrew Cullen, Network Delivery Alliance Enabling an Integrated System Enable Services Limited (Enable) is the provider of Ultra-Fast Broadband in Christchurch. Geospatial data is central to Enable’s business, allowing them to monitor the number of connections they make to customers, the current state and extent of the network, and the assets that are involved in keeping the network running. Previously, these key datasets have been managed by a small GIS team, with access to the data limited to those who had the knowledge and a licence to use the GIS software.

Enable wanted to make some changes to allow geospatial data to be accessed and used throughout the company.

These changes included centralising the datasets and providing a number of specialised views on the data. This allowed everyone within the organisation to view the same authoritative datasets, with the information provided in the most useful format. Data processes were automated, allowing the update procedures to occur much faster, meaning that the spatial information was up to date. The result of these changes was that Enable had more reliable, authoritative datasets. People throughout the organisation are able to rely on the information, and the value provided by the GIS data has been increased.

Photo by Colin McDiarmid. NZSEA finalists gather before the awards dinner.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

19

• BCB

COMMENTARY

F∙E∙N∙C∙I∙N∙G

Mick Strack, National School of Surveying A recent case at the High Court – Gosney v Ngai Tahu Property Ltd [2015] NZHC 515 – has clarified some issues about the application of the Fencing Act 1978 that might otherwise have been poorly understood; in particular, the requirement to gain a neighbour’s consent prior to any fence being constructed on the common boundary.

The case arose when Ngai Tahu Property proceeded to fence the external boundary of land they were subdividing (in compliance with council conditions). The adjoining neighbour Gosney, objected to the fence and proceeded to remove it and also, apparently, the boundary pegs.

Ngai Tahu successfully applied to the District Court for an injunction to prevent interference with the new fence and, interestingly, to prevent the Gosneys from interfering with the cadastral boundary pegs. Given that it is a criminal offence to remove survey marks (s55 Cadastral Survey Act 2002), it would seem somewhat superfluous to require a court injunction to protect the pegs. However, that was not the end of the matter.

The case was appealed to the High Court where a full examination of the Fencing Act provided clarification. First, there is no general obligation to fence a boundary unless there is some hazard that needs to be separated, enclosed or prevented from escaping. There is a general expectation

20

that when fences are built they should be on the boundary – specifically s22 of the Fencing Act states; “the middle of a fence shall be upon the boundary line ... where a fence is supported by posts, the posts shall be placed on the boundary line or as near thereto as possible.” It is thus clear that any fence, in straddling the boundary, is going to encroach onto both adjoining properties. There is also a general expectation that neighbours should seek agreement about fencing their common boundary whether or not either party seeks to have the other contribute to the cost of the fence. This duty to obtain consent to fence on the boundary was where Ngai Tahu came unstuck – believing that as they were not seeking financial contributions from the Gosneys, they did not need to obtain their consent to fence.

It should be further noted that s8 of the Fencing Act states: “no person is entitled to erect a fence that encroaches to any degree whatever upon any land of which

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

he is not the occupier, except – (a) with the consent of the occupier of that land; or (b) pursuant to an order of the Court made under section 24 of the Act.” When any fence that is erected encroaches upon land, the occupier “may apply to the Court for an order that the fence be removed; and the Court shall order the removal of the fence unless it is satisfied – (a) that the degree of encroachment is minimal; and (b) that the encroachment in no way adversely affects the use and enjoyment of his land by the applicant” (Fencing Act s8(2)).

It would seem that in any situation where it is reasonable to have a fence (i.e. with the exception of land parcels where a building extends completely to the boundaries), the law should be able to recognise that any encroachment of half the width of a fence must be seen as minimal and has no adverse affect on the use and enjoyment of the land. In fact, use and enjoyment of the land may depend on giving up some of one’s land for a fence. It has been observed by some that the expectations of accuracy in our highly developed cadastral survey system have incited neighbourly conflict rather than pacified it: “attempts to fix boundaries too meticulously prompted a crop of disputes that would otherwise have remained dormant forever” (Ruoff 1957. An Englishman looks at the Torrens System).

The wording of the Fencing Act appears to assume that a boundary is a line which can be defined to a perfect degree – the absoluteness of “to any degree whatever” is clearly at odds with surveying tolerances, legal tolerances, and common sense. Court judgements and common sense should recognise that fences are important and acceptable features on the land and that they have a width. Boundary ‘lines’ also have a width (including the fuzziness of both surveying and legal tolerances – ‘a little more or less’).

Surveyors would do well to accept the imprecision of land measurement, and work to avoid the kinds of disputes that arise from too fine a regard for accuracy.

The High Court ruling on this fencing case was that the District Court injunction was not the correct remedy but could stay in place while the fence was completed, and that both parties were to seek agreement about the fence or to apply for a court order to permit the encroaching fence. At a further hearing about indemnity costs (awarded against Ngai Tahu), it was recorded that Ngai Tahu had proceeded unreasonably with the fence construction, and had drawn the Gosneys into ‘a whirlpool of meritless litigation and appeals’ and that Ngai Tahu should have engaged in a dialogue with the Gosneys to gain consent rather than to impose an injunction upon them.

PROJECT DIRECTOR

McKAY Senior Licensed Cadastral Surveyor KNARSTON LAND DEVELOPMENT & SUBDIVISION CONSULTANTS Takapuna, North Shore, Auckland

We are a friendly, medium-sized company of Surveying Consultants located in central Takapuna.

McKay Knarston is an established and respected firm; we provide personalised professional services to our clients for large and complex land development proposals or small-scale residential subdivision. It is an exciting time to join, we are expanding and looking to build on our strengths and team environment.

YOUR DUTIES WILL INVOLVE:

• Work with clients to consider, create and advance their land development proposals.

• Provide high quality professional services to clients; from project conception to surveying, coordinating engineering services, guidance through approval processes and onto project completion.

• Allocate work, lead and mentor others in the team environment for quality professional services.

• Build rapport with other development professionals and local business community to attract and retain business.

• Support continuous improvement across the company operations.

• Provide thought leadership and strategic ability to the company for continuing success.

Our location provides a great lifestyle choice; close to fabulous beaches, community facilities, outdoor leisure opportunities and good local schools.

We seek a Senior Licensed Cadastral Surveyor / Project Director to join our team at McKay Knarston Ltd. ABOUT YOU:

• A Cadastral Survey Licence essential • Registered Professional Surveyor • +5 years’ experience in New Zealand including project management, financial and leadership skills • Experience with 12d Survey and Landonline • Knowledge of GPS Methodologies and total Station instruments • Good communication skills (both written and verbal) • Ability to build rapport with local business community • Will contribute positively to our team environment and development of others • Self-motivated and results-orientated

To find out more, please contact Lizzy Wangford at McKay Knarston on +64 9 489 4102 For a Job Description and/or send your application and CV to lizzy@mkk.co.nz

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

NZ Citizens only to apply

21

• PERSPECTIVE

RMA Reform – Will it sort the housing crisis?

Leigh Auton, Director, Auton & Associates Ltd First Published in AsiaPacific Infrastructure www.infrastructurenews.co.nz

Spare a thought for Minister Nick Smith in trying to get a handle on the housing crisis in Auckland.

With a form of property madness having enveloped the city, aided and abetted by the media, house prices have gone through the roof, almost literally.

Daily the NZ Herald and other media breathlessly report another spectacular increase in house prices. The implication is that these increases reflect a great public good.

Saner voices however, such as NZEIR principal economist Shamubeel Eaqub, describe Auckland’s housing as “essentially a Ponzi scheme because you need more and more entrants to keep prices rising and that’s exactly what’s happening in the housing market”.

The consequences of Auckland’s housing madness on the young and the poor are diabolical. Today it is no longer possible for large numbers of people in Auckland to access the property ladder, nor is it easy to rent.

The social impacts of failing to adequately house, at affordable prices, will live with Auckland and New Zealand for a long time. And when the house-price madness bursts, all New Zealanders will feel the pain.

Unfortunately, and while the potential options for the central government are wide, Minister Smith’s political options are in my opinion limited unless he can persuade his colleagues to break out of their philosophical strait jacket.

The option being explored by Minister Smith is to change the Resource Management Act (RMA) to address the housing crisis. As I have commented previously, I don’t believe this will have any meaningful impact. Many governments have argued, and made changes to our planning laws to make it easier to deliver better outcomes for business and communities. The 1953 and 1977 Acts respectively gave way to the RMA 1991 to better encapsulate environmental principles of sustainable management.

Interestingly, the former Acts managed to provide a framework for adequate housing availability and affordability through a number of decades, as has the RMA for a good period of its existence. In my opinion, sustainable

22

management, if interpreted and applied correctly, already provides direction to policy makers to take into account economic, social, cultural and environmental outcomes in the provision of land for housing. Maybe the key issue is how the Act is being applied, rather than how it is written?

Shamubeel Eaqub argues that Auckland prices are being driven up by a number of factors, including tight land supply, the high cost of building, lack of infrastructure supply and high net migration. I would add a lack of central government support for building, or supporting the building of, lower cost housing, which has for almost a century been a role of the state.

Optimistic options So let us look at a few options for the government, some of which as noted may be philosophically out of reach but which may need to be reworked. Firstly, I would advocate for a central government national policy statement on urban land supply. Minister Smith has indicated that this would need a change to the RMA to enable, and if this is so, I would support a change to that extent.

The policy statement needs to direct councils and policy makers to provide adequate land and infrastructure for housing, employment and commerce. There is a need to free up more land, whether green field or brownfield, and the need is urgent.

Additional measures already introduced, such as the Special Housing Areas (SHA) will only be effective long-

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

term if there is a national policy framework around the supply of urban land. Currently the incentive to be a SHA lies in land banking to get capital gain. This needs to be changed.

Secondly, and to address the issue that many housing and business developers see as a major impediment, the government may need to be more active in the practice of planning. In particular, this needs to be at the sharp end of policy definition, but significantly at the actual consenting of development.

This has been partly tried in the past, but needs to be more embedded with central and local officials working together so that each party understands the processes and develops a common culture and understanding around development. If the Minister wants to effect change, I would argue that this is a key area in which to focus. As a minimum, it will help central government better understand the complexities at the coal face.

I agree with Minister Smith when he expresses a need for a greater focus on economic imperatives, but as I have argued, I believe this focus is already contained in the RMA. Certainly when I was a local government practitioner I was clear that the RMA and Local Government Act required me to do so.

However, I do think it is valid that many in my planning profession focus far too much on design and amenity outcomes, ignoring the ‘cost’ that many of these rules have on economic wellbeing. Too many rules are cast in the name of good urban design, however defined, with little appreciation that business, employment or wealth creation can often be negatively impacted or foregone. The cost of doing business for many can be too great. If the rules are too plentiful and overly prescriptive, the ‘money’ will go elsewhere.

I have little doubt that the cost of housing has been driven up in part by rules which purport to lead to good environmental outcomes but end up denying the young and the poor access to housing.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

I have little doubt that the cost of housing has been driven up in part by rules which purport to lead to good environmental outcomes but end up denying the young and the poor access to housing.

My third pitch is that the current government needs to get serious about supporting public housing. Minister English has advanced social housing, owned and administered by the largely not-for-profit sector to provide housing for the socially and economically disadvantaged.

I support the aspiration of the government’s social housing initiative but being involved on several Boards with interests in such housing, I know it will be slow and dependent on significant central government support.

In the meantime it is imperative that the central government builds, or financially incentivises, the building of more low-cost public housing. Without such support, the deteriorating impacts on the young and poor will continue to escalate exponentially, especially in the larger cities.

Interestingly the central government does have the expertise on tap, as in the Hobsonville Land Company and in the Tamaki Redevelopment Company in Auckland, but these need to be significantly expanded in order to deliver housing ,including public housing, on scale.

There are other areas of government policy that would help Minister Smith out of the housing crisis, including an assessment of the impact of migration on the Auckland housing market. While not all the additional 75,000 extra Auckland residents in the last two years were migrants, the ability of any council to plan for these additional people is an enormous challenge. Indeed it is almost impossible to build infrastructure at a rate to accommodate such population growth without major central government support.

For the sake of completeness I would add to Minister Smith’s bucket list the need to provide a suite of measures to tackle housing speculation, including a fairer taxation regime on capital gains, measures to address the uncompetitive material supply market and increasing the supply of qualified tradespeople. The minister may want to enquire into the quality of the new million-dollar houses being built in some of the newer housing subdivisions, but that is another story.

I do not envy the minister in sorting out the housing crisis enveloping our largest city. Most of the cards lie with the government however, most of which in my opinion will need to be dealt. I just happen to believe that simply changing the RMA will not deliver on more affordable or available housing.

Leigh Auton is a Director of Auton & Associates and has 35 years’ local government experience. He is a chairman/director/trustee on several boards and provides consulting advice to public and private sector companies

23

• POSITIONING

AND MEASUREMENT PROFESSIONAL STREAM

Precise GNSS Positioning with the Emerging Satellite Systems in New Zealand Robert Odolinski, National School of Surveying

Current status of the emerging satellite systems The American Global Positioning System (GPS), consisting of 31 satellites, has been used for decades in millimetre-level precise positioning surveying applications using the single baseline/network real-time kinematic (RTK) techniques. The Russian GLONASS system has also been a common complement to GPS in Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receivers in recent times, as to increase the satellite availability and receiver-satellite geometry.

However, there is a drawback with the GLONASS system since the satellite signals are based on the Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA) technique that in contrary to Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA), as used by GPS, can cause issues for integer ambiguity resolution. Only once the correct integer ambiguity phase cycles between the receiver and satellites are determined can the GNSS receiver start to take advantage of the very precise phase measurements for instantaneous RTK positioning. Fortu-

nately Russia has plans to launch new GLONASS satellites with the CDMA technique as to enhance the interoperability with GPS (Kosenko and Revnivykh, 2015).

In the past few years new satellite systems have also been developed, such as the regional Chinese BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS, currently 17 satellites), regional Japanese Quasi-Zenith Satellite System (QZSS, currently 1 satellite) and the global European Galileo satellite system (currently 10 satellites). See also Figure 1 which depicts these constellations tracked by a receiver in Dunedin as of February Figure 1: BDS, Galileo and QZSS ground tracks as seen from Dunedin, New Zealand (February 6, 2015).

Note: figure is from Odolinski and Denys (2015).

24

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

6, 2015 (Odolinski and Denys, 2015). India is also launching satellites for its Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS). By 2020 BDS will become a global system and consist of 35 satellites in total, QZSS by around 7 satellites and Galileo will consist of 27 satellites. What is common for all these systems is that they are based on the CDMA technique similar to GPS. The surveyor will have access to more than 100 different satellites that can be used in a combined RTK model (compare to 31 GPS satellites). This will significantly increase the satellite availability in urban canyon Figure 2: Dunedin, New Zealand multi-GNSS receiver setup (February, 2015) environments, increase the rethere are significant improvements that can be achieved. liability in the estimated (fixed) In Figure 4 the single-frequency RTK positioning perforpositioning solutions, provide for better outlier detection mance in Dunedin is presented over two days of data (Febcapabilities, and give better receiver-satellite geometry, ruary 6-7, 2015). The left column represents a GPS-only resulting in more precise positions. model, the middle column GPS+BDS and the right column GPS+BDS+Galileo+QZSS. An elevation cut-off angle of Single-baseline RTK positioning in New 25° is used as to simulate an urban canyon environment.

Zealand using GPS, BDS, Galileo and QZSS The top row shows the horizontal (local North/East) posiThere are many benefits for surveyors in New Zealand to tioning error scatter whereas the middle row indicates the use the emerging GNSSs in their daily surveying routines. corresponding vertical (local Up) error time-series. DeTo illustrate this, a multi-GNSS real data experiment was picted at the bottom of Figure 4 is the number of satellites conducted at the National School of Surveying in Dunedfor each model, and their Positional Dilution of Precision in, New Zealand in February, 2015 (Figure 2). Note that all (PDOP) as a measure of the receiver-satellite geometry of the following results are obtained from Odolinski and strength. Note the very large positioning scatters when Denys (2015). the PDOPs are large for the GPS-only model (left column), The number of satellites for four satellite systems is depicted in Figure 3 over a 24 hour period. It can be seen that when all four satellite systems are combined the total of number of satellites (black lines) is often double the number of GPS satellites (blue lines). This leads to the conclusion that when using a combined system one is allowed to increase the elevation cut-off angle as to avoid low-elevation multipath signals (top of Figure 3), which will be of particular benefit in urban canyon environments. Interesting to also note from Figure 3 is that the number of BDS satellites (magenta lines) are sufficient to provide for continuous standalone positioning over the day (at least four satellites are required). The current BDS constellation’s geometry is, however, not always sufficiently strong to provide for reliable precise positioning Figure 3: Satellite visibility in Dunedin, New Zealand (February 6, when viewed from receivers in New Zealand. Nevertheless 2015) for an elevation cut-off angle of 10°. Note: figure is from Odolinski and Denys (2015). when BDS is combined with GPS (and the other systems)

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

25

Figure 4: L1 GPS (left column), GPS+BDS (middle column), and GPS+BDS+Galileo+QZSS (right column). The RTK positioning results are for Dunedin, New Zealand (February 6-7 2015). The float (gray), correctly fixed (green), wrongly fixed (red) solutions are given for a 25° cut-off angle and instantaneous RTK. The total # of satellites is given in light green (in red when below 8 and 9 when BDS is included, dark green is Galileo and cyan the single QZSS satellite). The PDOPs (in cyan) are given as well for GPS and GPS+BDS (left two columns). Note: figure is from Odolinski and Denys (2015).

whereas the PDOPs decrease significantly when BDS is added (middle column) and thus the estimated positions also become more precise.

Figure 4 also shows that when the number of satellites is low there is a high probability of getting an incorrectly fixed solution (red colour) that gives less precise positions at the decimetre-meter level. This is particularly obvious for the GPS-only model in the left column. However when BDS or all three satellite systems are combined with GPS in the middle and right column, respectively, there are less incorrectly fixed and thus more correctly fixed positioning solutions (green colour) with millimetre-level precision. These correctly fixed solutions are represented by the zoom-in windows.

Conclusions All of the results presented in this article were based on single-frequency RTK results from Odolinski and Denys (2015), where the baseline was so short that the relative atmospheric delays could be neglected. For readers also interested in the RTK positioning performance when combining satellite systems for longer baselines and when the relative atmospheric delays cannot be neglected, see Odolinski et al. (2014; 2015).

In Odolinski and Teunissen (2015) a single-frequency GPS+BDS single-baseline RTK model is analysed and compared to dual-frequency GPS-only RTK solutions, both in

26

Perth (Australia) and Dunedin. There it is concluded that when combining two systems using a single-frequency receiver, similar positioning performance to traditional (single-system) dual-frequency RTK receivers can be obtained (provided that the baseline is short). This opens up possibilities for using cheap single-frequency RTK receivers for precise positioning, potentially achievable in mobile phones, which was not possible when only the GPS constellation was in orbit. The price of a single-frequency RTK receiver can be a few hundred dollars, which can be compared to a survey-grade RTK receiver costing tens of thousands of dollars. It could be possible to use these cheap RTK receivers for cadastral surveying, engineering stakeout, topographical surveying, hydrographic surveying, car lane keeping, and other daily surveying work. In other words having access to several GNSSs would not only improve the current New Zealand geodetic surveying applications that are dependent on expensive RTK receivers, but may also give access to precise RTK positioning capabilities for many more users in different disciplines – at a much lower cost.

References Odolinski, R. and Denys, P. (2015): On the Multi-GNSS RTK Positioning Performance in New Zealand. International Global Navigation Satellite Systems Society (IGNSS) Symposium, 1416 July 2015, Gold Coast, Australia.

Further references supplied on request.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

• LEGAL

COLUMN

Property Law Changes Stephanie Harris, Glaister Ennor Solicitors You will be aware that there have been a number of changes to property law that came into effect on 1 October 2015. This article outlines the changes made to the Land Transfer Act 1952 and the Tax Administration Act 1994 and how they may apply to surveyors.

New rules Parliament passed the Taxation (Land Information and Offshore Persons Information) Bill on 10 September to create the Tax Administration Act 2015 and Land Transfer Amendment Act 2015.

In a nutshell, the legislative changes mean: • All transfers of specified estates in land (freehold, leasehold, stratum estates under the Unit Titles Act 2010 and licence to occupy) can only be registered with Land Information New Zealand if accompanied by the required tax information.

• Transferors and transferees must complete a signed tax statement stating whether the transferor or the transferee or a member of that person’s immediate family is a New Zealand citizen, or a holder of a resident visa, work visa or student visa; • Transferors and transferees must state whether the transfer instrument is for a non-notifiable transfer, which includes a transfer of a dwelling that has been used by the transferor as his or her main home, or a dwelling that is intended to be used by the transferee as his or her main home. This only applies to transferors or transferees who are natural persons (and not trustees).

• If the transfer instrument is not for a non-notifiable transfer, the tax statement must include the transferor or the transferee’s IRD numbers, state whether the transferor or transferee is treated as a tax resident in an overseas jurisdiction, and if so, the country code for the jurisdiction and their equivalent IRD numbers.

• Offshore persons must have a current New Zealand bank account number in order to receive a tax file number from the Commissioner for Inland Revenue.

How are the new rules applicable to surveyors?

Surveyors may not think that these new rules are directly relevant to your line of work. However, these rules are triggered when surveyors are undertaking any boundary

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

adjustments, subdivision or developments which require a transfer of an estate in land. For example, converting three flats to a cross lease structure, or a transfer of a part of a unit to common property, or from common property to a unit will require registration of a transfer, and hence compliance with the new tax information requirements.

What do you need to do as a surveyor?

Practically, the most useful and important thing that surveyors can do, is to alert your clients of these new requirements as early as possible, so that they have time to get their tax affairs in order. For example, surveyors’ clients will often include trusts, companies and offshore persons. None of these clients can rely on the main home exemption.

Often, non-trading trusts may not have an IRD number, and it can take a number of weeks to obtain one from the IRD. If the client is an offshore person, the client will need to have a fully functional New Zealand bank account, and some banks require the authorised signatories for the client to be present in New Zealand before an account can be opened. A fully functional New Zealand bank account is one where you can make deposits and withdrawals, and the account holder’s identity is verified in line with New Zealand legal requirements.

Your client may need professional legal or tax advice specific to their situation.

If these issues are not dealt with in a timely manner, it can cause considerable delays to your main transaction being the boundary adjustment or subdivision or whatever they may be.

More changes to property law are in the pipeline and I will write about these as they are applicable to surveyors as they develop.

Stephanie Harris is the joint managing partner of Glaister Ennor Solicitors. She has extensive experience in property and commercial law. She acts for SMEs, larger corporates, investors and developers on many large and complex property transactions and developments, ownership structures, leases, security interests and general structuring and finance.

Contact Details: DDI: (09) 356 8232 Fax: (09) 356 8244 Email: stephanie.harris@glaister.co.nz

27

Talk to the experts today

Precision surveying at your fingertips.

Start-to-finish solutions for every application: Fixed wing and multi-rotor aerial mapping GNSS and Total Station systems Field, Office and post-processing software Ground Penetrating Radar Survey accessories

Our alliance covers you throughout New Zealand Auckland

28

ph: 09 479 3064

Wellington

ph: 04 473 7935SURVEYING+SPATIAL •

Christchurch

Issue 84 December 2015

ph: 03 366 2658

Health and Safety Reforms are Coming – Are you ready?

Jan Lawrence, Marketing and Communications Manager, NZIS The new wide ranging Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (Act) will be coming in to force on 4 April 2016. Aiming to address the Government’s concern at New Zealand’s poor health and safety record, it will have wide reaching implications and requirements for not only individuals and employees, but also for businesses both large and small. Individual obligations and liabilities are one of the new features of the legislation that everyone needs to be aware of.

The key intents of the Act are to ensure employers provide and maintain a workplace that is safe and without risk to health and that workers care for themselves and other people in the workplace as well as observing and respecting all safety rules, directions and requirements relating to health and safety.

The new Act changes the terms currently used for employers and employees and expands the definition of an officer. A key difference will be individuals having a responsibility for their health and safety and a personal

liability. Previously businesses carried the majority of liability.

Workers will have a right to health and safety information, training, and systems provided by employers who under the Act are called Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking or PCBUs. Workers will also be able to refuse to do work if they think it is likely to seriously harm them.

NZIS will be doing all it can to advocate best practice for health and safety and to ensure that members are aware of the new Act. Over the months leading up to April 2016 NZIS will be communicating to members the new Act requirements and obligations.

A world surveying and spatial event not to be missed!

www.fig.net/fig2016

Registration is now open! For the early bird fee register at www.fig.net/fig2016/registration.htm SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

29

The Emersons Revisited ...an epilogue to The Story of Shaky City published in Surveying+Spatial issue 82 June 2015 Brent George, Registered Surveyor RPSurv; LCS; MNZIS; MICS With apologies to David Goodwin ...

Before the rangatira could resolve a winner of the Emersons, from under a rock a fourth surveyor emerged. His name was Prag Matic and he had been asleep during the rangatira’s announcement of the definition challenge.

Prag had been – in a former life – a wizened old Lands and Survey surveyor and worshipped the tried and true hierarchy of evidence. So much so that he had the hierarchy in pride of place on his mantle at home (next to the 100 year old peg he had found and replaced in his younger days, and a cadastral definition award from his institute peers). On the mantle in number one position was a natural boundary; next to an original and undisturbed monument, followed by some old and undisputed occupation, an abuttal, and some mathematical evidence being the poor cousin of the hierarchy.

When Prag was appraised of the quest, he promptly recalled his early graduate days in Napier and then later in Edgecumbe where he had worked during and after their times as rock ’n roll cities. He remembered that after those events the best intentions and suggestions from the wise old heads from out of town were just not workable. So the definition efforts were placed solely on his beloved hierarchy - and the least square tables, fancy-pant calculators, and random-number coordinate generating devices were consigned to the ever-growing asbestos laden cadastral rulebook scrapheap in the neighbouring town.

Prag shook off the hangover borne out of the last contest he had won (a fine pallet of Harrington’s Pig and Whistle), and shouted “Thou should never forget the first principles of the hierarchy of evidence”.

He went on to pronounce “Thou should also consider what is important to the landed owner of the property previously described in the cadastral record. They will consider their boundaries and appurtenances to be where they always thought they had been – that is between the fences that still remain in place, astride the crumbling ruins of their abode and behind the wee nib-wall separating the cricket pitch or front lawn from the pedestrian tarmac of the path and roadway. If, based on our clever-dick mathematical calculations, we go and place a flash new plastic peg with nail some 457mm from an old and upright white-topped wooden peg and match this at the next corner with another new mark some 312mm from a stout old corner post that has been there since Ritchie’s grandfather laced up his rugger boots (and was depicted on an old colour plan too) – we will be laughed out of the Cosmopolitan Club.”

He concluded “We must remain cognisant of the monuments and occupation evidence that are left behind, and use our detective and analytical skills to weigh up all the evidence before recording the observations and information within the records that, along with our thorough report, will save us from undue scrutiny at a future time. It is my contention that boundaries can move with the land, and so we should record where they have got to – before they wander agin (in a nod to his Scottish Granddad). If the rangatira and his aides indicate that that is not what the law dictates, then perhaps the law should be changed.”

When Prag had finished the rangatira – somewhat taken aback by this bolshy interloper – scratched his chin and announced meekly “I think I have a winner. . .”

SUPPORT & ASSISTANCE

CIVILCAD MAGNET – Magnet Office New modules, new pricing Full support and training

NZTraverse interfaces Magnet Office with Landonline

TEL: 07 579 1284 FAX: 07 579 1287 EMAIL: civilcad@hale.co.nz VIEW US ON-LINE: www.hale.co.nz

30

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

GROW YOUR PEOPLE. Eighty4 Recruitment is proud to become the first and only Recruitment Partner to the NZIS. We offer recruitment and HR consultancy services to improve your business through its people - ultimately increasing your bottom line.

Exclusive offer to NZIS members - FREE one hour consultation on any HR & recruitment needs.

RECRUITMENT SERVICES Access local and global candidates ready to move, returning Kiwis or market map the competition.

HR CONSULTANCY Full HR analysis and review. Building successful teams, recruitment strategies and best practice JOBS Multiple opportunities NZ wide to progress your career. Contact us for a confidential chat and FREE salary check.

“Mark truly understands our business and has delivered outstanding results in both recruitment and HR consulting” Daniel Williams, Managing Director - WOODS. Contact: Mark Fisher 09 391 8484 or 021 347 445 Or email mark@eighty4recruitment.com www.eighty4recruitment.com 100% NZ owned and operated

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

31

• CADASTRAL

PROFESSIONAL STREAM

CADASTRAL SURVEY OF THE YEAR 2015 Earlier this year the Cadastral Professional Stream launched the Cadastral Survey of the Year Award. The award was created to recognise the outstanding cadastral surveys that have been carried out by cadastral surveyors. Seven excellent and challenging surveys were submitted, and the judging panel were very impressed with their quality and attention to detail.

Awards were presented to the three winning submissions at the NZIS Conference in Wellington. The winners are outlined below and a full write up on the winning entry follows.

G O L D WI N N E R Tony Nikkel for DP 461455 A land transfer survey to complete a large boundary adjustment involving very old survey work, poor definition information, large miscloses, errors in underlying work and in difficult hilly terrain covered mostly in bush.

The Judging panel believed this survey stood out due to it being an exceptional example of good survey practice, with thorough reporting and excellent attention to detail.

S I LV E R WI N N E R Brian Curtis for SO 460481 A complex and innovative three-dimensional legalisation survey of the replacement Newmarket Viaduct; compris-

ing over 200 parcels with inclined airspace parcels and a subterranean tubular easement.

The Judging panel rated this survey highly due to its high complexity and innovative use of technology.

BRONZE WINNE R Stuart Wallace and Tony Nikkel for DP 466668 A land transfer survey to remove limitations from a limited title that had one boundary in particular that was significantly incorrectly represented in Landonline.

The Judging panel believed this survey was carried out using exceptional investigation, research and innovation to determine the water boundary location. They were also impressed with the good survey practice, thorough reporting and excellent communication with LINZ. The Cadastral Stream would like to encourage surveyors to submit their top cadastral surveys into next year’s awards and gain the recognition they deserve.

GOLD WINNER: TONY NIKKEL, NIKKEL SURVEYING LTD FOR DP 461455 Project Description

GPS and robotic total station observations while ensuring correct ellipsoidal height reductions were completed and overall survey orientation was maintained.

A land transfer survey to complete a boundary adjustment involving very old survey work, poor definition information, large miscloses, errors in underlying work and diffiChallenges Faced cult hilly terrain covered mostly in bush.

Poor underlying survey data and various differences and The survey required extensive searching of underlying conflicts between many trial and error traverse loops resurvey plans and exploring various closure loops, invesquired extensive searching, investigation and calculations tigation to identify where potential to isolate the sources of error and recalsources of misclose or error could lie culate the appropriate boundary lines. and extensive calculation and ground The altitude of the project, mostly over definition of previously unmarked 900 metres and a 600 metre difference in boundary positions. elevation over the project site, required The altitude of the project ranged diligence in reducing a mixture of GPS from 700m to 1300m. Substantial and total station observations to ensure parts of the project required traverses correct ellipsoidal distances were rethrough thick bush presenting an in- Approaching the project site by 4WD track duced and captured in the final dataset. teresting challenge in integrating both (above the clouds and at times on 3 wheels)

32

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

4WD vehicle apart from the perimeter access at either end of the project. As a result there was also a physical challenge to carry the traversing equipment over most of the site.

Level of Difficulty This survey is considered one of the most challenging surveys faced by Tony in terms of the technical difficulty, volume of vectors captured and tested for closure and the physical effort required to complete the field work.

Apart from about three days, when a field assistant helped to carry equipment, the Typical terrain encountered for the bush traverses (Note the blue altimeter hanging in the survey was completed by Tony as a onetree for atmospheric and ellipsoidal height correction) man field party.

The dense bush that covered most of the project site reDefinition Complexity quired that sufficient orientation control was implementAs stated above the poor closes in the underlying data, ed and carried into the bush traverses to maintain control the identification of an error in an underlying survey and over the entire project site. the work required to isolate the miscloses presented an Searching for old marks from circa 1890-1910 that were interesting and complex definition task. considered critical to the definition was extensive and difPart of the effort made to isolate the traverse miscloses ficult. and locate key definition anchor points involved searching for over 50 marks from the very old pre-1900 survey plans.

An example of the elevation difference

Due to the steepness of the terrain and limited vehicle access tracks most of the project could not be accessed by

A typical base station location

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

Locating old pegs for definition evidence, with a little assistance

33

At least seven old marks were located in good agreement that enabled the adjustment of the identified miscloses with confidence.

In the process of completing the definition calculations an error was identified in one of the underlying surveys.

This error was fully reported on in the Survey Information Complex Requests submitted to LINZ.

Innovative Techniques In the process of this survey several innovative techniques were used to enable more accurate field observation data to be collected. In addition 3D and live presentation techniques were used to better help the client visualise their boundaries.

The innovative techniques used in the survey are outlined below.

A Google Earth boundary overlay

the dense bush. This data assisted our client in establishing walking and ATV tracks and assessing future potential building sites knowing he was within his property boundary.

1. Automated set collection was utilised on the total station to automatically repeat two rounds of FL & FR observations on all the traverse lines through the bush to eliminate any booking errors and to minimise propagation of orientation errors through the multiple short traverse lines.

2. Total station ‘Track-Lights’ and a visible laser dot were utilised to project the intended line of sight through the thick bush areas. This enabled the pruning of only a minimal amount of vegetation while still maximising the available distance for individual traverse lines.

Accurate boundary information was converted to Google Earth KML overlays to allow the client to see their property in 3D and assist with the marketing of one of the lots to be sold.

3. Boundary data was also converted and uploaded into the client’s Garmin GPS unit as customised line work to enable easy navigation around his property and the determination of approximate boundary locations without being disoriented by

Garmin GPS Mapping data supplied to the client as boundary overlays

Legal Complexities Other than arranging for an error item report and correction to an underlying dataset adjacent to this survey there were no legal complexities.

Minimal bush cutting by using Track-lights and laser dot

34

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

QA and QC processes & Requisitions A comprehensive QA process and checking procedure was completed on this survey prior to lodgement.

Only one requisition involving two relatively minor elements was issued against this dataset. They related to (1) showing a bearing on a vector that had been hidden and not re-shown on a diagram, and (2) showing more detailed annotation of an old mark found and renewed.

Health & Safety Due to the remote location a cell phone and personal CB radio was carried and regular safety checks were texted back to base or home at four hour intervals. A personal survival kit was carried during solo field work and a backup tent, sleeping bag, food and water rations were carried in the 4WD. The client also had a cabin on site that was used as temporary accommodation.

Other Matters The underlying spatial record in Landonline was badly distorted and contained several critical topology errors that needed fixing. These were reported on accurately in the Survey Exception requests.

In order to tidy up further significant distortions in Landonline spatial data in the immediate vicinity of this survey numerous other adopted vectors were captured to bring them into better adjustment as part of the integration process for this dataset.

Conclusions This dataset was submitted for consideration for the ‘Cadastral Survey of the Year Awards’ because it was believed to have merit in the following areas: • The physical size, extent and scope of the survey coupled with the high degree of complexity in assessing the definition issues all presented a difficult survey to complete.

• Professionalism was involved in the attention to detail and accuracy of reporting. Detailed diagrams and descriptions of all critical calculations and jus-

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

An early morning start, one that makes being a surveyor all worthwhile

tification for these were presented. Comprehensive and detailed QA was completed prior to lodgement in an attempt to gain first time compliance, even with such a large and complex dataset.

• Elements of innovation are included particularly in helping our client visualize an otherwise difficult property to comprehend on the ground.

• The benefit of extensive and thorough searching and not accepting underlying surveys just because they are ‘approved as to survey’ can reveal errors in the cadastral record, help in identifying survey conflicts and provide confidence in establishing the best estimate of a documentary boundary.

• The benefit of doggedly searching for old marks (almost obsessively) even though one could be justified in assuming they had all since been destroyed or rotted away.

• Thorough and accurate reporting to LINZ in a presentation style that enabled LINZ to make informed decisions when dealing with Survey Information Complex and Exception Process requests.

• A good example of one taking P.R.I.D.E. in their work and in the presentation of the end deliverables product. In other words taking: “Personal Responsibility In Delivering Excellence”.

35

• TECHNOLOGY

PointSense: seamless interconnectivity between spatial data and AutoCAD Cameron Officer, Synergy Positioning Systems

Plant and pipe 3D modelling from scan pointcloud

Utilising sophisticated software tools such as FARO kubit PointSense, which connects intuitively with AutoCAD; surveyors, architects and engineers are able to access and use spatial data far more easily than ever before.

FARO kubit PointSense Pro provides several tools for the management and processing of laser scan data within AutoCAD and supports the import of almost all currently available 3D laser scan data formats.

PointSense Pro adds useful tools for modelling and analysing 3D laser scan data. Geometric objects such as polylines, planes and cylinders may automatically be fitted to parts of the point clouds; a spatial join of these objects produces corners, edges and peaks.

By fitting polygons and lines to point cloud slices, layout plans and elevations can be created quickly. Furthermore, new designed objects can be analysed for clashes with existing objects represented by the scans.

Once in the software management tool, a section manager – which controls how point cloud sections are displayed – helps divide point clouds into sub-areas, which are useful for various evaluations. These individual areas can be faded in or out, coloured or exported separately.

Meanwhile the planar view of PointSense provides a clear photo-like image of single scans and allows a much more intuitive navigation than the one inside of point clouds. Snapping background points by mistake is never an issue with this feature.

Orthoimages of the point cloud can be created from any desired direction. In the resulting raster image all objects that are parallel to the projection plane are to scale. This way the orthoimage can be used as image plan and if needed combined with AutoCAD vector graphics and supplemented with dimensions.

Other advantages include the efficient management of making, dividing and joining point clouds, as well as the ability to combine scan data with CAD. FARO kubit PointSense also enables the fast construction of 3D wireframe models and solids, while users are also able to enact a clash detection analysis between scan and drafted CAD objects, as well as analyse deformation.

But FARO kubit PointSense is more than just one programme. In fact the suite of software incorporates a range of modules suited to specific tasks.

For example, FARO kubit’s PointSense Building software offers fast virtual construction of 2D floor plans taken from 3D laser scan data. PointSense Building can be applied where 2D plans need to be generated from 3D plans in a short period of time, which makes the software exceptionally useful for property planning and survey requirements, facility management or for interior fit-outs.

PointSense for Revit is the perfect companion when working with point clouds in Autodesk Revit. Providing special commands for modelling and detailing BIM elements, the functionality of PointSense permits a quick and intuitive workflow when processing large point clouds in Revit, creating inventory architecture that can be used in BIM. FARO kubit PointSense Plant provides tools for pattern recognising plant assets from point cloud data, giving designers the ability to move directly into their familiar AutoCAD based plant design programs, such as Plant 3D, MEP, CADWorx or AutoPlant.

Finally PointSense Heritage is suitable for the documentation of historical monuments in conservation, historic building research and the recording of complex three-dimensional excavations in archaeology.

What’s more these systems are completely flexible and support almost all laser scanner formats on the market.

All FARO kubit PointSense software also incorporates VirtuSurv; FARO’s standalone software for working with highly visual laser scan data.

This program supports the import, export and display of numerous structured scan data formats and has interfaces for Windows-based programs, as well as various CAD and BIM packages.

The flexible VirtuSurv platform makes the use of laser scans as easy as using a measuring tape and supports a completely digital, less error-prone workflow.

More information can be found at www.synergypositioning.co.nz/products/laser-scanning-bim/bim-software/ bim-software-products

36

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

LAWYERS AND SURVEYORS WORKING TOGETHER Stuart Weir, Partner, Kemps Weir Lawyers Ryan Healey, Licensed Cadastral Surveyor, Associate, Harrison Grierson First Published in The Property Lawyer Volume 15, Issue 1

A Lawyer’s Perspective I was fortunate to be included in a Property Law Society workshop between LINZ technical staff and a selection of property lawyers and surveyors. We were split into groups with our tables having a mix of representatives from each profession with the LINZ staff circulating around the groups.

There were a number of issues arising from the workshop and my table discussions that I found enlightening.

I thought I would share some of my ‘take aways’ with you:

Knowledge Surveyors are like lawyers – some of them know more than others about different types of property developments. At my table we had some professionals who were more familiar with greenfield developments and some who were more familiar with multi-level unit title develSURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

opments. Some surveyors will know a lot more than we do about certain types of developments and we should leverage that knowledge.

Memorials Surveyors are not like lawyers and do not necessarily need to consider all of the potential issues caused by the memorials registered against the new identifiers or whether easement terms should be registered over jointly owned access lots.

It is useful to engage in this conversation with the surveyor early on as the easement schedule in the LT Plan might need amendment. It may also have a bearing on any proposed amalgamation conditions that the Council are considering, eg if only one of two amalgamated parcels is to have the full benefit of a Jointly owned access lot, what issues will be created in the future when those parcels are divided?

It is also useful to work through the current memorials on the underlying title with the surveyor to see whether

37

any memorials can be removed so that the new identifiers are not too cluttered. This can be particularly helpful for avoiding unnecessary duplication of consent notices if the surveyor is able to take up a conversation with the Council officers as part of the sec224c application.

Drafting Surveyors do not necessarily have a copy of the Land Transfer regulations on their desk when they are typing up in easements in the schedule on their Land Transfer (LT) Plans. Hopefully that will change as a result of this workshop and following my (perhaps over the top) impassioned plea for the terminology they use for standard easements to be consistent with the regulations.

LINZ advised us that they do check names of utility company Grantee’s in easement schedules to make sure that they are real companies on our register. Perhaps we should start including the NZBN numbers for Grantees to improve our accuracy and help LINZ with their checks?

LT Plans sometimes have quite random things on them: midden protection covenants over esplanade reserves that are to vest in Council or ‘Land Covenants for Ko-iwi’ for example.

LINZ indicated it was happy with the use of the term ‘Covenants’ on the face of an LT Plan, eg “Covenant over areas A and B – wildlife habitat protection”. As the text of the ‘Covenants’ is often Council imposed and contained in Consent Notices I would prefer that the term ‘Covenant’ not be used as that could cause confusion for lawyers looking for land covenants.

LT Plan LINZ indicated that there is a complicated process at their end to un-do an LT Plan that had gone through the approval process. I thought it was as simple as pressing an ‘un-do’ button but that is not the case! LINZ would really appreciate it if the LT Plan was accurate before they are asked to approve the survey.

We should ask the surveyor to send us the draft LT Plan as soon as possible, in order to identify whether there are errors on the LT Plans, legal issues likely to arise from items described on the face of the LT Plan or documents that we or a third party (eg Council) need to start drafting as part of our subdivision application.

We should also ask to see all revisions of that LT Plan during the survey plan preparation process as these can change and cause delay (and embarrassment) if not picked up on early.

Valuer It was recommended that surveyors engage the valuer to obtain the valuation certificates under the new Unit Titles Act regime. If the surveyor was responsible for the en-

38

gagement they could ensure that appropriate site visits were performed by the valuer.

Substituted Proposed Unit Development (SPUD) Spuds were one of my favourite veggies as a kid (being from Irish parents) but for surveyors and lawyers, SPUDs can be problematic.

If any changes are required to a unit development that is being completed in stages then a SPUD plan has to be prepared and deposited to record those changes.

That exercise requires careful survey work to identify each change from the original proposal. It can also be a complicated and time consuming process to deposit a SPUD with LINZ as the consent of the owners (and their banks) from the earlier stages is required.

I would recommend that you work closely with your client and the surveyor, planner and builders at the outset of the development to try to minimise the need for any later changes to the proposed stage plan.

I appreciate that it is not always possible to forecast how developments will pan out but if we get involved early we may be able to help our clients avoid delays and expensive legal and holding costs in the future.

My practice has been to visit development sites early on in the subdivision process. From now on I will look to line up that initial site visit with my client and the key contact at the surveying firm so that we can work together to identify issues relevant to the particular property and underlying title. I also look to involve LINZ in complex matters prior to submitting a plan and dealing; LINZ has indicated it is willing to assist in this way.

It is certainly my hope that these collaborative workshops with LINZ and surveyors are continued in the future.

They help us all better understand the different and important roles that we all play in obtaining the best outcome for our clients.

Stuart is a partner at Kemps Weir Lawyers in Auckland and works extensively in the property development and commercial areas of property law

A surveyor’s perspective Why and how do surveyors and lawyers need to work with one another on subdivisions?

This was one of the questions being asked as we began the joint workshop hosted by the Property Law Society, LINZ, and the New Zealand Institute of Surveyors. This workshop, offered to a small group of lawyers and surveyors, ran through three separate ‘real life’ scenarios, testing even the most seasoned practitioner. Surveyors and lawyers discussed the scenarios in mixed groups, making collaboration necessary to solve all of the problems.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

After scenario one (a rural subdivision with a fair few issues) the answer to the ‘why and how’ question became obvious. My surveyor colleagues spent most of their allotted time poring over the definition of the boundaries and in particular the supplied survey report. Their legal counterparts obsessed themselves with the exact terms of the mortgages. This was to be expected as we are both trained in our respective disciplines to look for the potential problems in these documents. The first scenario identified that the two professions were able to point out to the other the respective legal / survey issues around the subdivision.

This set the scene well for scenario two where even more surprises awaited. It was clear that LINZ has a large repository of these tricky subdivisions making it easy for them to find ones that tested both the legal and the survey mind. The teams were more used to “looking” for the discrepancies on the plans but this time around, the scenario involved a timeline of plans. This added challenge really opened up the discussion and with the help of the LINZ staff the teams were guided to the issues around the subdivision. This one, along with the first example, showed the importance of working together much earlier.

Just when the participants thought they had figured this whole thing out, a complex unit title scenario was thrown into the mix. Like most surveyors, it seemed that a lot of the legal fraternity are not completely comfortable with this form of tenure and in particular the new Act. This discussion rapidly evolved into a full blown discussion around the Act and the seasoned practitioners sharing their knowledge with the greenhorns.

So what did we actually learn?

Apart from the hidden terms inside mortgage documents, the difference between vesting and dedication, mean high water mark versus mean high water springs and that the Council doesn’t always get it right either, the main lesson learned was how useful early co-operation can be.

The first scenario showed that both surveyors and lawyers had something to learn from each other. One of the cases had a disastrous outcome, ending up in Court which all agreed could have been avoided. In particular, everyone agreed that the involvement of the lawyer right at the very beginning of the process could have possibly helped in this scenario.

The unit title (third) scenario showed how much each of us did not know. The concepts of Future Development Units (FDUs), SPUDs and layered unit developments were discussed at length with more than a few raised eyebrows.

The main lesson around this one was the range of options that exist for any particular development. The discussion quickly focused around the benefits / weaknesses of the different types of unit title tenure and how we might

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

speak to one another right at the project scope phase to work out both what is best for the client and what is the least messy legally or requires the fewest of plans and/or consents.

Both lawyers and surveyors are required to effect subdivisions (we are in fact the only required professions in some cases). But yet we often try to do the work completely independently until the last possible moment.

Each thinks that the other knows enough to a) get the consent over the line and b) draw a plan the other can use to effect the subdivision. It was clear, at least to this surveyor that we can’t really live without one another on these projects and that apparently simple proposals can easily become unnecessarily complex if we do not seek the other’s input early.

Through observation of the issues it was obvious that both professions need to act together as the two trusted advisors in this process. We cannot rely upon Council to get it right either. Several of the examples showed council officers (who do not normally have a legal or surveying background) often rely solely on us as the experts carrying out the process.

LINZ on the other hand is still well stocked with legal and surveying experts who more often than not have to requisition these erroneous datasets on points of law.

However, LINZ only has limited jurisdiction and some situations can only be resolved in Court. But how many of those situations can be resolved in the initial processes, avoiding the need to ever think about litigation?

All in all, the workshop provided not only the opportunity to look at some of these complex situations in the company of our “opposite numbers” but also the opportunity to learn from them.

Both grid paper and legal pads were filled with notes from the session that ended with a social drink and some nibbles. The discussions continued throughout the socialising, further cementing the concepts we had worked through in the previous three hours and building relationships in the process.

39

GLENN STONE INSURANCE

40

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

• UNIVERSITY

HAPPENINGS

GENDER BIAS Christina Hulbe, Dean, National School of Surveying Nathan Heazlewood’s article, Supporting Women in Spatial, in the September issue of this magazine was a thoughtful reflection on opportunities and challenges for women in the surveying and spatial professions. I agree that the numbers are not encouraging—and that addressing the imbalance is both a policy issue and a social issue.

Overall, there are more women than men studying in New Zealand’s universities (TEC, 2015). Of the 209,000 students enrolled in a Bachelor’s level or higher degree programme in 2014, about 59% were women. That ratio is not repeated here in the School of Surveying, where we hover around 10% women. Unsurprisingly, our 10% figure is repeated in the proportion of women in the profession (as recorded in the 2015 NZIS membership survey).

As a gateway, the university is apparently doing excellent work upholding the status quo.

Their underrepresentation in our programme means that either young women aren’t aware of surveying and spatial as university courses or that young women don’t find these courses to be attractive options. We can’t ask questions of the students who don’t choose Surveying and GIS but we do ask our graduates to tell us how they got here. Roughly one third of our students learned about surveying from a family member, a third from a high school careers councilor or teacher, and the rest by other avenues. Young women in the school tend to fall in that third group—many say they didn’t find out about our degree options until after arriving at Otago. This sounded familiar to many attendees at the 2015 NZIS Conference Women in Spatial breakfast.

It would seem that when high school teachers, careers councilors, and parents are saying “surveying might be a good fit for you,” they are saying it primarily to boys. If so, we are not alone. Gender stereotypes about maths and science are widespread and according to research on the topic, gender biases are applied by teachers as early as elementary school (see, for example, Lavy and Sand, 2015).

Girls who get the message early on that they just aren’t as good at math as the boys will turn their attentions elsewhere, toward topics and careers where they think they have a better chance to succeed (OECD, 2014).

A recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

Development (OECD) study on gender gaps in education found that confidence and self-belief are closely linked to performance (OECD, 2014). When girls think that they are not as good as boys at mathematics, their performance mirrors that lower expectation. Gender gaps in achievement and self-belief are persistent over time and it should be noted here that New Zealand runs near the end of the pack, well behind the OECD average (along with the UK, Australia, and France).

How might the biases that work against attracting young women to surveying and spatial be addressed?

First, we need to acknowledge that biases exist. Because we live in a society characterised by gender stereotypes, those stereotypes play a role in structuring our world view. Few of us would want to admit that we harbor biases of any kind—but academic studies show otherwise.

Social science research finds that teachers express biases in favor of male students (Lavy and Sand, 2015; Moss-Racusin et al., 2012), that students express biases in favor of male teachers (MacNell et al., 2014), that prospective employers express biases toward male applicants (Reuben et al., 2014; Uhlmann and Cohen, 2005), and so on. I’ve indicated just a few studies but these are robust, and often repeated, results.

The study by Uhlmann and Cohen (2005) should be particularly interesting to practitioners in objective, scientific disciplines like surveying and spatial. Those authors found that the more objective a reviewer understood himself or herself to be when evaluating a candidate’s fitness for a job, the more gender bias he or she displayed. Reviewers who were less confident in their own objectivity displayed less bias. Moreover, reviewers who made a priori commitments to specific criteria expressed less bias than reviewers who did not.

Two things are clear. First, gender bias exists and it affects the academic and career pathways of girls and women. Second, recognising that bias exists is an essential step in overcoming it. So I’m glad to see at least one colleague raising the topic here in Surveying+Spatial. Thanks Nathan—I hope these two articles are just the start of a real dialog and real change.

A full list of references is available on request

41

TWO NEW NZIS FELLOWS WELCOMED NZIS Fellowships, the pinnacle award are conferred on members who have given eminent service to NZIS. This year two members were found worthy of this honour – John Jeffery Carter of Wanaka and Jeffrey Alan Needham of Wellington.

John Jeffery Carter John was nominated in recognition of his contribution over many years in NZIS service. During this time, he has given service to the management committee of the Consulting Surveyors of New Zealand (CSNZ), to the Consulting Surveyors Quality Corporation (CSQC) and to the membership as a mentor and leader in his chosen profession.

John started work with the Lands & Survey Department in Hamilton at age seventeen where he worked for three years as a survey draughtsman before heading south to Dunedin to attend Survey School. John graduated 3 years later with a Dip Surveying and then after two years with Lands and Survey in Hamilton he became a Registered Surveyor. After a year spent travelling and working in UK and Europe John joined McPherson & Goodwin in Hamilton in 1974. This was the beginning of his career as a Consulting Surveyor. John has been self-employed ever since.

In 1976 he was invited by Peter McPherson and Graeme Goodwin to join them and Geoff Gibbs as a Partner in Te Awamutu. John bought out the other partners two years later. David Latham joined the firm and it was renamed to Carter Latham. Carter Latham subsequently merged with Jellie and Keucke in Hamilton in 1988 to become Carter Keucke & Latham. The two Waikato offices were maintained after the merger and the company name was shortened to CKL Surveys.

The 1990’s were a busy time of expansion for CKL resulting in the opening of branch offices in Auckland and Wanaka and the firm growing from 4 to 65 staff over 15 years.

John sold out of CKL in 2006 although he maintained an interest in the Wanaka practice of Southern Land for several years afterwards. John continues to work as a sole practitioner trading as Meridian Land Development Consultants.

42

Key projects include the design, contract administration and survey inputs for large residential subdivisions in Te Awamutu, Hamilton, Auckland and most recently Wanaka.

John’s main interest in the past 20 years has been land development engineering and cadastral surveying.

John served on the Executive Committee of the Waikato Branch of NZIS for several terms until his focus changed to CSNZ. He has been a member of CSNZ almost since it was inaugurated in 1973 and he has served for 20 years on the Management Committee including two years as Chairman and as invited member to NZIS Council. John has missed only one CSNZ Workshop in the past 24 years and has recently stepped down from Management Committee in October 2014.

In 1993, the spatial industry established CSQC as a specialist quality assurance certifying body for the spatial information industry. In 1995, Consulting Surveyors New Zealand purchased equity in CSQC and its operations were expanded to include New Zealand.

John has been on the Board of CSQC for 10 years and he continues to serve as Treasurer. He has had considerable input into raising the standards of Quality Systems in survey practices throughout NZ. Draft QA systems have been prepared and made available at minimal cost for practices to implement as a means to improve consistency in survey plan datasets and to improve practice management and business systems.

Outside of surveying John has a strong interest in motorsport which led to him competing in many car rallies in the 1980s. John has an even stronger interest in flying that commenced with flying lessons at Taieri Aerodrome while on Field Camp at Survey School. A Private Pilot’s Licence led to many years of fixed wing flying including setting up and running a small aerial photography business - Waikato Air Surveys in the 1980’s. John’s interest in flying changed to helicopters in 1998.

John is passionate about the roles and responsibilities of Consulting Surveyors and the reputation of our profession. He has worked tirelessly to ensure that we are a recognised, well represented and respected profession.

John has derived considerable satisfaction over the

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

years from having encouraged and mentored many young people to join the survey profession, with a number of them now being principals in various practices throughout NZ and of course members of CSNZ and NZIS. John has influenced the careers of many young and not so young professionals during his career and he is a respected and sought after professional.

Jeffrey Needham Jeff first joined NZIS in 1994 and is someone who quickly stood out for his commitment to his chosen profession.

His early professional experience came from employment with the Lands and Survey Department, Murray North and Natural Gas Ltd in the Waikato.

During this time he gained his NZ Certificate in Land Surveying and later completed a Bachelor of Surveying in 1993.

After university Jeff held positions in Te Aroha and Orewa during which time he gained the experience necessary for registration which he achieved in 1997 and was duly awarded the Percy Dyett Prize for Best Engineering Plans In 1999 Jeff moved to Wellington to take up the role of NZIS Stakeholder Representative on the developing Landonline project. He was subsequently appointed Customer Strategy Manager in 2002. During this time of significant change and challenge for the profession, Jeff had the opportunity to travel the country, talking to surveyors about what was needed in Landonline and he ensured that the profession was well represented in the implementation of this world first automated survey and title registration system.

In 2002 Jeff travelled to Washington to present a paper to the FIG XXII International Congress. His paper was titled The Benefits of Stakeholder Involvement and was based on his experiences with the Landonline project.

Since returning to professional consulting in 2005, Jeff has held positions as Principal with Tse Group and Spiire NZ Ltd in Wellington and consulted on a national radio backbone for TeamTalk Ltd. Jeff was appointed to the role of Land Development Manager at Harrison Grierson in Wellington and now holds the position of General Manager - Survey.

He was appointed to the NZIS Council in 2007 where he took on responsibility for the Membership Services Committee and served on a number of Boards of Enquiry. Jeff was voted President-Elect in 2012 and served as Vice President and then as President from 2013.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

During his period of service to the NZIS Jeff was a key part of change for the profession including the development of the Way Forward 2013. Jeff has made a significant personal contribution to leading the step change that has occurred in the culture, structure and function of the NZIS. These changes have been essential to maintaining the relevance of the profession and positioning the NZIS as the body that now supports surveying and spatial professionals. A key success during this period has been the transformation of the National Office that has the capacity and specialist skills to proactively support the objectives set by NZIS Council and Board.

Over his time on Council and as President Jeff has been involved in the NZIS responses to Canterbury Earthquake challenges, he has represented NZIS on panels and working parties seeking to define the future of the cadastre for New Zealand and remains an advocate for building relationships with international professional organisations such as FIG, SSSI and ISNSW and ISVic. Next year the NZIS will host the FIG Working Week in Christchurch which Jeff has been a strong advocate for, having travelled to numerous international events in recent years to share the message with international colleagues. This event will be the largest professional conference in NZ history following on from the Surveying and Spatial Science Congress held in Wellington in 2011 where Jeff was Co-convenor. For Jeff these events are evidence of the NZIS taking a leadership role in the New Zealand professional community, with the net benefit of creating profile and status for the profession.

Over the last eight years Jeff has served on NZIS Council and is now coming up to the completion of a challenging term as NZIS President. Over this period of time Jeff has demonstrated his knowledge, commitment and passion for the role of NZIS to anyone he has come into contact with.

He has been an excellent leader for NZIS and has recognised and taken opportunities to advocate for the skills of our members and the value that surveyors and spatial professionals can provide to NZ. Jeff has offered his continuing support to the incoming President and NZIS objectives where he can and a couple of smaller roles will continue. Harrison Grierson have been very supportive of Jeff during his Presidency over the last two years.

Jeff lives in Wellington with daughters Abby and Holly and his wife Carleen, who is herself a well known NZIS supporter. Jeff’s family have strongly supported him during his commitment to NZIS duties and the family are now about to start building a new house in Wellington, quite close to the NZIS office, as it happens. No doubt NZIS will be able to rely on Jeff Needham for a few more things yet.

43

• OBITUARY

ROSS DEMPSTER SHIRLEY 18 December 1946– 3 August 2015 Ross Dempster Shirley was born on 18 December 1946 and passed away following a brave battle with cancer on 3 August 2015.

Ross is survived by his wife Bobbie. They were married for 44 years. Ross and Bobbie have two sons Warren and Gus. Ross’s funeral was attended by a large number of the survey profession both locally and from out of the district.

Ross touched many lives in his professional career and probably more importantly many more in his personal and family life. The funeral was certainly a celebration of a life well lived.

Ross attended Southland Boys High School and then started study at Otago University in 1965. He graduated from Survey School in Dunedin in December 1969 with a Diploma in Surveying.

Ross then moved to Rotorua to work for Don Speedy in the Surveying Section of the Forest Service. He completed the relevant experience and further study to proudly obtain the professional qualification of ‘Registered Surveyor’.

In 1973 Ross and his young family transferred to Nelson where his main role was project surveyor to the Beech Scheme, a large afforestation project planned for the West Coast, South Island. As part of that project Ross established 190 control points to 3rd order standards, mostly in remote and bush clad locations.

In 1976 Ross moved to Fiji to take up the position of Project Surveyor to the Fiji Pine Commission which was an aid project to provide a commercial forestry operation for Fiji. The aim of the Commission was firstly to provide work and income for the indigenous Fijian and secondly to conserve Fiji’s native forest. Ross established a network of control points over the proposed forest areas to provide a base for photogrammetric mapping and also as a base for establishing the boundaries of the land. Being an aid project, staff training was also a priority for Ross’s time with the Commission.

In 1979 Ross returned to Nelson where he held the position of Conservancy Surveyor, NZ Forest Service. Ross was very well respected by his staff and peers and his name appears on many cadastral and control plans throughout the Nelson District. During that period Ross took the opportunity to mentor young surveyors whenever possible.

On the demise of the Forest Service in 1987 Ross estab-

44

lished his own business as a survey and property consultant.

In 1991 he was engaged by the Tasman District Council to clear a backlog of subdivision applications prior to the introduction of the Resource Management Act - a job that morphed into a full time position as Subdivision Officer and a job that he held until his retirement in 2014. It is not possible to enumerate the countless individuals Ross helped during his time at the Council.

Ross was a member of NZIS throughout his working life. He had an active role within the Nelson Marlborough branch where he held the position of chair and secretary.

There are very few meetings that we can remember that were not attended and contributed to by Ross. Ross was also an active member of the Local Authority Surveyors Group of NZIS. Ross always had the good of the profession in mind.

He added considerable value to Branch meetings and promoted healthy, informed discussion and debate.

The local survey community has been very fortunate to benefit from the free and frank advice Ross gave on planning matters and any other Council issues which had the potential to impact on local members. This advice was provided during branch meetings and on a professional level during dealings with Ross during his time as a Council officer.

Ross was a champion of the Surveyor over the years and lobbied Councillors and council staff about the value of the survey profession whenever the opportunity arose.

It is often hard to quantify what makes people stand out but in the end comes down to them having the ‘Right Stuff’ and the ‘Good Bloke’ factor. Ross certainly went off the scale on both these scores.

Ross has left us, but will also live on in many local surveyors through what he taught us about how to be a proud Registered Surveyor.

SURVEYING+SPATIAL

•

Issue 84 December 2015

...aren’t like meetings in other countries. Relationships matter more than long emails and formal committees. Because of our unique way of doing business you need a training company that teaches your team skills tailored to the Kiwi business psyche.

When you’re looking to significantly boost the performance of your sales and marketing don’t choose a licenced solution from abroad, choose a company that grew up here and understands just how great it is to work differently. Choose THE Marketing Company.

If you want to be smarter in your sales & marketing call us for a free assessment.

“The Leica Captivate solution enables Envivo to make better on site decisions improving the efficiency of our field crews and the quality of our field work. We can now visually check on site the completeness of our job, ensuring that we have captured all the data we need and thus avoiding costly returns to the site. The Captivate hardware along with Global Surveys support solutions also provide Envivo with the technological framework to allow us to cope with the industries changing needs and venture confidently into the exciting world of 3D and BIM.�

MARK FINLAYSON Survey Director, Envivo Planning, Surveying & Engineering