Agenda of Regional Transport Committee

N-logotype-black-wide Regional Transport Committee

16 October 2015

Page No.

1. Apologies

Nil

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

3. Interests

3.1 Updates to the Interests Register

3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda

4. Public Forum

4.1 Dr John Moore, Guardians of Victory - Southern Arterial Route

Dr Moore, of Guardians of Victory, will speak about the Southern Arterial Route and request assistance to obtain information on the progress of the NZ Transport Agency review on State Highway 6 options.

4.2 Craig Dennis, Progress Nelson Tasman - Nelson Southern Arterial Route

Craig Dennis of Progress Nelson Tasman will speak about the Nelson Southern Arterial Route.

4.3 Robert Stevenson and John Gilbertson, Tahunanui Business Association - The Southern Arterial and Pedestrian Refuge

Robert and John, from the Tahunanui Business Association, will speak about the Southern Arterial and Pedestrian Refuge.

4.4 Paul Anderson, Waimea Road Business and Residents Society Incorporated - Waimea Road traffic congestion, the Southern Arterial, consultation, MOUs, and representation

Paul, from the Waimea Road Business and Residents Society Incorporated, will speak about Waimea Road traffic congestion, the Southern Arterial, consultation, MOUs, and representation.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 25 February 2015 6 - 12

Document number M1313

Recommendation

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Regional Transport Committee, held on 25 February 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

5.2 10 February 2015 13 - 17

Document number A1310901

Recommendation

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Regional Transport Committee, to hear submissions to the draft Nelson Regional Land Transport Plan, held on 10 February 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

5.3 5 December 2014 18 - 22

Document number A1286747

Recommendation

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Regional Transport Committee, held on 5 December 2014, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

6. Chairperson's Report 23 - 26

Document number R4483

Recommendation

THAT the Chairperson's Report (R4483) and its attachment (A1377050) be received;

AND THAT a letter be sent to New Zealand Transport Agency Canterbury Region requesting that Nelson be signed from Waipara via the Lewis Pass.

7. National Land Transport Fund - Nelson Outcomes 27 - 36

Document number R4979

Recommendation

THAT the report National Land Transport Fund - Nelson Outcomes (R4979) and its attachment (A1434647) be received.

8. New Zealand Transport Agency Update 37 - 44

Document number R4989

Recommendation

THAT the report New Zealand Transport Agency Update (R4989) and its attachments (A1438448 and A1438451) be received.

Minutes of a meeting of the Regional Transport Committee

Held in Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Wednesday 25 February 2015, commencing at 9.01am

Present: Councillor E Davy (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors R Copeland (Deputy Chairperson) and B McGurk, and R Bleakley (NZTA)

In Attendance: Planning and Investment Manager NZTA (P Hookam), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading (R Palmer), Engineering Adviser (S McAuley), Asset Engineer – Transport (C Pawson), and Administration Adviser (S McLean)

1. Apologies

No apologies were received.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

The Chairperson advised that the Regional Transport Committee minutes from 10 February 2015 (Item 4) would not be confirmed at the meeting.

3. Interests

There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.

4. Chairperson’s Report

Document number A1313561, agenda page 9 refers.

Resolved

THAT the Chairperson’s Report (A1313561) be received and the contents noted;

AND THAT the offer of professional support from Lindsay Wood (Submission 23 to the draft Regional Land Transport Plan) be declined.

Davy/McGurk Carried

5. Analysis of Submissions on the Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2021

Document number A1312774, agenda pages 10-52 refer.

Update on Further Information Requested

The Chairperson advised that the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) was planning to review intersections and speed limits on Atawhai Drive within the next three years.

It was agreed that a copy of the Transport Asset Management Plan would be provided to Committee members.

In response to a question, it was advised that the Regional Land Transport Strategy would be expiring and would not be renewed.

With regards to the Liveable Arterial project, there was support for this to be brought back to the Committee in future, along with indicative budget detail.

In response to questions, Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading, Rhys Palmer, said that it was often the case that levels of service for side roads were affected by arterial routes. Some concern was raised about this potential compromise for residential areas.

Her Worship the Mayor asked Council officers to provide detail on the classification of the Market Road/Boundary Road and Ridgeway/Waimea Road intersections.

The Committee agreed that further detail on Waimea Road was required at a future Committee meeting.

Mr Palmer pointed out that the population statistics referred to in 4.1.9 of the officer report would be impacted by recent information received from Statistics New Zealand. He said this information would be sent to councillors in due course.

Individual Submissions

Submission 1 – Feliana McKenzie

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 2 – National Council of Women

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 3 – Steve Hawke

The Committee agreed with the recommendation in the officer report. It was agreed the submitter’s comments would be referred to the Nelson Airport and that the response to the submitter would note this.

There was discussion on a review of the bus service. Mr Palmer advised that the last review was carried out in late 2013 and would not be done again for a number of years.

Submission 4 – Atawhai Safety Group

The Committee agreed with the recommendation in the officer report.

Submission 5 – Vikki Scott

The Committee agreed with the first and second recommendations in the officer report. It was noted that the response to the submitter should state that the matters had been referred to NZTA for consideration.

It was agreed that the third request about using chip seal, would be accepted in part and referred to NZTA for a response.

There was discussion on road treatments and how the type of treatment used was determined based on its estimated life. The Committee asked that NZTA provide further details on the analysis used to establish the life of roading treatments.

Submission 6 – Federated Farmers

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 7 – Warwick Rogers

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report. It was agreed that detail on timing of the Quarantine Road roundabout project would be included in the response to the submitter.

Submission 8 – Keith Morrison

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report. It was agreed that the response to the submitter would explain that increasing the number of bus routes had replaced the need to increase the frequency of the service.

Mr Palmer advised that the number of bus shelters were expected to increase in future years. It was agreed that the response to the submitter should include detail on the budget for bus shelters and the process for assessing the need for additional shelters.

Submission 9 – Charmian Koed

The Committee agreed with the recommendation in the officer report.

Submission 10 – Sara Cooper

The Committee agreed that the request regarding expenditure on public transport should be accepted in full.

Submission 11 – Tasman District Council

The Committee noted the update for Submission 11 provided in the officer report.

Submission 12 – Cycle Trails Trust

The Committee agreed that the request about cycling infrastructure would be considered later in the meeting as part of the decision on the Rocks Road Walking and Cycling Package.

Submission 13 – Ali (Surname not provided)

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 14 – Nelsust

The Committee agreed with recommendations for decisions 1-4, 6-8, and 10 in the officer report.

It was agreed that the request to add a Travel Demand Management Project would be rejected.

It was agreed that the request to improve the NBus service would be accepted in part.

It was agreed that the request to place more emphasis in the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) on reducing pollution would be accepted in part and it would be indicated that a number of initiatives were to take place in this area.

Submission 15 – Waimea Road Business and Residents Association

It was agreed that the request to remove references to increasing the capacity of Waimea Road, would be accepted in full.

It was agreed that the response to the submitter would include details on the constant review and monitoring of traffic numbers on Waimea Road. It was also suggested that the submitter response include details on how to submit to the Long Term Plan regarding a living arterial project.

There was discussion on Waimea Road. It was agreed that officers would provide further information on Waimea Road at a future meeting so that the Committee could investigate competing needs and pressures.

It was agreed to accept in part the request to include a new project in the RLTP to enhance Waimea Road.

The Committee agreed with the remaining recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 16 – Ken Beckett

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 17 – Tony Small

The Committee agreed with the recommendation in the officer report.

Submission 18 – Bicycle Nelson Bays

It was agreed that the first request about Rocks Road would be considered later in the meeting as part of the decision on the Rocks Road Walking and Cycling Package.

The Committee agreed with the remaining recommendations in the officer report.

In response to a question, Mr Palmer agreed that climate change would be on the agenda at a future joint Regional Transport Committee meeting.

Submission 19 – NZ Motel Association

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 20 – Tahunanui Business Association

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 21 – New Zealand Transport Agency

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 22 – Bus and Coach Association New Zealand

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Submission 23 – Lindsay Wood

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

In response to questions about climate change, it was suggested that page 30 of the RLTP could be updated to align with the information provided in Attachment 1 of the officer report. It was also suggested that climate change be referenced in the RLTP, instead of only references to adverse weather conditions.

Submission 24 – New Zealand Automobile Association

The Committee agreed with the recommendations in the officer report.

Attendance: The meeting adjourned from 10.57am to 10.58am, and then from 10.59am to 12.06pm.

Significant Committee Decisions

Decision 1 – Rocks Road Walking and Cycling Package

It was agreed that work on the Rocks Road Walking and Cycling Package would not be delayed until after the Southern Link had been investigated. The Committee noted that the two projects were complementary and that any timing impacts could be dealt with as variations to the RLTP if necessary.

Decision 2 – Rai Saddle Second Curve Realignment

It was agreed that the Rai Saddle Second Curve realignment project would be retained as priority two in the list of Agreed Top of the South Significant Activities.

Decision 3 – Timeframe for R Funding

It was agreed that there was no reason to seek an extension to R funding timeframes at this stage.

Decision 4 – Walk Cycle Schools Package

It was agreed that the Walk Cycle Schools Package remain as priority four in the list of Agreed Top of the South Significant Activities.

Decision 5 – Bus Fares

It was agreed the focus would remain on increasing the number of bus routes, and no change would be made to bus fares. Mr Palmer provided detail on modelling of various bus fare scenarios. It was agreed that the Committee would look into bus fares within the next 12 months, and that this would be signalled in the RLTP.

Mr Palmer advised that a review of bus fares could be undertaken, but any changes to NZTA contributions could not be requested until 2018 when the RLTP was next reviewed. He added that the draft RLTP was already asking NZTA for an additional $170,000 towards extending bus service routes.

It was suggested that Council could front fund a reduction in fares during the 2015-18 period and recover a subsidy from NZTA if the business case showed this was warranted.

The Committee agreed the current focus of the bus system was to improve service coverage without increasing the cost to the community.

Decision 6 – Rocks Road

It was agreed no change would be made to the budget for the Rocks Road redevelopment project.

Resolved

THAT the report Analysis of Submissions on the Regional Land Transport Plan (A1312774) and its attachments (A1316962 and A1317051) be received;

AND THAT the Nelson Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2021 be amended to reflect the Committee’s decisions on submissions.

Davy/Bleakley Carried

Recommendation to Council

THAT the Draft Nelson Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2021, as amended to reflect the Regional Transport Committee’s decision on submissions, be adopted.

Davy/McGurk Carried

There being no further business the meeting ended at 12.40pm.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Minutes of a meeting of the Regional Transport Committee to hear submissions to the draft Nelson Regional Land Transport Plan

Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Tuesday 10 February 2015, commencing at 9.03am

Present: Councillor E Davy (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors R Copeland and B McGurk, and Raewyn Bleakley of the New Zealand Transport Agency

In Attendance: Councillors G Noonan and M Lawrey, Peter Hookam of the New Zealand Transport Agency, Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading (R Palmer), and Administration Adviser (S McLean)

1. Apologies

No apologies were received.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

The Chairperson, Councillor Davy, tabled a memo to the Committee (A1310918) and spoke about regional funding from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

Attendance: Councillor McGurk joined the meeting at 9.06am.

Her Worship the Mayor commented on the process used to obtain community feedback on the draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP). She emphasised that identifying any conflict of interest in this regard was the responsibility of individual Committee members.

3. Interests

There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.

4. Hearing of Submissions

4.1 Vikki Scott

Ms Scott urged the Committee to reduce the speed limit between Clifton Terrace School and Nelson to 70 kilometres per hour to improve safety in the area. She spoke about noise pollution on that stretch of road due to chip seal and suggested that asphalt be used. Ms Scott suggested that a car-width centre lane be created for cars turning into driveways etc. and that the double lanes heading towards Atawhai be removed.

4.2 Bill Gilbertson, Nelson Tasman Cycle Trails Trust

Mr Gilbertson said it was crucial that cyclists be represented in the RLTP and that Nelson should be built up as a cycle friendly city. Mr Gilbertson spoke on cycling and its link to tourism and the Great Taste Trail. He said that the challenge was for Council to link existing cycleways.

Mr Gilbertson spoke about the Rocks Road walking/cycling esplanade proposal and emphasised that it needed to be useable by everyone and created with future capacity in mind. He suggested that Council should look at alternatives such as a design and build scenario due to the high costs involved.

4.3 Lindsay Wood

Mr Wood tabled and read from a document (A1311856). He raised concerns about climate change and greenhouse gases, and suggested that the draft RLTP neglected these important areas.

Mr Wood tabled a book titled The Sixth Extinction (A1317217) and a written offer of professional support (A1311991) towards the development of the RLTP.

4.4 Peter Olorenshaw, Nelsust Inc

Mr Olorenshaw spoke about congestion on Rocks Road. He said that a comparison could not be made between high car registration levels and an increase in traffic. Mr Olorenshaw suggested that Council should have a balance between roading and active transport. He also said that development along Rocks Road should be seen as a traffic and roading improvement.

Mr Olorenshaw spoke about the Southern Link, and highlighted that forecasts had shown it was not a priority in terms of reaching capacity or improving the economy, therefore the consequences were not justified.

Attendance: The meeting adjourned for morning tea from 9.49am to 10.03am.

4.5 John Gilbertson, Nelson Branch of the NZ Motel Association

In Mr Gilbertson’s absence, his notes were tabled (A1312193) and councillors read through these.

4.6 Ken Beckett

Mr Beckett stressed that no funding should be allocated to Rocks Road development until the NZTA had made a decision on the Southern Link. He suggested that the RLTP could be amended at a later date once that decision had been made.

Mr Beckett spoke about a recent news article about the NZTA tendering for design for the Southern Link, which made it seem as though the project had started. He highlighted that this information was not available at the time of forming the draft RLTP.

Mr Beckett spoke about procedures that the Committee had used and raised concerns about their legality. He said that the memo tabled by Councillor Davy at the start of the meeting should have focussed on the Land Transport Management Act 2003, and had provided important information to submitters after consultation had closed.

In response to comments by councillors, Councillor Davy advised that the draft RLTP was put to the Council to approve it being sent to the NZTA, and that the Council did not have any discussion on the content of the draft RLTP.

4.7 Mike Thomas, Tahunanui Business Association Inc.

Mr Thomas raised concern about the removal of parking in Tahunanui. He said that clearways should be removed in the area, and that there were still traffic problems in places like Tahunanui Drive and Muritai Street.

Councillor Davy said that there were three years left on a four year agreement to enable Council to work on parking in the area. He said that clearways could be assessed once the agreement had expired.

4.8 Chris Allison, Bicycle Nelson Bays

Mr Allison spoke about the need for an integrated transport plan which focussed on the interconnectivity of different modes of transport. He highlighted that the increase in funding for walking and cycling did not impact other modes of transport as there was still a larger proportion of funding allocated for roading.

Mr Allison suggested that the future challenges of Nelson would be to ensure economic viability and attract young people, meaning that roads may be a lower priority in the future. He said that a walking and cycling strategy should not be prepared in isolation and needed to be considered within an overarching framework.

4.9 Paul Anderson, Waimea Road Business & Resident Association Inc

Mr Anderson said that Waimea Road was structurally unsuitable for use as an alternative highway. He showed support for the Southern Link, and added that the ‘do nothing’ projects that were in the Southern Link area should not have been included in RLTP.

Mr Anderson spoke about Waimea Road becoming an economic hub, and said he supported a separate cycleway alongside the Southern Link.

4.10 Allan Kneale, New Zealand Automobile Association

Mr Kneale tabled and read from a document (A1311427). He summarised concerns about the correctness of population growth figures, and detailed the projects that were supported by the New Zealand Automobile Association.

Councillor Davy thanked submitters for their contribution.

Councillor Davy asked councillors to list any items that should be brought back to the Committee through the deliberations report. Responses were:

· Detail on the Atawhai Drive speed limit, how had discussions with NZTA progressed

· An update on the walking and cycling strategy

· Details on Waimea Road as a ‘living’ arterial route

· Clarification on population statistics in the RLTP

· Details on the NZTA evaluation manual and analysis, and the ‘do minimum’ option, in relation to the Waimea Road projects

· Reference to climate change and emissions added to the draft RLTP

· Clarification on the relationship between vehicle registration numbers and traffic levels

· Detail on the data anomalies referred to in Lindsay Wood’s submission (No. 23)

· Detail on the procedural concerns in Ken Beckett’s submission (No. 16)

· Any information and advice that was provided direct to submitters by Council officers

There being no further business the meeting ended at 10.57am.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Minutes of a meeting of the Regional Transport Committee

Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Friday 5 December 2014, commencing at 1.02pm

Present: Councillor E Davy (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors R Copeland and B McGurk, and L Hammond (NZTA)

In Attendance: Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Senior Asset Engineer - Transport and Roading (R Palmer), NZTA Representatives (M Owen, P Hookham, A James and R Bleakley), and Administration Adviser (G Brown)

Apologies: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese for lateness.

1. Apologies

Resolved

THAT an apology be received and accepted from Her Worship the Mayor for lateness.

Davy/McGurk Carried

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) representative, Lyndon Hammond introduced the new Regional Director Raewyn Bleakley.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

There was no change to the order of business.

3. Interests

There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no conflicts of interest with agenda items were declared.

4. Public Forum

There was no public forum.

5. Confirmation of Minutes – 3 October 2014

Document number A1257624, agenda pages 6-11 refer.

Resolved

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Regional Transport Committee, held on 3 October 2014, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Davy/McGurk Carried

6. Chairperson’s Report

The Chairperson thanked Committee members and Council officers for a productive year, and highlighted the healthy working relationship with Tasman and Marlborough District Councils.

7. Introduction of a new Regional Director

The new Regional Director, Raewyn Bleakley, summarised her background and advised that this was her sixth Regional Transport Committee (RTC) meeting and she looked forward to working with Nelson City Council.

8. Building Blocks Presentation

NZTA Regional Director, Raewyn Bleakley, gave a presentation on Building Blocks (A1286617).

Attendance: Her Worship the Mayor joined the meeting at 1.09pm.

9. NZTA Regional Transport Committee Report

Document number A1281267, agenda pages 12-15 refer

Resolved

THAT the New Zealand Transport Agency Report (A1281267) be received.

Copeland/McGurk Carried

10. Draft Nelson Regional Public Transport Plan 2015-2018

Document number A1277415, agenda pages 16-54 refer.

Senior Asset Engineer – Transport and Roading, Rhys Palmer, presented the report.

In response to a question, Mr Palmer said that acknowledging the Draft Nelson Regional Public Transport Plan 2015-2018 was a formality and that if the Committee wished to amend the Plan then that would need to occur after the public consultation phase.

In response to a further question, Mr Palmer advised that the farebox recovery ratio was 62% for Nelson, which was the highest in the country.

NZTA Representative, Lyndon Hammond, advised that the average farebox recovery ratio in New Zealand was 47%. He added that the ratio could be improved by lowering costs or by getting more people using the bus service. Mr Hammond said when compiling a business case a number of aspects needed to be included in the package.

In response to a question, Mr Palmer advised that a single unit model would still be used as Nelson was not a large enough city to consider multiple bus service operating contracts.

Mr Palmer indicated that an in depth analysis was conducted on the Stoke bus loop to ensure that it services as many additional residents and businesses as practical. This was done using the GIS for comparing the number of new lots served and census travel to work data for potential major origins and destinations.

In response to a question, Mr Palmer said the extra funding requested through the business case from NZTA was modest at $170,000. He added that this was not a significant request in relation to public transport for Nelson.

It was mentioned that carpark revenue was historically utilised for NBus. However, it was agreed that it would now be funded via general expenditure in the Long Term Plan (LTP). Mr Palmer added that the draft RLTP and Transport Asset Management Plan were consistent with this direction.

Resolved

THAT the report Draft Nelson Regional Public Transport Plan (A1277415) and its attachments (A1277814 and A1277789) be received;

AND THAT the Draft Nelson Regional Public Transport Plan (A1277415) be acknowledged as the version to be consulted on in conjunction with the Draft Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-21.

Copeland/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

11. Regional Land Transport Plan Development Funding

Document number 1277753, agenda pages 55-56 refer

Resolved

THAT the report Regional Land Transport Plan Development Funding (A1277753) be received;

AND THAT the costs associated with the development of the 2015-21 Regional Land Transport Plan be included in the 2012/15 Regional Land Transport Programme.

Davy/Copeland Carried

12. SH1 Quarantine Road Roundabout Upgrade – Update

Document number A1282087, agenda page 57 refers.

NZTA Representative, Mark Owen, presented the report. He advised the Committee of the error in relation to the reference SH1, it should be SH6.

In response to a question, Mr Owen confirmed that there would be land acquisitions on the south western corner of the roundabout. He advised that there was an opportunity for landscaping the centre of the roundabout and that designs had been provided to Nelson City Council.

A map of the Quarantine Road roundabout area was presented (A1285564). NZTA Representative, Andrew James, advised that it was not ideal to have cyclists crossing two lanes on Quarantine Road. However, due to the number of users and funding, this was the best solution. He added that the crossing would be monitored.

In response to a question, Mr Owen advised that this project was shown within the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) as committed funds. In addition, the Chairperson read out the Executive Summary from the RLTP which clarified the current situation in relation to the roundabout upgrade.

Resolved

THAT Nelson Regional Transport Committee support the construction of Quarantine Road Roundabout Upgrade.

Davy/McGurk Carried

13. SH6 Gentle Annie safety improvements

Document number A1282070, agenda page 58 refers.

THAT the Nelson Regional Transport Committee vary the current 2012-15 Regional Land Transport Programme to include the SH6 Gentle Annie safety improvements project, noting that it will utilise national funding.

Davy/Her Worship the Mayor Carried

14. SH6 Whakatu Drive barriers

Document number A1282096, agenda page 59 refers

Resolved

THAT the Nelson Regional Transport Committee vary the current 2012-15 Regional Land Transport Programme to include the SH6 Whakatu Drive safety improvements project, noting that it will utilise national funding.

Davy/McGurk Carried

There being no further business the meeting ended at 2.10pm.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Regional Transport Committee

16 October 2015

REPORT R4483

Chairperson's Report

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To seek Regional Transport Committee support for increased guide signage to Nelson on State Highway 1 at Waipara.

2. Recommendation

THAT the Chairperson's Report (R4483) and its attachment (A1377050) be received;

AND THAT a letter be sent to New Zealand Transport Agency Canterbury Region requesting that Nelson be signed from Waipara via the Lewis Pass.

3. Discussion

Background

3.1 The advance direction sign at Waipara on SH1 at the SH 7 intersection has been causing confusion for Nelson bound tourists.

3.2 The guide sign indicates Hanmer Springs and West Coast via Lewis Pass to the left and Cheviot and Picton straight on. A photo of the existing sign and its surrounding environment is included in attachment 1.

3.3 The feedback I have been receiving indicates that tourists heading out of Christchurch on State Highway 1 bound for Nelson who intent to turn left at Waipara to travel on State Highway 7 through the Lewis Pass and onto Nelson miss the turn as they expect Nelson to be signed.

3.4 I know most folk when travelling to Nelson from Christchurch don’t associate the ‘West Coast’ as a destination on the way to Nelson

3.5 Tourism is a major growth industry in the top of the south and our joint draft Regional Land Transport Plan highlights the importance of the road network for the significant numbers of self drive international and domestic tourists that visit our region. With 3 National Parks in the Nelson Area it is essential that tourists know which way to go.

3.6 Having consistent and informative signage is critical for both road safety, and to make ensure visitors trips are memorable for the right reasons.

3.7 Officers have discussed this with the NZ Transport Agency Journey Manager and Safety Engineer based in Canterbury requesting that ‘Nelson’ be added below ‘West Coast’ to the sign at Waipara as shown in attachment 1. This request has been declined. The reasons given are listed below in sections 3.8 to 3.13.

NZ Transport Agency Feedback

3.8 The guide signs provided on the highway are intended to supplement the places shown on most road maps. It is therefore expected that motorists will either carry a road map with them, or will have studied their route before departing.

3.9 There is a limit to the amount of information that can be read while travelling at a rural speed limit of 100km/hr. Best practice suggests that signs should be limited to a desirable maximum of three (or an absolute maximum of five) place names per sign.

3.10 Once a place name has been mentioned on one sign, it must be confirmed on every other guide sign along the route until the destination has been reached.

3.11 The guide signs need to assist in directing motorists to places of local importance as well as assist with general way-finding for longer trips.

3.12 Keeping these points in mind the signage for Nelson starts at the following locations:

3.12.1 On State Highway 1 the signage for Nelson starts north of Kaikoura (241km from Nelson).

3.12.2 On SH7 the signage for Nelson starts north of Culverden (322km from Nelson).

3.13 We (NZ Transport Agency) would not support signing Nelson at Waipara for the following reasons:

3.13.1 As per point 3.8 above we would expect motorists to know that they must follow SH7 at this intersection or would know that Hanmer Springs and/or the Lewis Pass were staging points along their journey. The sign north of Culverden would then confirm that they were heading in the right direction.

3.13.2 As per point 3.9 above this sign already contains more than the desirable number of places and adding more places would exceed the maximum amount of information we can safely direct at traffic travelling at 100km/hr allowing enough time for such traffic to consider the directions given and take the appropriate action.

3.13.3 Finally, at this intersection, travel to Nelson could be via SH1 or SH7 with both routes being of a similar length, travel time and attractiveness to tourists. Posting Nelson in one direction only would potentially confuse motorists wanting to travel via the other route and posting Nelson in both directions would potentially confuse everyone.

4. Conclusion

4.1 The convenience of appropriate signage and the improved safety that results from clear signage is important especially for the significant numbers of international and domestic self drive tourists that travel between Christchurch and the Nelson region.

4.2 The NZ Transport Agency Canterbury region have declined the Nelson City Council officer request to install Nelson as a destination at Waipara.

4.3 I would note that in section 3.13.3 NZ Transport Agency state that the routes are of similar travel time. It is typically 30 minutes longer to go via the State Highway 1 via Blenheim rather than through the centre of the island via the Lewis Pass. In the interests of efficiency directing motorists via this route should be a priority.

4.4 I also question the validity and responsibility of the statement made by the NZ Transport Agency at 3.13.1 that motorist get to Culverden before finding they are on the wrong road.

4.5 I recommend that the Regional Transport Committee formally request a review of this decision.

Eric Davy

Chairperson - Regional Transport Committee

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1377050 - SH1 Guide Sign at Waipara - Existing and proposed

Regional Transport Committee

16 October 2015

REPORT R4979

National Land Transport Fund - Nelson Outcomes

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To receive the 2015-18 National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) funding decisions for the Nelson region as a result of the Regional Land Transport Plan submission.

2. Delegations

2.1 This report relates to the business of the Regional Transport Committee however no decision is required.

3. Recommendation

THAT the report National Land Transport Fund - Nelson Outcomes (R4979) and its attachment (A1434647) be received.

4. Background

4.1 In April 2015 the Regional Transport Committee submitted to the NZ Transport Agency the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) that detailed its funding priorities for the next six years.

4.2 The NZ Transport Agency Board in June 2015 adopted the National Land Transport Programme which details its funding priorities for 2015-18 from the RLTP’s put forward by all Regional Transport Committees around the country, Auckland Transport and national programmes delivered by NZ Transport Agency and the Police.

5. Discussion

5.1 The funding decisions letter from the NZ Transport Agency is attachment one.

5.2 The second table appended to the formal letter in attachment one labelled NELSON - ATT 2 has a funding priority column which details the status of each of the projects or activities included in the RLTP. The table below gives definition to the terms used.

Funding Priority	Definition
Committed	Projects approved in a previous NLTP that will continue to be funded until completion.
Recommended	Approved for funding with the publication of the NLTP.
Probable	Funding has not yet been approved for the activity but, based on its profile and the robust evidence provided in developing the NLTP, funding approval is likely for an application made in 2015-18, subject to funds being available
Proposed	Funding has not been approved for the activity in the 2015-18 NLTP. Based on its profile and the evidence provided in developing the NLTP, funding approval may be given when an application is made in 2015-18. Further robust evidence is required to confirm the assessment profile and provide confidence in the funding priority and availability of funds.
Not included in the NLTP	Projects which are below the funding threshold, have cash flow outside of the NLTP period, or have been excluded for eligibility reasons.

Implications for Nelson City Council Local Roads

5.3 Minor Improvements 2015-18 - $650,000/annum recommended – good news for programme certainty.

5.4 The maintenance operations and renewal budget is at the indicative level expected following discussions with NZ Transport Agency Officers during the submission process of a total of $15.5M for the 2015-18 period. This is $750,000 below what Council Officers consider necessary to maintain the network to the agreed levels of service, and what was applied for in the RLTP. The approved amount does not align with the adopted Long Term Plan as during the Long Term Plan deliberations the local share of $750,000 was retained for year 2 and 3 so Council could be in a position to take up additional funding.

5.5 Council and NZ Transport Agency Officers are work collaboratively reviewing the levels of service as part of the One Network Road Classification. If this review reinforces the need to invest in line with the Asset Management Plan and RLTP then the NZ Transport Agency may make funds available for renewals as originally proposed by the RLTP.

5.6 The public transport funding is at the level requested (significant increase over 2012/15 level for operations) and also enables the proposed Stoke service to proceed.

5.7 Integrated ticketing – The ‘proposed’ funding priority which means more robust evidence is required before funding is approved for the integrated ticketing project is unexpected as it has a high profile and is being driven nationally by the NZ Transport Agency.

5.8 Rocks Road to Maitai Path. The timing is inconsistent with that proposed in the Urban Cycleway Programme and the Long Term Plan. This was due to the RLTP being developed ahead of the details around the Urban Cycleway Programme and the final LTP document. Council will need to make progress in the investigation and have the RTC resolve to bring construction forward into 2015/18 period if it is to be progressed in the next three years as part of the Urban Cycleway Programme.

5.9 In order to access NLTP funds in the ‘proposed’ funding priority Council will need to progress the projects to a greater level of certainty and robustness to gain funding in the 2015/18 period.

5.10 The four Urban Cycle Programme projects are in the ‘proposed’ funding priority. Nationally there is an over allocation of ‘proposed’ projects in the walking and cycling funding category for 2015/18 period. The NZ Transport Agency is suggesting that to gain any kind of funding certainty for these projects from the NLTF then Council will need to progress the projects to a greater level of certainty and robustness within the first year.

Nelson State Highway Summary

5.11 The maintenance operations and renewal budget is at the requested level.

5.12 Quarantine Road SH 6 upgrade is probable.

5.13 Minor Improvements is at the requested level.

5.14 Rai Saddle Second Curve Realignment (construction phase) – ‘proposed’ for funding which was unexpected as it had a higher profile in the RLTP than the ‘probable’ Quarantine Rd project. The NZ Transport Agency has recently advised the reason the Quarantine Road project was ranked ahead of Rai Saddle project was it was ready to implement and the funding assessment was more robust.

5.15 Rocks Road Walking and Cycling – ‘proposed’ which is not surprising as this project needs to be informed by wider network planning currently underway.

NZ Transport Agency Clarification

5.16 The Transport Agency is aware that the investigation into the Nelson Southern Link has impacted on the wider Nelson programme, and timing for delivery. The uncertainty around use of funds as a result of the Nelson Southern Link Investigation has been considered and the NZ Transport Agency has advised that they do not intend that Nelson’s programme will be disadvantaged as a result.

5.17 NZ Transport Agency Board policy continues to be that (Regional) R funds are spent on the best projects in the region.

5.18 However the Nelson Southern Link Investigation has introduced an element of uncertainty into Nelson’s programme. Because of this in March 2015 the NZ Transport Agency Board provided for an extension of the timeframe for spending R funds, if this is required. The Board resolved that:

‘The NZ Transport Agency Board agreed to allow the use of R funds in Nelson to extend beyond the current June 30 2018 deadline, subject to a requirement that the funds are spent by 30 June 2021’

5.19 To ensure the Nelson programme is not disadvantaged the NZ Transport Agency will progress the Nelson projects in the current NLTP through the usual funding process. The NZ Transport Agency will then look to tag the R funds to the ‘best project’ in the region later in the process, once the Nelson Southern Link Investigation is complete. This approach allows the NZ Transport Agency to recognise any potential impact of the Nelson Southern Link Investigation business case process while still delivering on the Nelson Programme.

5.20 All the Nelson projects in the current NLTP qualify for National funds (subject to going through the individual approval processes to confirm they are good quality projects addressing real problems). The value of Nelson projects that meet the NLTP funding thresholds exceeds the amount of R funding available, so R funds are thus not accelerating projects that wouldn’t otherwise be funded.

5.21 If the Southern Link does not qualify for NLTP funding (via inclusion in the RLTP), the final funding decision rests with the Minister of Transport as the project is part of the Government’s Accelerated Regional State Highway Package.

5.22 Initial feedback from the NZ Transport Agency Highways Group is that the SH6 Quarantine Road intersection project would still be required with the Southern Link in place. Therefore they are finalising their funding proposal to enable that project to proceed.

5.23 Portions of the Urban Cycleway Project from the City to the Airport would be unaffected so Council can continue to develop these components. The largest impact is on the Rocks Road component of the cycleway and Southern Link is being considered in that design process. The timing of the Rocks Road cycleway design and the Southern Link business case align well enabling final decisions on both projects to be made at the same time.

6. Options

6.1 This section is not required as no decision is required

7. Alignment with relevant Council policy

7.1 This section is not required as no decision is required

8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

8.1 This section is not required as no decision is required

9. Consultation

9.1 A special consultative procedure was undertaken when developing the Regional land Transport Plan to seek the community’s views.

10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

10.1 No specific consultation with Māori was undertaken.

11. Conclusion

11.1 The NZ Transport Agency Board in June 2015 adopted the National Land Transport Programme which details its funding priorities for 2015-18.

11.2 In order to access NLTP funds in the ‘proposed’ walking and cycling funding category Council and the NZ Transport Agency Highways Group will need to progress the projects to a greater level of certainty quickly as nationally there is an over allocation of ‘proposed’ walking and cycling projects in the 2015-18 period.

Rhys Palmer

Senior Asset Engineer - Transport and Roading

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1434647 National Land Transport Programme - RLTP Funding Decision