Agenda of Regional Transport Committee

N-logotype-black-wide Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

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 Peter Olorenshaw - Nelsust Inc

Peter Olorenshaw, Convenor for Nelsust Inc, will speak about the Council resolution CL/2016/117: “THAT the Chair and members of the Regional Transport Committee engage with aligned stakeholder groups to provide feedback on priorities in Council’s travel demand activity areas, noting this will be externally facilitated”.

4.2 Kate Malcolm and Delwyn Wasley - Nelsust Inc

Kate Malcolm and Delwyn Wasley, from Nelsust Inc, will speak to and present a petition for a Waimea Express Bus trial.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 5 December 2016 7 - 11

Document number M2253

Recommendation

That the Committee

Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Regional Transport Committee, held on 5 December 2016, as a true and correct record.

6. Chairperson's Report 12 - 13

Document number R7130

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the Chairperson's Report (R7130); and

Notes that the Regional Transport Committee Chairperson, and Deputy Chairperson as substitute, will be the Council representative at the New Zealand Transport Agency ‘Richmond Network Operating Framework’ workshops.

7. Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link 14 - 17

Document number R7169

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link (R7169); and

Approves the inclusion of the Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link as a new project in the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan.

8. LED Streetlight - Network Wide Conversion 18 - 20

Document number R6845

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report LED Streetlight - Network Wide Conversion (R6845); and

Approves the inclusion of the network wide LED streetlight upgrade into the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

9. Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement 21 - 25

Document number R7249

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement (R7249); and

Approves the inclusion of Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement as a new project in the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan.

10. Common messaging for South Island Regional Land Transport Plans 26 - 32

Document number R7178

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Common messaging for South Island Regional Land Transport Plans (R7178) and its attachment (A1732359); and

Notes the amended agreed Collaboration Charter (A1732359); and

Approves inclusion of the “Common Messaging” agreed by the South Island Regional Transport Committee Group Chairs in the Regional Land Transport Plan.

11. Submission on Draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 33 - 92

Document number R7248

Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Submission on Draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (R7248) and its attachments (A1721106, A1721112 and A1727792); and

Approves for signing, by the Chair of the South Island Regional Transport Committee Group Chairs, the submission on the Draft Policy Statement on Land Transport as prepared by that group (as per attached draft A1727792) and as amended by that group on 20 March 2017; and

Delegates responsibility to the Chair of the Regional Transport Committee and Her Worship the Mayor for developing a local addendum to the South Island Regional Transport Committee Group Chair’s submission, if necessary, to capture any significant local issues.

Minutes of a meeting of the Regional Transport Committee

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

On Monday 5 December 2016, commencing at 1.30pm

Present: Councillor P Matheson, Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors G Noonan and M Rutledge and J Alexander (NZTA Rep)

In Attendance: Councillors I Barker, M Lawrey and S Walker; Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Manager Operations and Asset Management (P Anderson), Senior Asset Engineer – Transport & Roading (R Palmer), Engineering Advisor (S McAuly), Communications Adviser (A Hamblin), Engineering Officer (K Goldthorpe), Team Leader Administration Advisers (Robyn Byrne) and NZTA Representatives (Regional Director J Harland, Regional Performance Manager M Owen)

Apology: R Bleakley

1. Apologies

The apology from Ms Bleakley was noted.

2. Appointment of Chairperson

Group Manager Infrastructure Alec Louverdis assumed the chair and called for nominations from the Regional Transport Committee for the appointment of a Chairperson.

Her Worship the Mayor nominated Councillor Matheson for Chair. There were no further nominations. The NZTA representative abstained from voting.

Resolved RTC/2016/006

That the Committee

Appoints Councillor Matheson as Chairperson of the Regional Transport Committee.

Rutledge/Noonan Carried

Councillor Matheson assumed the chair.

3. Appointment of Deputy Chairperson

The Chairperson called for nominations from the Regional Transport Committee for the appointment of a Deputy Chairperson. Her Worship the Mayor nominated Councillor Noonan for Deputy Chair. There were no further nominations.

The NZTA representative abstained from voting.

Resolved RTC/2016/007

That the Committee

Appoints Councillor Noonan as Deputy Chairperson of the Regional Transport Committee.

Her Worship the Mayor/Rutledge Carried

4. Confirmation of Order of Business

The Chairperson advised of a minor late item regarding a Joint presentation on the role and purpose of Regional Transport Committee.

Resolved RTC/2016/008

That the Committee

Considers the item regarding the presentation on the role and purpose of the Regional Transport Committee at this meeting as a minor late item not on the agenda, pursuant to Section 46A(7)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

Matheson/Noonan Carried

5. Interests

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

6. Public Forum

There was no public forum.

7. Joint presentation

Senior Asset Engineer – Transport & Roading, Rhys Palmer, presented on the functions of the Regional Transport Committee and it’s responsibility for delivering the Regional Transport Plan, a partnership between Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

Attachments

1 A1673619 Regional Transport Committee Roles and Responsibilities

8. 2015/16 Annual Monitoring Report on the Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2021

Document number R6612, agenda pages 5 - 25 refer.

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

Members asked for clarification on some statistics. It was noted that the walking and cycling counts were reported together and Mr Palmer was asked if these could be split. He advised that currently they were jointly recorded but officers had noticed a higher growth in the walking count than the cycling count.

There was some discussion on the decline in public transport use along with the Supergold patronage, which was heavily subsidised. Officers were asked if it was possible to provide free travel for children and students; NZTA noted that they co-invested public transport and they would need to look at this option closely in terms of using their investment for free public transport.

Resolved RTC/2016/009

That the Committee

Receives the report 2015/16 Annual Monitoring Report on the Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2021 (R6612) and its attachment (A1654649)

Her Worship the Mayor/Rutledge Carried

9. Stoke Foothills Business Case

Document number R6613, agenda pages 26 - 31 refer.

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

The Committee noted that state highways were for inter-regional transport and expressed concern at secondary roads being used increasingly because the state highway was not performing at optimum level. It was noted that Council needed to be mindful it was not moving the burden of cost to ratepayers even if it was helped with funding by NZTA.

Resolved RTC/2016/010

Receives the report Stoke Foothills Business Case (R6613) and its attachment (A1667256); and

Approves inclusion of the Stoke Foothills Business Case into the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan.

Rutledge/Noonan Carried

10. New Zealand Transport Agency Update

Document number R6825, agenda pages 32 - 34 refer.

Acting Regional Manager Central- NZTA, Julie Alexander, presented her report and gave a presentation on the National Land Transport Programme 2018-21. (A1674747)

Attachments

1 A1674747 National Land Transport Programme 2018-21

In response to a question, Ms Alexander advised that the Southern Link was a very important project. The business case had been completed and was now going through internal processes. She said the investigation was being funded by government and this involved reporting back to the NZTA Board and Minister of Transport.

Regional Director, Jim Harland gave a verbal update on the roading impacts of the Kaikoura earthquake of 14 November 2016, and following aftershocks. He said NZTA were spending money with a priority on a safety perspective, which was significant.

It was noted that for the foreseeable future, the Picton to Christchurch Lewis Pass highway route would be the main freight route for the South Island, and Kiwirail was looking at a coastal shipping route into Lyttleton.

The Committee discussed the impact on Nelson; with the increase in freight and transport this would impact the already constrained network through the city.

Resolved RTC/2016/011

That the Committee

Receive the report New Zealand Transport Agency Update (R6825) and its attachment (A1665721).

Rutledge/Noonan Carried

There being no further business the meeting ended at 3.15pm.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

REPORT R7130

Chairperson's Report

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To update the Committee on a matter.

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the Chairperson's Report (R7130); and

3. Discussion

Nelson City Council RTC representation as a key stakeholder and for the Richmond Network Operating Framework

3.1 The New Zealand Transport Agency is currently initiating a project “Richmond Network Operating Framework” (NOF) as an outcome of the Strategic Case prepared for the section of SH6 between the Saxton on ramp on Whakatu Drive and the SH60 intersection at three brothers corner. The purpose of this project is to:

· Understand future transport demand

· Consider intervention options that make best use of the existing local and state highway network, and then

· Determine the trigger levels when investment will be warranted to implement the Hope Bypass.

3.2 The key outcomes for this project are to provide more confidence in network management, enable optimisation of the existing transport network, to better identify gaps in levels of service, and to give more effective support to decision makers about the effects of transport investment proposals.

3.3 The NOF is a joint stakeholder, round table, workshop based process which helps the partners and stakeholders identify what priorities they have for transport and how best to close the operating gaps in the network.

3.4 Key stakeholders will be engaged with at key stages of the NOF process via four workshops. The suggested key stakeholder list includes one Nelson City Council RTC representative and one supporting Council officer. I propose that I attend these workshops or the Deputy Chairperson if I am not available. The first workshop is expected to be held in April 2017.

Paul Matheson

Chairperson

Attachments

Nil

Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

REPORT R7169

Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To include the costs associated with a cycle link between Anzac Park and the Maitai Path in the current 2015/2021 Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link (R7169); and

Approves the inclusion of the Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link as a new project in the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan.

3. Background

3.1 The Anzac Park to Maitai cycle link is included in the draft 2017/18 Annual Plan but is not included in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

3.2 There is a missing link between the St Vincent Street cycle route, which ends at Anzac Park, and the Maitai Shared path which this project aims to connect. This is shown on the map below.

3.3 The Anzac Park to Maitai Path missing link is especially important to the principle cycle network as it connects the Inland Railway Reserve Route with the Coastal Route. It also closes the last missing section of the recreationally based Great Taste Trail between Nelson and Kaiteriteri by making the connection to its starting point at the I-site.

4. Discussion

4.1 In order to seek NZTA co-investment, the Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link must be included in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

4.2 The capital cost of the project is unknown. The first step in the project lifecycle is to undertaken business case work followed by design to determine costs. $50,000 has been budgeted in the Draft 2017/18 Annual Plan to undertake this work in 2017/18.

5. Options

5.1 The following table summarises the two options available.

Option 1: Include Anzac Park to Maitai Path cycle link in RLTP
Advantages	· Enable application for co-investment from NZTA
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Do not include Anzac Park to Maitai Path cycle link in RLTP
Advantages	· Nil
Risks and Disadvantages	· Missed opportunity for co-investment/greater ratepayer contribution necessary to deliver project.

6. Conclusion

6.1 The Anzac Park to Maitai cycle link is currently not in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

6.2 In order to seek co investment the project needs to be included in the RLTP before officers can prepare a business Case seeking NZTA co-investment.

Kayleen Goldthorpe

Asset Engineer Transport

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Seeking investment from NZ Transport Agency fits with the purpose of Local Government by ensuring that costs that should be met by Central Government are.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The Draft 2017-18 Annual Plan includes the Anzac park to Maitai Path Cycle Link.

Provision of cycling facilities fits with the Long Term Plan and RLTP level of service to have 25% of all journeys to work by walking and cycling by 2018.

Provision of cycling Facilities fits with 2060 visions to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

3. Risk

This is a low risk decision as inclusion of the Anzac Park to Maitai Path Cycle Link in the RLTP invites co-investment from NZTA.

4. Financial impact

There is an investigation investment required to determine if this project is viable as detailed in section 3.2. This would identify the costs and benefits expected by investing in this cycle link.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This is not a significant decision under the Significance Policy with the RLTP as the change to the local road renewal budget would be less than the $5M threshold set in Appendix 2 section (v) of the RLTP.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No specific consultation with Maori has been carried out in preparing this report.

7. Delegations

The Regional Transport Committee has the responsibility for inclusion of new projects into the Land Transport Plan. The Regional Transport Committee has the power to decide this matter.

Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

REPORT R6845

LED Streetlight - Network Wide Conversion

1. Purpose of Report

To include the costs associated with a network wide Light Emitting Diode (LED) streetlight upgrade in the current 2015/2021 Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report LED Streetlight - Network Wide Conversion (R6845); and

Approves the inclusion of the network wide LED streetlight upgrade into the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

3. Background

3.1 Funding of the network wide LED streetlight upgrade was not included in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

3.2 Technology and cost have evolved enough to make LED streetlights the least whole of life cost, notwithstanding the significant capital expenditure required before operational savings can be realised. Solar technology is still unrealistic for streetlight applications.

3.3 NZTA will consider Business Case applications for co-funding LED upgrades.

3.4 Council currently spend $440,000 annually on power and $160,000 on maintenance of 4433 streetlights which have a replacement value of $34M (including poles, lanterns and the distribution network).

3.5 The 2017/18 draft Annual Plan includes $53,000 to begin the LED streetlight network wide conversion.

4. Discussion

4.1 In order to secure NZTA co-investment, the network wide LED streetlight upgrade must be included in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

4.2 NZTA may subsidise the LED upgrade programme in the order of 85%.

4.3 A qualification for NZTA funding is that the operational cost savings from the LED conversion are reflected in future reduced maintenance costs to them. The annual average maintenance and power cost saving is expected to be in the order of $100,000/year.

4.4 The capital cost of the LED upgrade is expected to be in the order of $2.4M. NZTA require delivery by June 2018 for the 85% subsidy.

4.5 The priority of this work is driven by NZTA and value for money opportunities from bulk purchases, possibly with other councils.

4.6 Nile Street and St Vincent Street already have LED lights.

5. Options

5.1 The following table summarises the two options available.

Option 1: Include LED Streetlight – Network Wide Conversion in RLTP to seek NZTA co-investment
Advantages	· Enable application for co-investment from NZTA
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Don’t include LED Streetlight – Network Wide Conversion in RLTP
Advantages	· Nil
Risks and Disadvantages	· Missed opportunity for co-investment.

6. Conclusion

6.1 Network wide LED streetlight upgrade will deliver operational savings and should be included in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

6.2 A Network wide LED upgrade Business Case should be prepared and submitted to NZTA seeking co-investment.

Kayleen Goldthorpe

Asset Engineer Transport

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

This activity fits with the purpose of local government by providing good quality public infrastructure in the most cost effective way and ensuring costs are met appropriately.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Fits with 2060 by reducing ongoing energy demands.

3. Risk

This is a low risk decision as inclusion of the LED Streetlight Network Wide Conversion in the RLTP invites co-investment from NZTA only.

4. Financial impact

There is an upfront capital programme required as detailed in section 4.4 to gain the benefits of a reduced operating and maintenance expenditure as detailed in 4.5.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No specific consultation with Maori has been carried out in preparing this report.

7. Delegations

The Regional Transport Committee has the responsibility for inclusion of new projects into the Land Transport Plan. The Regional Transport Committee has the power to decide this matter.

Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

REPORT R7249

Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To include the replacement cost of the Oldham Creek Bridge in the current 2015/2021 Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement (R7249); and

Approves the inclusion of Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement as a new project in the 2015-2021 Regional Land Transport Plan.

3. Background

3.1 Oldham Creek Bridge is located on Atawhai Crescent as shown on the following map.

3.2 Oldham Creek Bridge was identified as needing priority replacement following the detour implemented as part of the Corder Park sewerage pump station upgrade works where traffic was diverted off State Highway 6.

3.3 Half of the bridge was posted to 30% Class 1 and is currently operating as a single lane bridge with traffic control at a cost of around $1,700/month.

3.4 The replacement of the bridge was included under the Nelson City Council’s Minor Works programme for 2017 as the value of the replacement works was under the $300,000 NZTA threshold for minor works. As a result it was not included in the RLTP as a project.

3.5 Design has been completed and tenders sought. The tenders received have exceeded the $300,000 threshold and cannot be classified as minor safety works and need to be formally included in the current RLTP to gain NZTA funding. The higher tender prices reflect the market as a result of the Kaikoura earthquake.

3.6 The cost of replacement is $383,000.

4. Discussion

4.1 NZTA have indicated that they will look favourably on subsiding the additional cost provided the project gets added into the current RLTP and that is the purpose of the report.

4.2 The new structure will have a 100 year design life and complies with NZTA design standards. The design will:

· Have two lanes able to carry 100% Class 1, 50 MAX and HPMV loads without restriction and this will provide network resilience for future SH closures.

· Reduce flood potential of upstream properties.

· Include for pedestrian access.

4.3 If the bridge is not replaced substantial work (estimated at $200,000) will still be required to effect a solution and make the bridge safe and this would not realise the benefits detailed in 4.2 above and the outcome would be sub-optimal.

5. Options

5.1 The following table summarises the two options available.

Option 1: Include Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement in the current RLTP
Advantages	· Enable application for co-investment from NZTA
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Do not include Oldham Creek Bridge Replacement in the RLTP
Advantages	· Nil
Risks and Disadvantages	· Missed opportunity for co-investment/greater ratepayer contribution necessary to deliver project.

6. Conclusion

6.1 The bridge over Oldham Creek needs replacement and is currently not in the 2015-2021 RLTP.

6.2 In order to seek co-investment from NZTA, the project needs to be included in the RLTP.

Kayleen Goldthorpe

Asset Engineer Transport

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Seeking investment from NZ Transport Agency fits with the purpose of Local Government by ensuring that costs that should be met by Central Government are.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Community Outcomes - Efficient and cost effective infrastructure that meets current and future needs.

Nelson 2060 - The new bridge will contribute to connected and resilient community and resource consent conditions allow for improvement of the waterway environment on completion of the new bridge

3. Risk

This is a low risk decision as inclusion of the Oldham Creek Bridge replacement in the RLTP invites co-investment from NZTA.

4. Financial impact

There is an upfront capital cost associated with the bridge replacement as detailed in section 4.2 of the report to remove current temporary traffic control costs detailed in section 4.4 of the report. There is a cost associated with not replacing the bridge as detailed in section 4.5 of the report.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No specific consultation with Maori has been carried out in preparing this report.

7. Delegations

The Regional Transport Committee has the responsibility for inclusion of new projects into the Land Transport Plan. The Regional Transport Committee has the power to decide this matter.

Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

REPORT R7178

Common messaging for South Island Regional Land Transport Plans

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To adopt the “Common Messaging” prepared by the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group (Group) for inclusion in the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Common messaging for South Island Regional Land Transport Plans (R7178) and its attachment (A1732359); and

Notes the amended agreed Collaboration Charter (A1732359); and

Approves inclusion of the “Common Messaging” agreed by the South Island Regional Transport Committee Group Chairs in the Regional Land Transport Plan.

3. Background

3.1 The South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group (Group) first met on 30 May 2016 where it was agreed that collaboration was required across South Island Regional Transport Committees particularly for freight and tourism.

3.2 On 4 July 2016 the Nelson Regional Transport Committee resolved

AND THAT the Committee support participating in the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Working Group

3.3 The Group again met on 22 August 2016, to assess the case for greater collaboration and this included joint advocacy around the upcoming Government Policy Statement on Transport 2018 (GPS), the development of a collaborative charter and to agree to develop “Common Messages” for all South Island Regional Land Transport Plans which is the subject of this report.

3.4 On Friday 9 September 2016 two of the chairs also met with the Minister of Transport Simon Bridges in Invercargill, who expressed a desire to remain in contact with the Group.

3.5 The Group met again on 20 March 2017 to discuss the proposed shared programme of work and engage with the Ministry of Transport on the recently released GPS. The Deputy Chair of the Nelson RTC and a Council officer attended that meeting.

3.6 The Collaborative Charter developed on the 22 August 2016 and endorsed by the Group was updated at the 20 March 2017 meeting to include a statement on resilience and security (refer to Attachment 1).

4. Discussion

4.1 RTC officials across the South Island have worked together to develop the draft “Common Messages” for Chairs to discuss and endorse, subject to any changes, at their meeting on 20 March 2017.

4.2 The draft Common message is presented below and any changes made on the 20 March 2017 will be tabled at this RTC meeting:

Draft common messaging for South Island Regional Land Transport Plans

South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs recognise that South Island regional economies and communities are interconnected, with critical freight and visitor journeys crossing regions, and extending along and across the South Island, and connecting to both Stewart Island and the North Island.

The South Island has a relatively small and dispersed population of around one million. Christchurch is the largest urban area and is centrally located, and there are several other main centres located throughout the island. Small communities are often at a significant distance from main centres, and depend on the products transported to their locality every day, as well as the ability to move products to be processed, distributed and exported. This makes the resilience of transport linkages between South Island communities of critical importance.

The efficient movement of both goods and people is essential to the South Island’s economy, as well as the social and economic wellbeing of its residents. The majority of freight is moved by road, with substantial freight growth being projected. Freight demand in the South Island is currently driven by a mix of primary sector and export growth, as well as population change. There has also been significant growth in the tourism sector, with the South Island recognised as a tourism destination in its own right. These critical freight and tourism journeys do not stop at regional boundaries – they extend across the South Island.

In this context, the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group was established with the purpose of significantly improving transport outcomes in the South Island, to help drive our economy and better serve our communities, through collaboration and integration. Chairs agree that they can make greater progress toward realising common goals if they work together.

The three key collaborative priorities for the Group are to:

1. Identify and facilitate integrated multi-modal freight and visitor journey improvements (including walking and cycling journeys) across the South Island.

2. Advocate for a funding approach which enables innovative and integrated multi-modal (road, rail, air, sea) solutions to transport problems, and small communities with a low ratepayer base to maintain and enhance their local transport network.

3. Identify and assess options for improving the resilience and security of the transport network across the South Island, as well as vital linkages to the North Island.

4.3 It is proposed to make this change as part of the three year statutory review of the Regional Land Transport Plan that must be completed in the first half of 2018. Group Chairs were in agreement that this common messaging be included through a combined foreword in the respective Regional Land Transport Plans.

5. Options

5.1 There are two options available to Council, either;

5.1.1 Adopt the Common Messaging prepared by the South Island Regional Transport Committee Group Chairs for inclusion in the RLTP or;

5.1.2 Do not adopt the Common Messaging.

6. Conclusion

6.1 South Island regions share many of the same transport issues and opportunities. The potential for South Island regions to influence central government policy and drive change across the network is diluted by operating independently.

6.2 South Island Regional Transport Committees and their Chairs have expressed a will to work together to more effectively achieve shared goals and this Council’s RTC has endorsed been part of the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group.

6.3 That Group has an agreed Collaboration Charter, has met with the Minister of Transport and agreed to develop Common Messaging as detailed in the body of this report.

6.4 This Common Messaging will be discussed at the next Regional Group meeting on the 20 March 2017 with the aim that this be included in the three year statutory review of the Regional Land Transport Plan.

Alec Louverdis

Group Manager Infrastructure

Attachments

Attachment 1: A1732359 South Island Inter-Regional Transport Charter ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Having common messaging with our South Island peers, sharing resources, knowledge and research will assist Council in meeting the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The combined Top of the South portion of the RLTP acknowledges the key journey routes that connect the region to the south via State Highway 1, 6 and 65. The recommendation to collaborate more inclusively with our South Island neighbours will assist in understanding the freight and tourism issues on our key journey routes to the south.

The recommendation aligns with the community outcome ‘Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement’. This decision is not inconsistent with any other previous Council decisions.

3. Risk

This is a low risk decision as inclusion of the Common Messaging highlights South Island wide collaboration and advocacy only.

4. Financial impact

The financial impact of inclusion of the Common Messaging in the Regional Land Transport Plan is accommodated within the budget for the statutory review of that Plan. The long term benefits and costs of participating in the SI group chairs group has not been assessed but it has been resolved that the benefit from participating in the group will be the subject of a report to the Regional Transport Committee in 2018.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This is not a significant decision under the significance policy within the RLTP, however a special consultative procedure will take place when the three year statutory review of the Regional Land Transport Plan takes place.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Māori have not been specifically consulted on this Common Messaging

7. Delegations

The Regional Transport Committee has the responsibility for developing the Regional Land Transport Plan that the Common Messaging would be part of. The Regional Transport Committee has the power to decide this matter.

Regional Transport Committee

27 March 2017

REPORT R7248

Submission on Draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve for signing the submission on the Government Policy Statement on Transport (GPS), as prepared by the South Island Regional Transport Committee Group Chairs (Chairs).

1.2 To delegate development of a local addendum (if necessary) to the Chair’s submission to the Mayor and Chair of the Regional Transport Committee.

2. Recommendation

That the Committee

Receives the report Submission on Draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (R7248) and its attachments (A1721106, A1721112 and A1727792); and

3. Background

3.1 South Island Regional Transport Committees and their Chairs have expressed a will to work together to more effectively achieve shared goals and this Council’s RTC has endorsed been part of the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group.

3.2 That Group has agreed a Collaboration Charter, and has met with the Minister of Transport to discuss the intention of the Group and the GPS.

3.3 If the GPS submission is agreed by Chairs on the 20 March 2017, it is proposed that Council be a signatory to that submission.

3.4 The GPS is the government’s main statutory lever to ensure investment in land transport reflects government priorities over the ten years from 1 July 2018.

3.5 The Minister for Transport is required by the Land Transport Management Act 2003 to issue a GPS every three years to identify the objectives, direction and strategy for spending of over $3 Billion through the National Land Transport Fund each year. The draft GPS was issued on 22 February 2017and is open for formal engagement until 31 March 2017. The GPS at a glance in included as Attachment 1, with the full GPS as Attachment 2.

3.6 The Chairs Group first met on 30 May 2016 and then again on 22 August 2016, to assess the case for greater collaboration.

3.7 On 4 July 2016 the Nelson Regional Transport Committee resolved

AND THAT the Committee support participating in the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Working Group

3.8 The Group met again on 20 March 2017 to discuss the proposed shared programme of work and engage with the Ministry of Transport on the recently released GPS. The Deputy Chair of the RTC along with officer support attended that meeting.

4. Discussion

4.1 The draft 2018 GPS continues the approach started in 2009 with the focus areas as stated by the Ministry of Transport as follows:

Putting the right infrastructure in place to support high growth urban areas

Supporting the regions – for New Zealand to thrive we need our local economies to thrive and we want to support regional freight and tourism movements while increasing the resilience of critical regional routes

Improving how freight moves on our network by focussing on high quality and resilient connections.

Resilience - We’re also focussing on ensuring that our network is resilient in the face of shocks and challenges – like responding to earthquakes or catering for increasing numbers of tourists using our transport network. We want to minimise the risk of transport disruption.

4.2 RTC officials from across the South Island have worked together to develop a submission for the Chairs to consider.

4.3 The draft submission is attached as Attachment 3 and this draft will be discussed at the 20 March meeting. Any changes to this draft will be circulated to members of the committee as soon as possible after the 20 March meeting.

5. Options

5.1 There are three options available to Council;

5.1.1 Option 1 - Adopt the Submission prepared by the Chairs group with a local addendum, if necessary, to highlight local issues: or

5.1.2 Option 2 - Prepare its own submission; or

5.1.3 Option 3 - Make no submission.

5.2 Officers support option 1.

6. Conclusion

6.1 The potential for South Island regions to influence central government policy and drive change across the network is diluted by operating independently. The South Island Group share many of the same transport issues/opportunities and a joint submission on the GPS is recommended.

Alec Louverdis

Group Manager Infrastructure

Attachments

Attachment 1: GPS at a Glance (A1721106) ⇩

Attachment 2: Full GPS (A1721112) ⇩

Attachment 3: South Island RTC chairs draft submission on GPS 2018 - 16Mar2017 (A1727792) ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

A common submission with our South Island peers on the GPS will assist Council in meeting the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

3. Risk

This is a low risk decision as a joint submission on the GPS only highlights South Island wide advocacy.

4. Financial impact

The financial impact of making a submission is included within business as usual budgets. The long term benefits and costs of participating in the SI group chairs group has not been assessed but it has been resolved that the benefit from participating in the group will be the subject of a report to the Regional Transport Committee in 2018.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This is not a significant decision under the significance policy within the RLTP.

6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Māori have not been specifically consulted on making a submission on the GPS.

7. Delegations

The Regional Transport Committee (RTC) currently has the delegated power to recommend matters relating to submissions to Council. Changes to the current Delegations Register are proposed via a report to the 23 March Council meeting allowing the RTC to approve submissions without having to go to Council. If this is approved then the RTC will be able to make that decision.

Attachment 3 – as at 16 March 2017

X March 2017

GPS Policy Team

Ministry of Transport

PO Box 3175

Wellington 6140

GPS2018@transport.govt.nz

Dear sir or madam

South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group - Submission on draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018

1. The South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group (“the Chairs”) welcomes the opportunity to make a submission on the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018 (GPS).

2. Our key points are summarised in this letter, with a short attachment setting out our primary submission in more detail.

Overview of the South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group

3. Membership comprises the Regional Transport Committee Chairs for all South Island Regional Transport Committees, that is: Southland, Otago, West Coast, Canterbury, Marlborough, Tasman and Nelson City. The Chair is X and the Deputy Chair is X. Environment Canterbury is the secretariat.

4. The Chairs have come together on the basis that South Island regions have a common view of transport-related problems and opportunities, and will have a significantly greater impact working together. Key focus areas for the Chairs are shared advocacy, critical freight and visitor journeys, resilience, improved data collection, and shared resources.

5. Chairs are supported by the South Island RTC Officials Group.

A positive step forward

6. Chairs wrote to the Minister of Transport on 1 September 2016 seeking in particular:

· recognition of the role that transport plays in enhancing tourism through greater support for tourism and investment in tourism corridors

· greater flexibility in the GPS to adopt the most effective solution to transport problems, including multi-modal transport solutions.

7. Chairs would like to acknowledge the positive steps taken in the draft GPS to provide a basis for improving visitor journeys and the infrastructure which supports those journeys, as well as promoting the efficient and effective movement of freight. Chairs also welcome the emphasis in the draft GPS on improving both accessibility and resilience, as these are critical issues across the South Island.

8. Chairs also strongly support the initiative to enhance regional economic growth through the new Regional Improvements Activity Class. This will give NZTA greater flexibility in approving transport projects outside of the main metros, and will have a positive impact on smaller South Island communities. Chairs welcome the possibility of reducing the local funding contribution, as this is likely to be critical to progressing projects that fall under this Class.

The GPS needs to signal how a One Transport System Approach will be achieved

9. The primary point that Chairs would like to make relates to the One Transport System Approach signalled in the draft GPS.

10. This new approach has the potential to become a significant step toward a more connected, multi-modal transport system. To this end Chairs recommend that:

· the Ministry of Transport and NZTA share responsibility for co-ordinating and delivering the One Transport System approach

· a strategy is developed to implement the new approach

· options for a new funding approach that better integrates planning and investment decisions across modes be developed and considered in the longer-term as part of this work.

11. These components should all be signalled in the final GPS, to provide clarity and assurance about the seriousness of the Government’s commitment to this new approach.

12. Chairs consider that the South Island RTC Officials Group would be well placed to provide advice and input into the development of a strategy, and to draw on local government and private sector connections in the South Island to do so.

13. More information about this point of the Chair’s submission is provided in the attachment.

Greater emphasis on transport options as an important component of current and future demand for access to opportunities

14. Chairs also consider that support for appropriate transport choice needs greater recognition in the GPS as an important part of addressing current and future demand for access to economic and social opportunities.

15. The availability of effective transport alternatives is a core component of a multi-modal transport system, whether this be good quality walkways and footpaths that enable connectivity (particularly in light of the ageing population), reliable and efficient public transport services that reduce dependency on the single occupancy vehicles that congest urban centres, or wider consideration of the intermodal role of rail and coastal shipping for resilient freight journeys.

16. There is a risk that the GPS will otherwise encourage a focus on capacity building at the expense of managing demand through the use of alternatives and travel demand where these would better support access to opportunities.

Implementation of the GPS

17. Effective implementation of the GPS will be critical to achieving the desired outcomes. Past experience has shown that fully aligning NZTA’s Investment Assessment Framework with the GPS can be challenging. Misalignment has resulted in NZTA staff having to find convoluted ways of funding the best solution to a particular problem, as well as NZTA funding decisions being challenged. The Chairs consider it particularly important that NZTA’s Investment Assessment Framework factors in the new GPS provisions on tourism.

18. To this end, the Chairs suggest that:

· the Ministry of Transport takes an ongoing role in ensuring that NZTA’s Investment Assessment Framework will deliver on the GPS

· The South Island RTC Officials Group helps test the efficacy of the NZTA decision-making framework for the sections on tourism in the final GPS.

Timing of the GPS

19. The timing of the issue of the GPS and the adoption of the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) is an ongoing problem for local government. Councils, through their long-term plans commit to projects and a level of service to be delivered to their communities. However, the timing of the GPS and NLTP does not align with local government processes in adopting long-term plans under the Local Government Act 2002. Any changes to the NLTP have a direct impact on rates revenue, which is used to match any shortfall. Any consequential changes to long-term plans need to occur prior to public consultation on long-term plans.

20. Aligning the timing of these processes would provide certainty around central government financial assistance prior to public consultation on long-term plans. It would also prevent the costly consultation required when there is a significant variation to the long-term plan following the release of the NLTP, or the issues that arise where there is a twelve month delay in adjusting rates to make up a shortfall in funding.

21. Chairs recommend that, as a matter of priority, options for aligning timing be developed so an enabling amendment can be considered in the next appropriate legislative vehicle. The South Island RTC Officials Group is available to provide further advice on the problems being experienced and on potential solutions.

Yours sincerely

Chair, South Island Regional Transport Committee Chairs Group

Attachment: Additional information about submission on One Transport System Approach

The Chairs consider the proposed one transport system approach and the New Zealand Transport Agency’s role in co-ordinating and integrating land transport investment, a positive step toward more integrated multi-modal transport planning and infrastructure investment. To help make sure this proposal will be effective, the Chairs propose the following high level approach, which should be signalled in GPS 2018:

· NZTA should have shared responsibility with the Ministry of Transport for co-ordinating the One Transport System Approach, and both agencies should work with local government and private sector stakeholders to do so. This would better reflect the Ministry’s important role in and responsibilities for transport policy across all modes, and also allow for a broader conversation to occur amongst key transport partners across all modes (road (including active and public transport), rail, air and sea), particularly given NZTA’s historic focus on roads.

· More detail is needed upfront in GPS 2018 on the objectives of the One Transport System approach. The One Transport System Approach should be focused on the big picture, not only on efficient administrative practices such as integrated ticketing.

· A strategy is needed to guide this work, and the development of this strategy by the Ministry of Transport and the New Zealand Transport Agency, in partnership with the transport sector, should be signalled in GPS 2018 as part of the Minister’s expectations.

· The longer-term, the GPS needs to support multi-modal transport outcomes, by removing incentives for local government to focus exclusively on road transport solutions. As such, there is a continuing need for a funding model that supports the adoption of the most effective solution to transport problems. Options should be explored as part of the proposed strategy to guide the implementation of the One Transport System Approach.