33RD MEETING OF THE CANTERBURY REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE

TO THE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE

Commissioner Rex Williams (Chairperson) Canterbury Regional Council

Mayor Angus McKay Ashburton District Council Mayor David Ayers Waimakariri District Council Cr Darryl Nelson Cr Phil Clearwater Christchurch City Council Mayor Craig Rowley Waimate District Council Mayor Lianne Dalziel Cr Peter McIlraith Commissioner Tom Canterbury Regional Council Mr Jim Harland NZ Transport Agency Lambie Cr Vince Daly Hurunui District Council Mr Philip Wareing Economic Advisor Mayor W Dalley Cr Derrick Millton Kaikoura District Council Prof Simon Kingham Environmental Sustainability Advisor Cr James Leslie Mackenzie District Council Dr Anna Stevenson Public Health Advisor Cr Sarah Walters Selwyn District Council Inspector Al Stewart Safety Advisor Cr John Morten Cr Kerry Stevens Timaru District Council

A meeting of the Committee will be held on

Monday 30 March 2015 commencing at 1pm (a light lunch will be available before the meeting)

VENUE: Selwyn District Council Chamber 2 Norman Kirk Drive, Rolleston

BUSINESS: As per Order Paper attached. Agendas are available on the Environment Canterbury website three days prior to the date of the meeting: http://ecan.govt.nz/news-and-notices/minutes/Pages/Default.aspx

Bill Bayfield CHIEF EXECUTIVE ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY

CANTERBURY REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE

ORDER PAPER

1. APOLOGIES

2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

3. MINUTES OF MEETING – 1 DECEMBER 2014 3

4. MATTERS ARISING

5. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

MATTERS FOR COMMITTEE DECISION

6. REGIONAL LAND TRANSPORT PLAN 2015 8

MATTERS FOR INFORMATION

7. ACTIVE AND PASSENGER TRANSPORT WORKING GROUP REPORT 146

8. REGIONAL ROAD SAFETY WORKING GROUP REPORT 154

9. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICERS GROUP REPORT 160

10. QUESTIONS

11. NEXT MEETING – 29 May 2014

12. CLOSURE

2

UNCONFIRMED CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL

MINUTES OF THE 32nd MEETING OF THE CANTERBURY REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COMFORT HOTEL BENVENUE, 16-22 EVANS ST, TIMARU ON MONDAY 1 DECEMBER 2014 COMMENCING AT 11:00AM

1. APOLOGIES

2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

3. MINUTES OF MEETING – 8 SEPTEMBER 2014

4. MATTERS ARISING

5. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

MATTER FOR COMMITTEE DECISION

6. REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

7. DRAFT REGIONAL LAND TRANSPORT PLAN 2015

MATTERS FOR INFORMATION

8. MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT – PROGRESS ON GPS

9. ACTIVE AND PASSENGER TRANSPORT WORKING GROUP REPORT 10. REGIONAL ROAD SAFETY WORKING GROUP REPORT 11. QUESTIONS 12. NEXT MEETING – 30 MARCH 2015 13. CLOSURE

PRESENT

Commissioner Rex Williams (Chairperson), Commissioner Tom Lambie, Mayor David Ayers, Mayor Angus McKay, Cr Vince Daly, Cr Darryl Nelson, Mr Jim Harland, Mayor Craig Rowley, Cr Kerry Stevens, Mr Philip Wareing, Senior Sgt Glen Nalder, Cr Derrick Millton, Cr M Morton and Cr James Leslie

IN ATTENDANCE Kate McKenzie (Cardno Consulting), Stuart Woods, Steve Higgs and Ian McCabe (NZTA), Andrew Dalziel (Ashburton District Council), Andrew Dixon (Timaru District Council), Ken Stevenson (Waimakariri District Council), Todd Moyle (KiwiRail), Richard Holland (Christchurch City Council), Andrew Mazy (Selwyn District Council) and Suzy Ratahi (McKenzie District Council).

Environment Canterbury Richard Ball (Project Leader – RLT Plan), Vanessa Scott (Programme Manager), Len Fleete (Strategy Advisor Land Transport) and Therese Davel (Senior Administration Officer)

1

3 UNCONFIRMED WELCOME

Commissioner Rex Williams welcomed everyone to the meeting. He also mentioned that a representative from the Ministry of Transport will brief the meeting on the Government Policy Statement.

1. APOLOGIES

Received from Cr Sarah Walters, Prof Simon Kingham, Dr Anna Stevenson, Inspector Al Steward and Cr Phil Clearwater. Cr K Stevens / Mayor D Ayers CARRIED

2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

None.

3. MINUTES OF MEETING – 8 September 2014

Resolved

That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 July 2014 subject to the following correction:  Cr John Morten was not present be confirmed as a true and accurate record and be adopted. Mayor A McKay / Mayor C Rowley CARRIED

4. MATTERS ARISING

None.

5. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

None.

MATTERS FOR DECISION

6. REGIONAL TRANSPORT COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

Mr Len Fleete presented the amended Terms of Reference referring to the main changes on pages 26 – 27. He suggested changing the quorum from nine to seven members to be in line with Local Government Act regulations.

Resolved

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee adopts the new Canterbury Regional Transport Committee Terms of Reference 2014 amended to reflect a quorum of seven members. Mayor C Rowley / Cr K Stevens CARRIED

2

4 UNCONFIRMED 7. DRAFT REGIONAL LAND TRANSPORT PLAN 2015

Richard Ball presented the draft plan. He noted the objectives as being to address current and future demand; keeping roads increasingly free from death and serious injury; supporting earthquake recovery; to be resilient and supporting long-term sustainability and to ensure that investing in land transport was efficient.

Richard mentioned some examples of improvements with high strategic alignment. These included the Waimakariri Bridge cycleway; 16 intersection safety projects in Christchurch; 3 State highway safety projects; 13 network improvement projects; the Rolleston CSM2 intersection upgrade and the Lyttelton Tunnel deluge system.

It was agreed that a subcommittee would review the draft plan before the end of the year and circulate a final document to the rest of the Committee which will be the public document for submissions. Consultation will open in January 2015. The same subcommittee will be the hearing committee for submissions. The members of the subcommittee are Mayor David Ayers, Cr Derrick Millton, Cr Kerry Stevens, Mr Jim Harland, Cr Phil Clearwater and Commissioner Rex Williams. The TOG would also convene before the end of the year to discuss the draft plan and advise the subcommittee.

Resolved

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee: 1. Approve the draft Regional Land Transport Plan for consultation; 2. Appoint a hearing panel to hear submissions on the draft RLTP, consisting of Mayor David Ayers, Cr Derrick Millton, Cr Kerry Stevens, Mr Jim Harland, Cr Phil Clearwater and Commissioner Rex Williams; 3. Delegate authority to a subcommittee of the Regional Transport Committee to amend the draft strategy if required prior to public consultation. Mayor A McKay / Cr J Leslie CARRIED

MATTERS FOR INFORMATION Items 9 and 10 were taken first as the Ministry of Transport representative (Item 8) was delayed. 9. ACTIVE AND PASSENGER TRANSPORT WORKING GROUP REPORT

Kate Mackenzie presented the report and noted significant discussions taking place on workplace travel planning and providing facilities for cycling in greater Christchurch. Kate mentioned that the monitoring report appended to the report had a few grey areas as the ECan Annual survey results have not yet been received. Of particular interest she mentioned that NZTA now has a national cycle manager with $100M being allocated to cycle infrastructure in NZ.

Resolved

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee receives the report of the Active and Passenger Transport Working Group. Mayor A McKay / Mr J Harland CARRIED

10. REGIONAL ROAD SAFETY WORKING GROUP REPORT

Mayor David Ayers and Kate Mackenzie presented this item noting the emphasis on road safety across the region. The Working Group finalised the Canterbury Regional Road 3

5 UNCONFIRMED

Safety Implementation Plan which included a number of strategic actions, and operational actions. The Working Group monitor regional road crash statistics for fatal and serious crashes and the trend report showed a slight increase in the total number in the 2013/14 FY (369 DSI) compared to the previous FY (322 DSI), but a decrease in the last 12 months in cycle and pedestrian serious and fatal crashes.

Kate agreed to provide more in-depth analysis of crash data, specifically identifying active transport crash risks related to state highways vs local roads at the next meeting. Mayor Ayers mentioned that the Road Safety Coordinators expressed concern about a lack of consistent support from road safety partners. Jim Harland noted that the NZTA were looking at establishing a regional strategic road safety position to coordinate road safety delivery in a strategic manner. It was agreed there was a variable emphasis on road safety across the region which needed to be reinforced as a regional priority.

Cr Kerry Stevens mentioned the new drink drive limits and 1km tolerance being introduced with general support shown across the Committee. The question was raised about what the RTC were doing to support this. The police noted there were no practical changes to how roads were policed although there was a change noted in the way speed tolerance was discussed throughout.

Resolved

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee receives the report of the Regional Road Safety Working Group. Mayor D Ayers / Commissioner T Lambie CARRIED 8. MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT GPS Mr Gareth Chaplin from the Ministry of Transport briefed the Committee on developments with the GPS. He provided background to the GPS 2015 noting three enduring priorities i.e. Economic Growth and Productivity, Road Safety; and Value for Money.

Gareth mentioned examples of progress in Canterbury which includes the Southern motorway, Lyttelton tunnel safety retrofit and the approval of $120 million for the public transport programme to increase patronage following the earthquakes. Under the draft GPS 2015 the total funding available to be allocated will be about $3.4 billion per annum in 2015/16 rising to $4.4 billion per annum in 2024/25. Cycling and the benefits, both from congestion and health points of view, were discussed. Rex Williams proposed that the Committee sets aside time to discuss cycling in more detail in future meetings.

Gareth noted the Ministry will aim to have the final GPS public before the end of the year and prior to the RLTP being released as the RLTP should be consistent with the GPS.

Resolved

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee receives the presentation from the Ministry of Transport update on the Government Policy Statement. Commissioner R Williams / Mayor D Ayers CARRIED

The rest of the agenda items were taken in order.

11. QUESTIONS

There were no questions.

4

6 UNCONFIRMED ADDITIONAL MATTERS

Rex Williams gave Jim Harland from NZTA the opportunity to update the Committee on any issues for information. Mr Harland briefed the Committee on:  one road network classification;  data availability;  finalised FAR; and  the Public Transport Operating Model.

12. 2015 MEETING DATES

Vanessa Scott presented the report proposing 2015 meeting dates for the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee. Recent discussions have been held about better aligning the meeting schedules of the various fora that might address transport issues. The Canterbury Mayoral Forum will provide direction in this regard at its next meeting scheduled for 5 December and it may mean that RTC meetings could take place on the same day as the Canterbury Mayoral Forum.

Resolved

1. That the first meeting of the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee takes place on Monday 30th March, 1-3pm to adopt the Regional Land Transport Plan. 2. That the proposed tentative dates for the remainder of 2015 be noted as Friday 29th May, Friday 28th August and Friday 20th November subject to decisions taken at the Canterbury Mayoral Forum on 5 December 2014. Commissioner R Williams / Mayor A McKay CARRIED

13. CLOSURE

The meeting closed at 1pm

CONFIRMED

Date Chairperson

5

7 Canterbury Regional Transport Committee – 30 March 2015

AGENDA ITEM NO: 6 SUBJECT MATTER: ADOPTION OF THE CANTERBURY REGIONAL LAND TRANSPORT PLAN

RLTP MATTER: YES REPORT BY: Richard Ball, Project Leader – Regional Land Transport Plan Review

ENDORSED BY: Steve Gibling, Programme Manager, Environment Canterbury

PURPOSE

For the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee to recommend to the Regional Council the adoption of the Canterbury Regional Land Plan 2015-2025.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That, in relation to the Regional Land Transport Plan, the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee:

a) Recommends to the Regional Council the adoption of the attached Canterbury Regional Land Transport programme 2012-22; b) Authorises the Chair of the Regional Transport Committee to approve any minor amendments and corrections prior to publication.

And that consequential to the RLTP process the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee:

c) Recommends that further work is undertaken as a matter of priority on the following matters: i. Further analysis to enhance the monitoring and performance indicators ii. Review of safety priorities and associated actions to ensure issues raised in submissions are adequately addressed iii. Review of projects within the Plan following completion of council Long Term Plans, with any changes required being referred back to the Committee if required iv. On-going coordination of the development of the Plan and associated projects be undertaken as a continuous process to reduce conflicts with future Long Term Plan processes and provide for greater collaboration in subsequent iterations of the Plan.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Canterbury Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 (marked up); 2. Draft Canterbury Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 – Hearings Decisions.

8 Canterbury Regional Transport Committee – 30 March 2015

BACKGROUND

At its December 2014 meeting, the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee approved a Draft Canterbury Regional Land Transport Plan 2015 – 2025 and delegated authority to a subcommittee to approve any further amendments required prior to public consultation.

This paper outlines the key points surrounding the consultation process and subsequent hearings process that was conducted by the nominated members of the Regional Transport Committee who sat on the Hearings Panel.

Attachment 1 to this report outlines the recommendations of the Hearings Panel to the full Regional Transport Committee and the reasons for their decisions. Attachment 2 includes a copy of the revised text and tables following the Committee decisions. it should be noted that the page references in this report refer to the consultation draft of the RLTP rather than the marked up version attached to this report.

CONSULTATION AND HEARINGS PROCESS

The Draft Canterbury Regional Land Transport Plan 2015 – 2025 was publicly notified on 21 January 2015 and with submissions closing on 20 February 2015. At total of 53 submissions were received, 10 of whom wished to be heard at the Hearing.

Hearings were held at Rolleston on Wednesday, 4 March 2015. An Officer Report, summarising the submissions received, together with evaluations and officer recommendations was circulated to the Panel and submitters prior to the hearings.

Deliberations were conducted following the hearings, on the same day. These deliberations involved a thorough review of the Officer Report, its evaluations and recommended changes, together with any further information provided by submitters at the hearing.

A Hearing Decisions report and marked up version of the Plan was prepared by Officers and circulated to the Panel for confirmation. This report will be provided to all submitters and posted on the Environment Canterbury web page, along with the final RLTP document.

Key matters raised by submitters were:  A stronger emphasis on safety and accessibility, including the adoption of the Swedish Vision Zero and greater emphasis on particularly vulnerable users such as people with limited or no vision and horse riders  The need for further analysis to enhance the monitoring and performance indicators  Requests for a number of projects to be added or amended, particularly from the NZ Transport Agency and the Christchurch City Council.  Greater priority for some work programmes, particularly those associated with walking, cycling, public transport and the improvement of routes through Timaru.  Twenty-three submissions sought inclusion of a bike share scheme. This was not able to be included as it was not proposed by an approved authority as required in the Land Transport Management Act 2003.

Where possible and appropriate, the matters raised by submitters were included within the revised Plan. Some matters, most noteably the sections on monitoring and performance indicators and safety require considerable further analysis and no substantive changes were able to be incorporated within this iteration of the Plan.

The timing of the Plan is determined by legislation and the directions issued by the NZ Transport Agency. This does not align well with the Long Term Plans of councils prepared

9 Canterbury Regional Transport Committee – 30 March 2015 under the Local Government Act. It is recommended that development of the Plan be looked at as a continuous process, rather than a once every three years, to reduce the conflict that arises between these two processes. Associated with this is an opportunity to be more proactive in using the development of the Plan to better align and coordinate future projects to the objectives and outcomes sought within the Plan.

10 Canterbury Regional Transport Committee – 30 March 2015

PROCESS FROM THIS POINT FORWARD

The process now is for the Regional Transport Committee to recommend to the Regional Council the adoption of the Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025. This item will be scheduled on the agenda of the Regional Council meeting in mid-April.

The Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 will then be submitted to the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) by 30th April, as required under the Land Transport Management Act (LTMA).

Printed copies of the document will be prepared and posted to the organisations named in the LTMA, to ensure statutory compliance. NZTA will consider Regional Land Transport Plans from across the country and issue its National Land Transport Programme.

Prior to the publication of the document and its supporting appendices, a through proof read will be undertaken to correct any final typographical errors, as well as a review of its final presentational quality. As a result, minor consequential changes may take place but will not significantly alter the wording or emphasis of the document. In terms of graphical layout and presentation, the format adopted for the Draft document will be carried through into the final version of the document.

11 Item 6 Attachment 1

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025

Draft for Consultation January 2015 March 2015

12 FOREWORD

Canterbury’s transport network has been built over generations. Today it provides us with access to economic and social opportunities; however, change is constant and economic growth and our changing population demand ongoing investment to meet the future transport needs of the region.

Safety, resilience and the long-term sustainability of our transport choices must also be addressed. These perennial issues are and will remain a key part of providing for the future.

This Plan, prepared by the Regional Transport Committee (RTC), outlines the current state of our regional transport network and the challenges we face now and in the future. The priorities reflect the context of regional, national and international events and trends. The programmes and projects in the Plan are the regional responses to these challenges and include actions for Canterbury’s regional and district councils and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZ Transport Agency).

The Committee invites your feedback on this draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

Rex Williams Chairman, Canterbury Regional Transport Committee

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 13 2 CONTENTS

Foreword ...... 2 Introduction ...... 4 Framework for the Plan ...... 4 The Canterbury region ...... 6 Transport demand ...... 98 Future transport challenges for the region ...... 1110 Objectives and policies ...... 1817 Statement of priorities for 2015 to 2025 ...... 2221 Expenditure and revenue forecasts ...... 444342 Monitoring and performance indicators ...... 494846 Appendices ...... 575653 Appendix 1: Regional programme details ...... 575653 Appendix 2: Significance policy ...... 676663 Appendix 3: Assessment of compliance with LTMA section 14 ...... 696865 Appendix 4: Assessment of the relationship of Police activities to the RLTP...... 706966 Appendix 5: Summary of consultation ...... 717067 Appendix 6: Legislative requirements ...... 727168 Appendix 7: Glossary ...... 767572

FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1: The Canterbury region and key transport routes ...... 6 Figure 2: 2013/2014 expenditure by activity ...... 7 Figure 3: 2013/2014 expenditure by organisation ...... 87 Figure 4: Deaths and serious injuries from road crashes in Canterbury ...... 1514 Table 1: Priority 1 expenditure ...... 2423 Figure 5: Christchurch RONS programme ...... 2827 Table 2: Priority 2 expenditure ...... 2928 Table 3: Priority 3 projects ...... 3332 Table 4: Regionally significant priority 4 projects ...... 414039 Figure 6: Expenditure by approved organisation ...... 444342 Figure 7: Expenditure by activity class ...... 444342 Table 5: Ten-year expenditure by organisation and activity ...... 464544 Table 6: Ten-year expenditure from National Land Transport Fund ...... 474645 Table 7: Outcomes and performance measures ...... 494846 Table 8: Project information by approved authority ...... 575653

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 14 3 INTRODUCTION

This draft RLTP outlines the challenges, objectives and priorities for land transport in Canterbury. It has been prepared by the RTC, a committee of Environment Canterbury, with representatives from all Canterbury district councils and the NZ Transport Agency. The future investment priorities for public agencies providing transport infrastructure and services in the Canterbury region are described within the Plan.

A summary of the framework for preparing the Plan, the current situation in Canterbury, and estimated future transport demand are included in sections two, three and four, respectively. Analysis identified six key challenges for the next ten years. These issues are outlined in section five and informed the development of the objectives and priorities in sections six and seven. The first priority is maintaining existing infrastructure and services; in the case of Christchurch, this includes repair of earthquake damaged roads. Improvement projects are then ranked as priority 2, 3 or 4, according to their alignment with the future challenges and objectives outlined in this Plan.

Further information on expenditure, monitoring and other matters are included in subsequent sections and appendices.

The RTC is now seeking feedback on this draft and the transport priorities for the region. Submissions must be lodged with Environment Canterbury by 4.00pm, Friday 20 February 2015. Further details are outlined in the attached submission form and on the Environment Canterbury website.

The consultation on this Plan is the only opportunity for public submissions on the NZ Transport Agency’s 2015-2017 state highway programme for Canterbury.

FRAMEWORK FOR THE PLAN

This RLTP is prepared by the RTC in accordance with the 2013 amendments to the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA). The Plan replaces the 2012 Regional Land Transport Statement (RLTS) as the statutory transport plan for the region, although the RLTS continues to provide the 30-year vision and direction.

The activities of the nine districts in the Canterbury region north of the Waitaki River are covered by this Plan. It excludes Waitaki District as the portion of this district sitting within the Canterbury region is covered by the Otago Regional Land Transport Plan.

The activities of the NZ Transport Agency and Environment Canterbury are included in the Plan, along with a small amount of expenditure by the Department of Conservation at Aoraki Mt Cook. The role of the New Zealand Police is outlined in Appendix 4, but Police expenditure is determined nationally and is not shown in this Plan. Although rail is a significant part of our land transport infrastructure it is not included in this Plan, because investment is subject to the commercial criteria of KiwiRail New Zealand and the Government and is not part of the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF).

Canterbury’s land transport infrastructure is part of the wider national and international transport network. Connections to the north, south and west link Canterbury with its

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 15 4 neighbouring regions and the rest of the nation. Similarly, our ports and airports move people and freight both nationally and internationally. Efficient and effective connections to and from these transport hubs are part of this Plan.

The statutory requirements for this Plan are contained in the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA). These are outlined in Appendix 6. A key requirement is that the Plan must contribute to the purpose of the LTMA. This purpose, outlined in section three of the Act, is "to contribute to an effective, efficient, and safe land transport system in the public interest”.

The Plan must be consistent with the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (GPS). Although it has only been released as a consultation draft at the time of writing, the strategic direction of the GPS is reflected in this Plan. The GPS contains three strategic priorities: supporting economic development, improving safety, and providing value for money.

The long-term objectives of the GPS are for a land transport system that:

 addresses current and future demand  provides appropriate transport choices  is reliable and resilient  is a safe system, increasingly free of death and serious injury  appropriately mitigates the effects of land transport on the environment.

The Plan must take into account the National Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (NEECS) and relevant policy statements and plans in force under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The NEECS transport objective is for a more energy efficient transport system, with a greater diversity of fuels and alternative energy technologies. The current Canterbury Regional Policy Statement (RPS) became operative in 2013 and incorporated substantial changes from previous versions, including amendments relating to earthquake recovery and the integration of infrastructure and land use - both of which are relevant to this Plan.

The development of the Plan included an NZ Transport Agency-sponsored Investment Logic Mapping process (ILM) workshop which involved a small group of staff and councillors. The ILM was used to collectively identify the key transport problems for Canterbury and forms as part of the business case approach required by the NZ Transport Agency. The ILM problem statements and benefits sought were presented to the RTC in September 2014. The problem statements included:

 Changing demand and declining network efficiency due to changes in urban land use, including impacts from the Christchurch earthquake.

 Increasing freight volumes and issues of network efficiency due to rural land use change and wider economic growth.

 Issues of affordability and funding availability to address increasing demand and related maintenance and improvement costs.

 The benefits included increased network efficiency, fewer deaths and injuries, increased accessibility and connectivity, and maintaining in an affordable condition.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 16 5 New paragraph: These statements, along with feedback from the RTC and consideration of the contents of the GPS, NEECS, RPS and the 2012 RLTS, formed the basis of the key challenges and objectives of the Plan.The development of the Plan included a NZ Transport Agency-sponsored Investment Logic Mapping process (ILM) as part of the business case approach sought by the NZ Transport Agency. The problem statements from this process were presented to the RTC in September 2014. These statements, along with feedback from the RTC and consideration of the contents of the GPS, NEECS, RPS and the 2012 RLTS, formed the basis of the key challenges and objectives for the Plan. These in turn formed the basis for assessing and evaluating the regional priorities, and the ranking of the proposed projects shown in this consultation draft under priorities 3 and 4. Submissions and hearings provided the opportunity for wider input to this Plan.

The One Network Road Classification (ONRC) is referred to in this Plan. This has been jointly developed by the NZ Transport Agency and local government to provide a nationally consistent framework for determining road function, future levels of service, the appropriate maintenance levels, and improvement priorities. As it is still under development it is expected to have a greater influence on the next iteration of this Plan in 2018. Similarly, further work to incorporate the NZ Transport Agency’s “’journey’” approach is required to incorporate it into the 2018 Plan.

THE CANTERBURY REGION

Canterbury is New Zealand’s largest region, covering 42,200 km2. It extends from Kekerengu in the north (north of Kaikōura) to the Waitaki River and Lindis Pass in the south. It is bounded by the sea in the east and the Southern Alps/Te Tiritiri-o-te-moana in the west. The area covered by this Plan includes the Mackenzie, Waimate, Timaru, Ashburton, Selwyn, Waimakariri, Hurunui and Kaikōura districts and Christchurch city (including Banks Peninsula). Figure 1 shows the region and key transport routes.

Figure 1: The Canterbury region and key transport routes

Map to be inserted

The population of Canterbury is 566,000 (as of June 2013), 81 per cent of whom live in greater Christchurch. This makes Canterbury the most populated region in the South Island and the second most populated region in New Zealand. Canterbury’s population is predicted to grow by 0.8 per cent per annum between 2012 and 2031.

Canterbury’s population is older than the New Zealand average, and the average age is increasing. Between 1996 and 2013 the median age in Canterbury increased from 34.4 to 39.6 years, compared to the New Zealand average of 32.8 and 37.1 years, respectively. By 2031, one in four of Canterbury’s residents will be aged over 65.

Regional gross domestic product (GDP) was $28B or 13 per cent of national GDP in 2013. Economic activity is dominated by primary industry and tourism, with significant contributions from manufacturing, mining, construction, energy supply, education, health and community services. In 2012/2013 the regional economy grew by six per cent, with construction and

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 17 6 dairying the major contributors. Future growth is expected to slow to less than three per cent per annum.

In 2010 and 2011 the greater Christchurch area was severely disrupted by a series of earthquakes, with 185 deaths and thousands of homes and businesses destroyed. Recovery from these seismic events is of regional and national significance.

Canterbury’s existing land transport infrastructure, services and expenditure

Canterbury has 1,455 lane kilometres of state highways and 15,916 kilometres of local roads. Many of our local roads are classified as rural roads, carrying relatively low traffic volumes but providing essential access to Canterbury’s rural hinterland. Approximately 50 per cent of these rural roads are unsealed.

Canterbury is connected to its surrounding regions. State Highway 1 and the South Island main trunk rail line provides an essential links north to Marlborough and the North Island, and south to Otago and Southland for both tourist and freight. State Highways 7 and 73 link to Nelson and the West Coast, and State Highway 8 provides a key tourist and freight link to Queenstown and Central Otago and Southland. With international airports in both Christchurch and Queenstown, and the concentration of warehousing and freight distribution within greater Christchurch, maintaining the reliability of these inter-regional routes is critical for tourism and freight.

In 2013/2014, $377M was spent on roads in Canterbury. Seventy-three per cent of this was on maintenance and renewals, and 27 per cent on improvements. Over 60 per cent was spent in Christchurch where a strong focus remains on earthquake repair and completion of the Government’s Roads of National Significance (RONS) programme.

Over 14M passenger trips were made on the public transport services in Christchurch and Timaru. In 2013/2014, Environment Canterbury spent approximately $60M on these services, with funding coming from user fares, rates and NLTF.

The number of dedicated cycle facilities in the region is increasing. Many of these are recreational and tourism facilities, funded without assistance from the NLTF. Most cycle commuting or shopping trips are currently made on the road network and included in the expenditure figures above. In Christchurch, a significant investment is now being made in urban cycling infrastructure.

The Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail provides an important cycle tourist link between Canterbury and Otago.

Public expenditure for roads and public transport comes from a combination of local and national sources. In 2012/2013, 26 per cent was funded from local and regional contributions and 74 per cent from the NLTF. An estimated $40M was spent by councils without assistance from the NLTF.

Figure 2: 2013/2014 expenditure by activity

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 18 7 pie chart to be inserted

Figure 3: 2013/2014 expenditure by organisation pie chart to be inserted

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 19 8 TRANSPORT DEMAND

Movement of people

Annually, people in Canterbury make 800M trips and travel 5.8B kilometres. The Ministry of Transport’s Household Travel Survey shows that, on average, 75 per cent of these trips are made by car, with 18 per cent on foot, three per cent by cycle and two per cent by bus.

Transport demand is driven by population, economic growth and vehicle availability. Although traffic growth is region-wide, it is a particular problem in greater Christchurch due to the density of traffic, the continuing dispersal of population and businesses, and growth in households and employment. Modelling undertaken in 2012 for the Greater Christchurch Transport Statement predicted an 11 per cent increase in traffic between 2010 and 2021, an increase of 200,000 additional trips per day, with a further increase of 298,000 between 2021 and 2041. The increasing traffic volumes around Christchurch are already leading to longer travel times and reducing travel time reliability with the traffic congestion index increasing 40 per cent between 2009 and 2013.

The Canterbury earthquakes significantly changed the nature of transport demand in greater Christchurch. Many businesses and households relocated as a result of the earthquakes, leading to changes in travel patterns, significant travel delays, and a large reduction in patronage from public transport services. With public access to most of central Christchurch limited for safety reasons, businesses relocated to other parts of greater Christchurch, or closed, removing 20,000 jobs from the central city. Census data for 2006 and 2013 show the population of Christchurch city decreased by two per cent to 366,000, while Selwyn district’s population increased by nearly a third to 44,595, and Waimakariri district increased by 17 per cent to 49,989. Commuters coming into Christchurch increased from 17,500 in 2006 to 23,000 in 2013.

Freight

Approximately 70M tonnes of freight were moved around the South Island in 2012. Over 90 per cent of this was by road and 48 per cent (34M tonnes) was in Canterbury. By 2042, freight volumes in Canterbury are predicted to increase by 79 per cent to 61M tonnes. This represents an increase in truck movements from 1.07M to 2.01M between 2012 and 2042 (Ministry of Transport, New Zealand Freight Study).

Like today, the majority (88 per cent) of future trips are expected to be within the region rather than inter-regional trips, with most freight going to or through Christchurch. The bulk of the increase in demand to 2042 is expected to come from:

 liquid milk  aggregate  general freight  limestone, cement and fertilizer  concrete  manufactured dairy.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 20 9 Agriculture and related processing is a major contributor to the region’s economy and freight demand. Canterbury has more livestock than any other region. Milk production in Canterbury was 3,446M litres in 2012 - a 72 per cent increase since 2006. The region produces 18 per cent of the nation’s meat production, 44 per cent of wool, 15 per cent of horticulture and 66 per cent of cereal. Increases in agricultural productivity, particularly associated with increases in irrigated land area and more intensive land use, are forecast to be the largest single driver of future freight demand.

Earthquake recovery has increased freight demand within greater Christchurch. Within Christchurch city the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Recovery Team (SCIRT) estimates the repair of infrastructure will require 4M tonnes of aggregate and 480,000 tonnes of asphalt, concrete and steel. This does not include any earthquake-related activities in surrounding districts, nor the materials required for the construction of buildings which are additional to these figures. The repair of infrastructure and buildings is expected to continue over the life of this Plan.

To improve the efficiency of freight movement, the Government has prioritised investment in road bridges and structures on major freight routes to allow for trucks of 44-62 tonnes (known as high productivity motor vehicles or HPMVs). The first phase of these improvements is expected to be completed in the 2014/2015 financial year and will mean the key strategic Canterbury network is able to cater for 50-tonne vehicles. Further work is anticipated to cater for full HPMVs.

The integration of road freight with sea, air and rail freight is an important consideration for investment decisions. While overall freight volumes are expected to increase, there is also strong competition within and between modes. For this Plan, the competition between South Island ports is a significant area of uncertainty in providing for the future. Lyttelton currently handles around 50 per cent of the South Island’s container cargo. Enhancing freight access to the Port of Lyttelton has been identified as a priority by the NZ Transport Agency and the partners to the Greater Christchurch Transport Statement. The Port of Timaru is also expecting significant growth following strategic partnerships brokered with the Port of Tauranga, Holcim Cement and Kotahi (a joint venture between Fonterra and Silver Fern Farms). Further improvements may be needed to accommodate increasing demand from the Port of Timaru within the next ten years.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 21 10 FUTURE TRANSPORT CHALLENGES FOR THE REGION

Providing transport choice for all people

In Canterbury, most trips are made by private car as this is usually both convenient and practical. However, alternatives are suitable for some trips, and provide benefits to both the user and the wider community. Walking and cycling, for example, are suitable for many short- to medium-length trips within towns and urban areas. Public transport services operate in greater Christchurch and Timaru, and Community Vehicle Trusts operate services in some smaller areas. Cycling has also been identified as a national priority in the GPS.

Currently, people choosing to walk, cycle or use public transport remain in the minority. This is an issue particularly for greater Christchurch where 81 per cent of the region’s population live. Traffic growth and limited road capacity is reducing the efficiency and effectiveness of the transport network, increasing travel times and reducing travel time reliability during peak times. Within greater Christchurch, earthquake damage and the subsequent repairs have increased travel times and reduced travel time reliability.

The Ministry of Transport Household Travel Survey indicates that only seven per cent walk, nine per cent cycle and seven per cent bus to work in Christchurch. There is a particular need to improve cycle connectivity between living and employment areas within greater Christchurch.

The benefits of providing transport choices are recognised in the draft GPS, the NEECS and the Canterbury RPS. The appropriate use of walking, cycling and public transport provides economic benefits by increasing the efficiency and throughput of our transport network. Switching from private vehicles to active travel modes supports long-term sustainability through enhanced public health, fewer environmental impacts and improved energy efficiency. Establishing local and regional cycle networks supports these outcomes as well as providing recreational, tourism and safety benefits.

An important aspect of transport choice is providing for those people who are unable to use or afford cars or choose other modes for health or other reasons. This includes young people, those who are mobility-impaired (including people with limited or no vision) and many elderly. Some provision already exists in this regard. For example, in addition to scheduled bus services, specialist services are provided for those with impaired mobility, and community-based transport services are provided in many rural areas for those without access to private cars.

With an ageing population, the provision of safe and effective access for everyone will become increasingly important and require changes in current practice. All sections of a trip need to be considered. For example, for people with limited or no vision to use public transport, the pedestrian sections of the journey need to have sufficient tactile or audible navigation aids to enable the journey to be completed safely before and after the bus trip. Similarly, increased use of mobility scooters may require wider footpaths - which are not currently funded from the NLTF unless they are part of road improvements.An important aspect of transport choice is providing for those people who are unable to use or afford cars, including the young, mobility-impaired and elderly. In addition to scheduled bus services, specialist services are provided for those with impaired mobility, and community-based transport services are provided in many rural areas for those without access to private cars.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 22 11 Providing safe and effective mobility for an ageing population is a future challenge that may require significant changes to our current thinking. For example, increased use of mobility scooters may require wider footpaths, which are not currently funded from the NLTF unless they are part of road improvements.

The key challenges with respect to improving transport choices in Canterbury are:

 The increasing number of vehicle trips is increasing traffic congestion around greater Christchurch. This has been compounded by changing travel patterns and infrastructure repairs following the Canterbury earthquakes.

 The current reliance on motor vehicles means higher environmental impacts and reduced health benefits compared with travel by active modes.

 Providing safe and convenient alternatives to private cars will be increasingly important with an ageing population.

 Perceptions of walking, cycling and public transport as inconvenient, unsafe or uncool remain a barrier to higher use of these modes.

Providing for freight demand

Supporting economic growth through improving the efficiency of freight movement has been identified as a priority within the GPS and for this Plan.

The efficient movement of goods is critical to our economic well-being. This requires effective links to and from key hubs such as ports, airports, major processing facilities, dairy factories and warehousing and distributions centres. It also requires connections to individual businesses, farms and households. A key factor for freight is the development of inland ports at Rolleston for both Timaru and Lyttelton. The connection and efficiency of the supply chain between these inland ports and the sea ports is a key area of focus for this Plan.

The key challenges for freight on the region’s land transport network include:

 Funding for local road maintenance, renewal and upgrade costs, particularly in rural areas. Increased agricultural production is leading to more trips and heavier trucks to and from the farm gate, increasing road maintenance costs.

 Increasing travel times and reduced travel time reliability on key freight routes around greater Christchurch, particularly access to Lyttelton from the west and south via Brougham Street. Improvements in this corridor need to take account of other modal and community needs in the surrounding urban areas.

 Sub-standard and, at times, unsafe access to and from areas of high freight demand such as major manufacturing or processing facilities, industrial areas, warehousing and distribution centres.

 Providing further efficiency improvements, such as upgrading the HPMV network or providing better connections between road and rail.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 23 12 Safety

Over the last five years, an average of 39 people died on Canterbury roads each year, with another 321 people seriously injured. The social cost of this is estimated at more than $330M annually. Reducing the number and severity of crashes is a national and regional priority.

The downward trend in serious crashes has flat-lined in Canterbury and a renewed focus is required. In 2014, 20 per cent of the nation’s fatal crashes occurred in Canterbury, despite having only 13 per cent of the total vehicle kilometres travelled. Canterbury has 20 of the country’s worst 100 safety rated intersections - all of them in or around the wider Christchurch area.

In 2010, the Government launched Safer Journeys, New Zealand’s road safety strategy to 2020. This is based on a safe system approach with the following objectives:

 Make the road transport system more accommodating of human error.  Manage the forces that injure people in a crash to a level the human body can tolerate without serious injury.  Reduce the incidence of error.

The Canterbury Regional Road Safety Working Group has identified the following risk areas for the region:

 motorcycles  speed  alcohol  young drivers and passengers  rural local roads  intersections  cyclists and other vulnerable users  commercial fleet.

These issues are addressed in this Plan through a combination of road safety promotion, enforcement, and infrastructure improvements that are primarily focussed on intersections, cyclists and vulnerable users. Safety issues regarding the commercial fleet are outside the scope of this Plan and are addressed by the Police, NZ Transport Agency and Accident Compensation Corporation.

In rural areas, there is evidence of suppressed demand from legitimate but vulnerable road users, such as cyclists and horse riders. The combination of high speeds, narrow roads and at times dangerous driver behaviour can make these vulnerable modes unsafe. Measures to address such concerns need to be investigated further as providing dedicated infrastructure will be cost-effective in only a limited range of situations. However, consideration of the needs of these users when renewing existing infrastructure, along with education and enforcement to modify driver behavior, may be more cost-effective.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 24 13

The use of restraints has also been raised as a potential issue of concern. The high rate of seatbelt compliance indicated in user surveys appears at odds with over 7,000 tickets issued in Canterbury each year for not wearing a seatbelt.

The key challenge for road safety is reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries from crashes.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 25 14 Figure 4: Deaths and serious injuries from road crashes in Canterbury

CANTERBURY REGION

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100 Deaths and serious injuries serious and Deaths

50

0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Serious 354 365 295 291 304 Fatal 32 47 33 33 50

Canterbury earthquake recovery

The Canterbury earthquakes severely affected transport infrastructure and services. In addition to direct damage to the surface of roads, the pipes and services beneath them were severely damaged across large sections of Christchurch and surrounding areas. The disruption caused by the Canterbury earthquakes has influenced spending priorities in this Plan.

Land use change is still occurring as damaged houses are repaired, new ones are built and businesses continue to relocate. Major projects, such as the RONS programme, have accommodated some of this demand, but issues remain, particularly in the northern corridor. The situation remains dynamic and further changes are expected as houses, business areas and infrastructure are repaired or rebuilt. The future use of the residential red zones is also uncertain.

The recovery plans prepared under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 provide direction for the future. The integration of these plans with transport services and infrastructure is critical for the economic and social recovery of Christchurch and surrounding towns. In particular, providing access to the central city and town centres will assist in rejuvenating these key commercial areas.

Key transport challenges for earthquake recovery are:

 the repair of damaged transport infrastructure  addressing the ongoing changes in land use and related travel demand impacts  supporting the redevelopment of central Christchurch.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 26 15 Resilience and long-term sustainability

To be resilient and sustainable, transport planning needs to look ahead and plan for both anticipated and unexpected changes. Canterbury faces transport disruption from acute events, such as floods, earthquakes or serious crashes. The design of infrastructure and provision of alternative routes can help alleviate these risks.

More gradual and predictable threats provide even greater challenges in the long-term. Changes in demand will occur due to population growth, demographic and economic changes, as already discussed. Other changes need to be anticipated and planned, for example, climate-induced sea-level rise is a threat to major infrastructure, such as State Highway 1 and the rail track on the Kaikōura coast.

The current reliance on non-renewable fuels and their contribution to climate change emissions is a sustainability issue. At a regional level, substantial changes are required in infrastructure, services and travel behaviour to make a meaningful difference to these issues.At a regional level, the infrastructure and services provided will make relatively little difference to these issues. More substantial progress requires national and international responses, including strong policy responses and the introduction of new technology.

The integration of transport infrastructure and services with land use planning also contributes to long-term sustainability. It can reduce costs and enhance accessibility, amenity and safety as recognised in chapters five and six of the RPS. It also supports vitality in town centres and other areas with high levels of pedestrian use.

Key challenges for transport resilience and long-term sustainability are:

 Disruption to transport services due to natural hazards and other acute events impose significant economic and social costs.

 Our current system is not sustainable due to its reliance on fossil fuels and related emissions.

 The integration of land use and transport services make the transport system more effective and provide economic, social and environment benefits.

The role of technology

Technology and innovation have the potential to transform transport systems in the future. For example, self-guided vehicles have the potential to greatly improve travel efficiency and road safety. A shift to renewable energy sources could reduce vehicle emissions and the reliance on fossil fuels. The nature of public transport could be transformed through the use of smart phone technology and point-to-point services using smaller, shared vehicles.

The nature and timing of step changes in technology are hard to predict, but may start to affect the way we provide services within the life of this Plan. For many people, smart phone technology is already influencing how and when they travel. Electric bicycles are rapidly growing in popularity overseas and may feature more prominently in the transport mix in Canterbury. The programmes and projects within this Plan do not preclude this type of

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 27 16 innovation, and technological improvements can be incorporated with subsequent plan reviews as needed.

The key challenge for the role of technology is that technological changes are uncertain in their nature, timing and costs, but have the potential to significantly impact the way we develop and use the transport network.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 28 17 OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES

Objective 1: A land transport network that addresses current and future transport demand

Increases in demand are expected across all modes and all districts during the next ten years. In general, the existing network outside of Christchurch has adequate throughput capacity for expected traffic volumes, however, increasing agricultural production is increasing maintenance, renewal and improvement needs for rural roads. Funding these activities is a key issue for the region.

For freight, improvements to increase efficiency on key routes are a priority. This includes completion of the RONS, improvement of the Brougham Street corridor to the Port of Lyttelton, strengthening structures for HPMVs and addressing access to freight hubs.

Within the greater Christchurch area, completion of the RONS will provide additional capacity on those strategic routes; however, focussing on increasing the use of other modes and improving the optimisation andoptimising the use of the existing network will be the primary strategy in the future. Greater investment in active travel modes such as walking, cycling and public transport is critical to providing for future travel demand and enhanced sustainability. Enhancing transport choice for the movement of people through greater investment in cycling and public transport infrastructure is a priority to address future travel demand.

Key outcomes for current and future demand to 2025:

 roads are maintained to a level that is fit for purpose, as defined by the ONRC  travel times and travel time reliability for freight and passenger trips are maintained at current levels outside of greater Christchurch  the number of strategic freight routes suitable for HPMVs is expanded  access to local freight transport hubs is improved.

Within greater Christchurch:

 the percentage of peak trips made byon foot, cycle and bus are increased  average travel time reliability is maintained at 15 per cent or better during peak travel times.

Objective 2: A land transport system that is increasingly free from death and serious injury

Improving safety is both a national and regional priority. Regional level actions to improve safety include safer infrastructure and improved road user behaviour. A reduction in crashes is sought, with a particular emphasis on reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 29 18 The ultimate aim of transport safety programmes is zero harm. While the Swedish Vision Zero has not been formally adopted in New Zealand, the underlying philosophy is equally applicable. This requires recognition of human error. It seeks not only to reduce the incidence of human error but to reduce the consequences of human error in all aspects of our transport system.

Key outcomes for safety to 2025:  fewer than 30 deaths and 250 serious injuries annually by 2021

 a reduction in total crashes by 2021.

Objective 3: The Canterbury earthquakes recovery is supported

Recovery from the Canterbury earthquakes is a national and regional priority with substantial economic and social benefits. Funding availability and resources continue to be a challenge for the recovery of transport infrastructure and services. The regional priorities for funding are reflected in the key outcomes listed below.

 Repair of horizontal infrastructure is delivered in accordance with timetables and standards contained in infrastructure recovery plans and the cost sharing agreements between councils and Government.  Transport infrastructure supports the redevelopment of central Christchurch.  The provision of transport infrastructure and services support the objectives and policies of Canterbury earthquake recovery plans.

Objective 4: The land transport network is resilient and supports long- term sustainability

Resilience and long-term sustainability is about reducing the risks associated with both known and unanticipated threats. While some long-term transport sustainability issues reflect national and international trends, local responses are supported where appropriate. The key outcomes listed below reflect the regional responses to these issues.

 Infrastructure and services are more resilient to disruption from acute events such as natural hazards or crashes.  Long-term sustainability issues, such as the effects of climate change, public health, demographic changes, and the reliance on fossil fuels are fully incorporated into transport planning decisions.  The environmental effects of transport infrastructure and services are fully incorporated in decision-making and are avoided, remedied or mitigated as required.  Transport infrastructure and services are integrated with and support land use and development patterns contained in the RPS and district plans.

Objective 5: Investment in land transport infrastructure and services is efficient

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 30 19 During the next ten years, around $4B of public money will be spent on transport infrastructure and services in Canterbury. Ensuring these funds are used efficiently is good public management and is recognised in the “value for money” priority of the GPS. The GPS also recognises the Ministry of Transport’s expectation of the role the NZ Transport Agency has in monitoring and reporting on investment efficiency.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 31 20 Key outcomes:

 All agencies involved in the provision of infrastructure and services will ensure expenditure is efficient and strive for productivity improvements.  The NZ Transport Agency will monitor and report on the efficiency of NLTF expenditure in Canterbury.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 32 21 STATEMENT OF PRIORITIES FOR 2015 TO 2025

This section outlines the Canterbury regional priorities for expenditure during the next ten years. Priority 1 is focussed on looking after what we have, and includes maintenance, renewal and minor improvement programmes and existing public transport services. These are regarded as essential to avoid going backwards.

All improvement projects are included in priorities 2-4. Priority 2 projects are existing commitments within the NLTF. No further prioritisation was undertaken for these projects as they are already well-advanced and funding is assured.

All priority 3 projects are of regional significance and strongly aligned to the challenges and objectives outlined in this Plan. The selection of priority 3 projects was based on an assessment of each project against the following criteria:

1. Benefits for the movement of freight. 2. Increasing transport choice for the movement of people. 3. Earthquake recovery. 4. Safety. 5. Long-term sustainability and resilience.

The assessment was undertaken with all five of the criteria being equally weighted. A subsequent moderation process resulted in intersection safety projects being promoted to a level higher than the initial assessment, reflecting a view that the criteria did not give sufficient emphasis to safety. The final grouping shows the results after this moderation process.

Priority 4 projects include improvements of lower regional priority. Only regionally significant projects are shown in this section. Priority projects that cost less than $5M and are of local rather than regional significance are shown in Appendix 1. Although not regionally significant, most of these projects remain an efficient use of NLTF due to the significant local benefits and the relatively low cost involved.

The projects and programmes of regional significance include all priority 1, 2 and 3 activities, and priority 4 projects or programmes over $5M. Improving access to the Port of Timaru is also regarded as being of regional significance due to the importance of access to the Port for the regional economy.

Improving the efficiency of spending was not explicitly part of the regional prioritisation process but is part of the ongoing process of improvement for the NZ Transport Agency and all approved organisations seeking NLTF funding.

Priority 1: Looking after what we have

For most trips in Canterbury the existing transport network and services provide effective and efficient access. The first priority for the region is keeping the existing network fit for purpose. In addition to maintaining existing infrastructure and services, it includes related activities such as road safety promotion and enforcement. This is the core business for road

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 33 22 controlling authorities, the Regional Council and other agencies such as the New Zealand Police. In greater Christchurch, this includes the repair and reinstatement of earthquake- damaged roads in accordance with infrastructure recovery plans.

The priority 1 programmes are:

 infrastructure maintenance and renewals  existing public transport services  safety enforcement and promotion  minor improvements and optimisation of the existing transport network and assets  repair of earthquake-damaged roads.

Table 1 shows the expenditure on these activities by approved authority.

The post-earthquake transport rebuild programmes agreed in the cost share agreements between the Crown and Christchurch City Council and Waimakariri District Council, respectively, are within priority 1. The projects within these programmes are not shown within Table 1 as they are managed through a separate governance arrangement agreed with Government. These works are expected to be completed by the end of 2017.

The Christchurch City Council and NZ Transport Agency have agreed to the reinstatement of the Sumner-Evans Pass-Lyttelton route as part of this rebuild programme. The Council is also seeking to include the second coat reseals, central city resurfacing and the repair of the Fitzgerald Avenue and Pages Road bridges. The expected gross cost for the period 2015- 2017 is in the range of $220-$260M. The NZ Transport Agency board has a financial assistance rate of 83% for these works.

The cost to complete the Waimakariri District Council transport post-earthquake repairs is estimated at $5.2M. The NZ Transport Agency board has agreed a financial assistance rate of 65% for these works.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 34 23 Table 1: Priority 1 expenditure

Three-year Ten-year Activity 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Six-year cost 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 cost cost Ashburton District Council

Transport planning $115,000 $15,000 $100,000 $230,000 $15,500 $15,500 $105,000 $366,000 $16,000 $16,000 $110,000 $16,500 $524,500

Road safety promotion $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $360,000 $123,600 $127,308 $131,127 $742,035 $135,061 $139,113 $143,286 $147,585 $1,307,080 Maintenance and $3,868,985 $4,001,635 $4,087,815 $11,958,435 $4,209,229 $4,335,506 $4,465,570 $24,968,740 $4,599,538 $4,737,524 $4,879,650 $5,026,039 $44,211,491 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $7,580,419 $7,806,223 $8,038,802 $23,425,444 $7,203,939 $7,420,058 $7,642,659 $45,692,100 $7,871,939 $8,108,097 $8,351,340 $8,601,880 $78,625,356 Local road improvements (minor $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $1,800,000 $615,000 $630,000 $645,000 $3,690,000 $660,000 $680,000 $700,000 $715,000 $6,445,000 improvements) Christchurch City Council*

Transport planning $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $900,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,800,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $3,000,000

Road safety promotion $1,267,900 $1,273,013 $1,278,125 $3,819,038 $1,300,000 $1,350,000 $1,400,000 $7,869,038 $1,450,000 $1,500,000 $1,550,000 $1,600,000 $13,969,038 Public transport $1,355,241 $4,194,647 $6,052,765 $11,602,653 $8,022,731 $5,102,313 $3,074,276 $27,801,973 $2,040,542 $1,006,871 $1,013,262 $1,019,717 $32,882,365 infrastructure Maintenance and $31,127,715 $31,497,451 $30,417,271 $93,042,437 $31,817,271 $31,817,271 $31,817,271 $188,494,250 $31,817,271 $31,817,271 $31,817,271 $31,817,271 $315,763,334 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $15,777,781 $21,876,945 $29,598,950 $67,253,676 $36,411,661 $37,654,248 $37,149,737 $178,469,322 $34,782,664 $33,052,208 $34,169,073 $35,286,446 $315,759,713 Local road improvements (minor $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $10,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $21,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $35,000,000 improvements) Earthquake recovery $500,000 $4,279,478 $13,592,888 $18,372,366 $15,694,925 $9,115,632 $8,485,752 $51,668,675 $8,339,617 $6,852,000 $3,995,000 - $70,855,292 works Department of Conservation (Mt Cook)

Maintenance and $54,500 $48,500 $67,500 $170,500 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $350,500 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $590,500 operation of local roads Environment Canterbury

Transport planning $340,000 $340,000 $340,000 $1,020,000 $340,000 $340,000 $340,000 $2,040,000 $340,000 $340,000 $340,000 $340,000 $3,400,000 Public transport $43,885,522$ $49,461,602$ $47,622,855$ $49,044,934$ $50,453,391$ $53,383,992$ $293,852,296$ $55,264,831$ $57,161,345$ $58,753,869$ $60,903,079$ $525,935,420 $140,969,979$ (existing) 40,993,894 42,920,445 44,470,862 45,613,943 46,885,159 49,673,031 20,557,334 51,405,432 53,147,570 66,869,807 69,343,652 $511,323,795 Hurunui District Council

Transport planning $10,000 $10,000 $25,000 $45,000 $10,000 $10,000 $25,000 $90,000 $10,000 $10,000 $25,000 $15,000 $150,000

Road safety promotion $56,000 $56,000 $56,000 $168,000 $58,910 $59,500 $60,100 $346,510 $60,700 $61,300 $61,900 $62,500 $592,910 Maintenance and $2,960,600 $2,988,640 $3,016,870 $8,966,110 $4,063,860 $4,173,800 $4,255,700 $21,459,470 $4,359,800 $4,403,400 $4,447,500 $4,491,900 $39,162,070 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $3,332,500 $3,544,250 $3,486,110 $10,362,860 $3,669,400 $3,594,520 $3,784,650 $21,411,430 $3,836,780 $3,905,100 $3,913,930 $3,953,060 $37,020,300 Local road $334,455 $336,445 $335,670 $1,006,570 $406,610 $408,390 $422,770 $2,244,340 $429,865 $435,490 $438,915 $442,623 $3,991,233 improvements (minor

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 35 24 Three-year Ten-year Activity 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Six-year cost 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 cost cost improvements)

Kaikōura District Council

Road safety promotion $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $60,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $120,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $200,000 Maintenance and $493,000 $493,000 $513,000 $1,499,000 $493,000 $493,000 $513,000 $2,998,000 $493,000 $493,000 $513,000 $493,000 $4,990,000 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $707,000 $707,000 $687,000 $2,101,000 $707,000 $707,000 $687,000 $4,202,000 $707,000 $707,000 $687,000 $707,000 $7,010,000 Local road improvements (minor $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $150,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $500,000 improvements)

Mackenzie District Council

Maintenance and $1,613,908 $1,624,133 $1,613,908 $4,851,949 $1,512,715 $1,563,840 $1,512,715 $9,441,219 $1,533,165 $1,543,390 $1,533,165 $1,512,715 $15,563,654 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $1,803,000 $1,803,000 $1,923,000 $5,529,000 $1,310,000 $1,310,000 $1,310,000 $9,459,000 $1,310,000 $1,310,000 $1,310,000 $1,310,000 $14,699,000 Local road improvements (minor $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $900,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,800,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $3,000,000 improvements) NZ Transport Agency Canterbury Highway Network

Road safety $233,000$50 $233,000$30 $224,000$5,0 $690,000$810, $233,000$5,0 $233,000$50, $1,380,000$86 $1,380,000$8 promotionTransport $224,000- - - - - 0,000 5,000 00 000 00 000 5,000 65,000 planning Maintenance and operation of state $33,305,200 $33,012,800 $33,784,180 $100,102,180 $32,571,270 $37,638,540 $47,511,240 $217,823,230 $38,973,330 $37,748,630 $41,889,760 $48,945,920 $385,380,870 highways Renewal of state $16,871,590 $20,091,540 $19,036,860 $55,999,990 $13,763,330 $15,904,560 $20,276,370 $105,944,250 $16,468,590 $15,951,080 $17,700,960 $20,682,610 $176,747,490 highways State Highway minor $2,363,584 $2,532,411 $2,701,238 $7,597,233 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 $15,697,233 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 $26,497,233 improvements Selwyn District Council

Transport planning $40,000 $42,000 $42,000 $124,000 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $250,000 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $42,000 $418,000

Road safety promotion $209,000 $218,000 $218,000 $645,000 $218,000 $219,000 $219,000 $1,301,000 $220,000 $220,000 $221,000 $221,000 $2,183,000 Maintenance and $5,588,000 $6,000,000 $6,179,000 $17,767,000 $6,313,000 $6,450,000 $6,591,000 $37,121,000 $6,728,000 $6,868,000 $7,012,000 $7,151,000 $64,880,000 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $5,343,000 $5,611,000 $5,654,000 $16,608,000 $5,605,000 $5,645,000 $5,687,000 $33,545,000 $5,727,000 $5,768,000 $5,811,000 $5,851,000 $56,702,000 Local road improvements (minor $534,000 $568,000 $579,000 $1,681,000 $583,000 $591,000 $600,000 $3,455,000 $609,000 $618,000 $627,000 $636,000 $5,945,000 improvements) Timaru District Council

Transport planning $50,000 $80,000 $100,000 $230,000 $50,000 $80,000 $100,000 $460,000 $60,000 $90,000 $110,000 $75,000 $795,000

Road safety promotion $295,000 $297,000 $309,000 $901,000 $312,000 $315,000 $318,000 $1,846,000 $325,000 $330,000 $330,000 $330,000 $3,161,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 36 25 Three-year Ten-year Activity 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 Six-year cost 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 cost cost Maintenance and $4,860,000 $4,950,000 $5,005,000 $14,815,000 $5,105,000 $5,207,100 $5,311,000 $30,438,100 $5,417,000 $5,525,000 $5,636,000 $5,749,000 $52,765,100 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $6,830,000 $6,860,000 $7,000,000 $20,690,000 $7,140,000 $7,282,000 $7,428,000 $42,540,000 $7,577,000 $7,728,000 $7,883,000 $8,040,000 $73,768,000 Local road improvements (minor $1,995,000 $1,920,000 $1,870,000 $5,785,000 $1,380,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $9,765,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $15,365,000 improvements) Waimakariri District Council*

Road safety promotion $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $360,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $720,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $1,200,000 Maintenance and $5,261,000 $5,243,000 $5,471,000 $15,975,000 $5,500,000 $5,740,000 $6,000,000 $33,215,000 $6,300,000 $6,600,000 $7,200,000 $7,500,000 $60,815,000 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $4,745,000 $4,710,000 $4,800,000 $14,255,000 $4,600,000 $4,750,000 $4,900,000 $28,505,000 $5,000,000 $5,200,000 $5,350,000 $5,500,000 $49,555,000 Local road improvements (minor $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $3,000,000 $1,020,000 $1,050,000 $1,070,000 $6,140,000 $1,090,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $10,230,000 improvements) Waimate District Council Maintenance and $1,871,463 $1,897,662 $1,938,836 $5,707,961 $1,983,750 $2,030,537 $2,081,066 $11,803,314 $2,133,467 $2,189,611 $2,247,627 $2,309,385 $20,683,404 operation of local roads Renewal of local roads $2,763,820 $2,802,514 $2,863,319 $8,429,653 $3,189,349 $3,284,100 $3,365,824 $18,268,926 $3,450,575 $3,541,379 $3,635,211 $3,735,096 $32,631,187 Local road improvements (minor $321,764 $326,269 $333,348 $981,381 $341,070 $349,114 $357,802 $2,029,367 $366,811 $376,464 $386,439 $397,057 $3,556,138 improvements)

* Excludes projects that are part of the post-earthquake cost share agreement with the Crown.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 37 26 Priority 2: Finishing what we have started (existing commitments)

There are a small number of significant projects that already have funding secured. In most instances, construction has already commenced. These projects include:

 Roads of National Significance (RONS) and related improvements: These roads have been identified as priority in the GPS, including the Northern Arterial, Western Belfast Bypass, the Western Corridor and stages 2 and 3 of the Southern Motorway. Christchurch City Council projects that directly connect to these are also included. (Figure 5 shows the location of the RONS projects).  An Accessible City (AAC) phase 1: This includes the first of the five phases in the AAC programme for the revitalisation of Christchurch’s central city. Full completion of the AAC programme is estimated to take up to 20 years. Phase 1 is already underway and expected to be completed by 2016.  Christchurch City Council Major Cycleways Programme: This programme of ten major urban cycleways commenced in 2014 and seeks to achieve a major modal shift away from private cars to cycling.  Existing public transport infrastructure improvement commitments within Christchurch: These include the completion of the new central bus interchange, improving the Riccarton Road corridor for buses, and building suburban interchanges at Riccarton and Northlands malls.  Ferrymead bridge: This major bridge replacement in Christchurch will be completed in 2015/2016.  Wigram Magdala link: This significant road project in south-west Christchurch will continue until 2016/2017.  Mingha Bluff to Rough Creek: This project on State Highway 73 is of inter-regional significance due to the link with the West Coast. It is expected to be completed in 2016/2017.

 Factory Road bridge: This project in Timaru district will be completed in 2015/2016.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 38 27 Figure 5: Christchurch RONS programme

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 39 28 Table 2: Priority 2 expenditure

Total cost for all Start Organisation Activity class Project name years year New and improved infrastructure for Christchurch City Council Wigram Magdala link $26,270,141 - local roads New and improved infrastructure for Christchurch City Council Cranford Street upgrade $19,455,828 - local roads New and improved infrastructure for Christchurch City Council Northern arterial extension $39,408,849 - local roads New and improved infrastructure for Christchurch City Council Ferrymead Bridge replacement and improvement $9,378,608 - local roads Christchurch City Council Post SCIRT Fitzgerald bridges and approaches work $21,070,000 2014/15

Christchurch City Council Post SCIRT Pages Road bridge and approaches $14,872,000 2014/15

Christchurch City Council Local cycleway Northern cycle connection: Belfast-Kaiapoi $3,848,000 20185

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Papanui parallel (Grassmere route-Papanui to city) $10,849,112 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Rapanui-Shag Rock (Sumner to city) $21,145,053 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Uni-Cycle (University to city) $9,623,488 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Little River link (Little River route) $4,875,172 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Nor'West Arc (western inner orbital) $21,133,734 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Southern Lights (south to city) $2,070,622 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Wheels to Wings (airport route) $12,372,880 2015 Northern Line (northern rail route-Belfast to Christchurch City Council Major cycleway $6,748,786 2015 Riccarton) Christchurch City Council Major cycleway South Express (Hornby rail-Templeton to city) $4,016,192 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Quarryman's Trail (Halswell to city) $17,822,621 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Otakaro (Avon River route-New Brighton to city) $21,935,880 2015

Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Opawaho River route (Heathcote River trail) $17,102,873 2015

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 40 29 Christchurch City Council Major cycleway Heathcote expressway (Heathcote rail route-city) $13,085,159 2015

New and improved infrastructure for NZ Transport Agency Christchurch northern arterial rural with QEII $214,379,715 2015 state highways

New and improved infrastructure for Christchurch southern motorway Halswell Junction NZ Transport Agency $256,575,401 2015 state highways Road to Rolleston (stage 2 and 3)

New and improved infrastructure for NZ Transport Agency Harewood Road to Yaldhurst Road four-laning $75,140,981 2015 state highways

New and improved infrastructure for NZ Transport Agency Western Belfast bypass $121,750,000 2014 state highways

New and improved infrastructure for NZ Transport Agency Groynes to Sawyers Arms Road $42,300,000 2014 state highways New and improved infrastructure for NZ Transport Agency Mingha Bluff to Rough Creek $21,800,000 2014 state highways New and improved infrastructure for Timaru District Council Factory Road bridge $3,589,000 2011 local roads

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 41 30 Priority 3: Improvements with high strategic alignment

Priority 3 includes programmes with a high alignment to the objectives of this Plan. Most of these programmes are in or around Christchurch due to the higher demand levels on this part of the network.

The priority 3 projects are grouped into programmes of similar type, as described below and shown in Table 3. The strategic alignment of individual projects is also shown in Table 3 through the assessment against the following evaluation criteria:

 supporting the efficient movement of freight  providing transport choice  supporting earthquake recovery  improving safety  supporting long-term sustainability and resilience.

Each project was rated as high (H), medium (M), low (L) or nil (-) against the criteria, as shown in Table 3. The grouping of projects into sub-categories and the ordering of these sub-categories does not imply any priority order. The relative priority and importance of individual projects can be seen through the assessment of strategic priority.The grouping of projects does not imply priority order, but the relative priority and importance of individual projects can be seen through the assessment of strategic alignment.

Priority 3a: High priority road projects

These are:

 Eight downstream improvement projects relating to the RONS.  The Annex/Birmingham/Wrights upgrade which links to the Wigram/Magdala project already underway.  Brougham Street corridor improvements that are aimed at improving travel efficiency to Lyttelton.  The Sumner–Lyttelton project is still subject to funding discussions between Christchurch City Council and NZ Transport Agency but is a critical alternative route for the Lyttelton tunnel with substantial freight and resilience benefits.  Priority 3b: Next stages of the AAC programme for central Christchurch These will improve access and the quality of urban spaces within the central city and are jointly funded by council and the Government. Only the projects scheduled for the next three years are included in priority 3. Note: Funding of the AAC programme is yet to be confirmed. It is expected that prioritisation and funding needs will require the programme to be spread over a longer period extending beyond the ten-year life of this Plan.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 42 31

Priority 3c: High priority intersection safety improvements

These are all based around greater Christchurch and most are included on the NZ Transport Agency national top 100 list of dangerous intersections. Other factors, such as changes in pedestrian traffic associated with school mergers and integration with other high priority works, have also been taken into account in selecting these projects.

Priority 3d: High priority urban cycle routes Priorities 3d and 3eThe cycle and public transport projects aim to enhance transport choice for travel in and around greater Christchurch. Enhancing alternatives to travel by private car is a key priority in this part of the region and supports effectiveness, safety, earthquake recovery and long-term sustainability. Enhancing cycling has been recognised in the GPS as a national priority, as well as being a regional and local priority. From a regional perspective, the highest-ranked cycle route is between Christchurch and Kaiapoi where there is currently no safe crossing of the Waimakariri River for cyclists or pedestrians.

Priority 3e: High priority public transport route and facility improvements The improvements for public transport support a transition to a hub and spokes public transport system. These and the cycle routes also support access to the central city as part of earthquake recovery.

Priority 3f: Other road-related projects This includes a variety of other projects with significant alignment to the objectives in this Plan. They include three state highway corridor safety projects (Rakaia to Ashburton, Ashley to Belfast and Woodend), road and intersection improvements around greater Christchurch, and the fitting of a deluge system to improve the safety and resilience of Lyttelton tunnel. Although unlikely, closure of the tunnel due to fire damage would have a very high impact for freight as the primary access to the Port of Lyttelton. This risk is currently heightened by the closure of Evans Pass Road due to earthquake damage. There are two significant intersection improvements proposed for Rolleston within this category 3f. The first are relatively minor improvements put forward by the NZ Transport Agency, and the second is a grade separation proposal from Selwyn District Council to address severance and safety issues related to both the state highway and rail lines between the main residential and industrial sites in Rolleston. Further discussions between the NZ Transport Agency and Selwyn District Council will refine the scope and funding of these projects.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 43 32 Table 3: Priority 3 projects

Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L)

High priority road projects

New and improved Christchurch City Annex/Birmingham/ infrastructure for 2014 2016 $11,351,260 M M M H H Council Wrights route upgrade local roads New and improved Intersection Christchurch City infrastructure for improvement: Belfast/ 2014 2019 $1,826,436 M M M H H Council local roads Marshland intersection Intersection New and improved Christchurch City improvement: Greers/ infrastructure for 2014 2015 $5,109,763 M M M H H Council Northcote/Sawyers local roads Arms New and improved Christchurch City Northcote Road four- infrastructure for 2014 2016 $7,361,162 M M L H H Council laning local roads RONS downstream New and improved Christchurch City inter improvements: infrastructure for 2015 2019 $8,875,000 L L M H M Council Cranford Street local roads downstream RONS downstream New and improved Christchurch City inter improvements: infrastructure for 2015 2019 $1,014,000 L L M H M Council Sawyers local roads Arms/Waimakariri RONS downstream New and improved Christchurch City intersection infrastructure for 2017 2019 $1,014,000 L L M H M Council improvements: local roads Memorial/ Orchard New and improved RONS downstream Christchurch City infrastructure for route improvement: 2016 2018 $1,014,000 L L M H M Council local roads Marshland-QEII-Shirley New and improved RONS downstream Christchurch City infrastructure for route improvements: 2016 2018 $442,000 L L M H M Council local roads Harewood Road New and improved Christchurch City Sumner-Lyttelton/ infrastructure for tbc tbc tbc H L H - H Council Evans Pass local roads

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 44 33 Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) New and improved RONS downstream Christchurch City infrastructure for route improvements: 2023 2024 $182,000 Tbc Tbc Tbc Tbc Tbc Council local roads Cotswold Avenue New and improved NZ Transport Brougham Street infrastructure for 2017 2019 $12,500,000 H L M M H Agency corridor improvements state highways

An Accessible City programme for central Christchurch

New and improved Christchurch City AAC Armagh Street infrastructure for 2017 2018 $2,047,743 - M H M M Council (Durham-Montreal) local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC Central City: $7,463,040$9, infrastructure for 2015 2019 - M H M M Council Wayfinding 463,040 local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC Colombo Street infrastructure for 2017 2018 $2,397,071 - M H M M Council (Bealey-Kilmore) local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC Colombo Street infrastructure for 2017 2018 $3,029,994 - M H M M Council (St Asaph-Moorhouse) local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC Ferry Rd (St infrastructure for 2017 2018 $1,885,422 - M H M M Council Asaph-Fitzgerald) local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC Hereford Street infrastructure for 2016 2018 $1,494,474 - M H M M Council (Cambridge-Montreal) local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC Hereford Street infrastructure for 2017 2018 $1,901,927 - M H M M Council (Madras-Manchester) local roads New and improved AAC Hereford Street Christchurch City infrastructure for (Manchester- 2016 2017 $4,451,273 - M H M M Council local roads Cambridge) New and improved Christchurch City AAC Hereford Street infrastructure for 2016 2017 $714,299 - M H M M Council (Montreal-Rolleston) local roads New and improved Christchurch City AAC High Street infrastructure for 2017 2018 $2,924,651 - M H M M Council (Manchester-St Asaph) local roads

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 45 34 Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) New and improved AAC Kilmore Street Christchurch City $14,914,024$8 infrastructure for (Fitzgerald-Park) two- 2015 2016 - M H M M Council ,414,024 local roads way conversion New and improved Christchurch City infrastructure for AAC Victoria Street 2015 2016 $7,083,286 - M H M M Council local roads New and improved Christchurch City infrastructure for AAC slow core TP30k 2015 2016 $2,500,000 Council local roads New and improved Christchurch City infrastructure for AAC Riccarton Avenue 2015 2020 $4,223,507 Council local roads New and improved RONS downstream Christchurch City infrastructure for route improvements: Tbc Tbc $286,000 Tbc Tbc Tbc Tbc Tbc Council local roads Cotswold Avenue Christchurch City AAC Antigua Street (St $1,435,487$1, Walking and cycling 2015 2016 - M H M M Council Asaph-Moorhouse) 935,487

Christchurch City AAC High Street Walking and cycling 2017 2017 $2,796,057 - M H M M Council (Hereford-Manchester)

Christchurch City AAC Oxford Terrace Walking and cycling 2016 2016 $96,876 - M H M M Council (Kilmore-Madras)

Christchurch City Walking and cycling AAC Salisbury Street 2016 2017 $6,161,314 - M H M M Council

High priority intersection safety improvements

New and improved Intersection safety: Christchurch City infrastructure for Aldwins/Buckleys/ 2017 2019 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council local roads Linwood (13) New and improved Christchurch City Intersection safety: infrastructure for 2015 2017 $4,186,000 - L - H - Council Aldwins/Ensors/Ferry local roads New and improved Intersection safety: Christchurch City infrastructure for Barrington/Lincoln/ 2016 2018 $1,326,000 - L - H - Council local roads Whiteleigh (3)

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 46 35 Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) New and improved Christchurch City Intersection safety: infrastructure for 2016 2018 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council Bealey/Madras (6) local roads New and improved Intersection safety: Christchurch City infrastructure for Bealey/Papanui/ 2017 2019 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council local roads Victoria (14) New and improved Christchurch City Intersection safety: infrastructure for 2017 2019 $1,326,000 - L - H - Council Byron/Gasson (11) local roads New and improved Christchurch City Intersection safety: infrastructure for 2016 2018 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council Cashel/Fitzgerald (2) local roads New and improved Intersection safety: Christchurch City infrastructure for Gasson/ Madras/ 2016 2018 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council local roads Moorhouse (1) New and improved Intersection safety: Christchurch City infrastructure for Ilam/ Middleton/ 2016 2018 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council local roads Riccarton (7) New and improved Intersection safety: Christchurch City infrastructure for Manchester/ 2016 2018 $1,014,000 - L - H - Council local roads Moorhouse/Pilgrim (5) Intersection safety: New and improved Christchurch City Marshland/New infrastructure for 2017 2018 $286,000 - L - H - Council Brighton/ North local roads Parade/Shirley (8) RONS downstream New and improved Christchurch City inter safety: Main North infrastructure for 2015 2015 $988,000 L L L H - Council Road/ Marshland/ local roads Spencerville (Chaneys) New and improved RONS downstream Christchurch City infrastructure for safety improvements: 2015 2017 $442,000 L L L H - Council local roads Sawyers Arms route New and improved NZ Transport Brougham/Burlington infrastructure for 2015 2016 $1,350,000 L L - H - Agency intersection state highways New and improved NZ Transport Pineacres safety infrastructure for 2016 2016 $3,300,000 - - - H L Agency improvements state highways New and improved Prebbleton Hampton Selwyn District infrastructure for Shands CSM2 2018 2018 $3,000,000 L L L H L Council local roads upgrades

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 47 36 Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L)

High priority urban cycle routes

Local cycleway: Christchurch City Northern cycle Walking and cycling 2019 2023 $3,848,000 L H L H H Council connection: Belfast - Kaiapoi Major cycleway: Christchurch City Papanui Parallel Walking and cycling 2014 2016 $10,616,608 - H L H H Council (Grassmere route- Papanui to city) Major cycleway: Christchurch City Walking and cycling Rapanui-Shag Rock 2014 2017 $20,837,528 - H L H H Council (Sumner to city) Major cycleway: Uni- Christchurch City Walking and cycling Cycle (University to 2014 2016 $9,532,768 - H L H H Council city) Major cycleway: Little Christchurch City Walking and cycling River link (Little River 2014 2016 $4,322,060 - H L H H Council route) Major cycleway: Christchurch City Walking and cycling Nor'West Arc (western 2014 2018 $20,788,448 - H L H H Council inner orbital) Major cycleway: Christchurch City Walking and cycling Southern Lights (south 2014 2016 $3,045,232 - H L H H Council to city) Major cycleway: Christchurch City Walking and cycling Wheels to Wings 2015 2020 $12,164,683 - H L H H Council (airport route) Major cycleway: Christchurch City Northern Line (northern Walking and cycling 2014 2016 $5,664,589 - H L H H Council rail route-Belfast to Riccarton) Major cycleway: South Christchurch City Walking and cycling Express (Hornby rail- 2014 2020 $13,419,700 - H L H H Council Templeton to city) Major cycleway: Christchurch City Walking and cycling Quarryman's Trail 2014 2018 $17,532,808 - H L H L Council (Halswell to city)

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 48 37 Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) Old Waimakariri Bridge Waimakariri pedestrian and cycle 201520 201520 Walking and cycling $750,000 L H L H H District Council facilitiesKaiapoi-Belfast 17 18 Cycleway

High priority public transport route and facility improvements

Core public transport Christchurch City Public transport route and facilities: 2015 2017 $5,200,000 - H L M M Council infrastructure Orbiter Core public transport Christchurch City Public transport route and facilities: 2016 2019 $7,348,640 - H L M M Council infrastructure South-west (Wigram and Halswell) Core public transport Christchurch City Public transport route and facilities: 2019 2021 $2,190,240 - H L L M Council infrastructure South (Colombo Street) Core public transport Christchurch City Public transport route and facilities: 2018 2020 $1,508,000 - H L L M Council infrastructure North (Papanui and Belfast) Public transport Christchurch City Public transport facilities: Northlands 2016 2017 $1,040,000 - H L M M Council infrastructure hub Transitional public Christchurch City Public transport transport infrastructure 2016 2020 $1,560,000 - H L M M Council infrastructure to support hubs and spokes

Other road-related projects

New and improved Intersection Christchurch City infrastructure for improvement: Lower 2014 2015 $1,676,267 L L L H M Council local roads Styx/Marshland New and improved Marshland Road bridge Christchurch City infrastructure for (linked to intersection 2014 2015 $5,172,220 L L L M M Council local roads safety improvement) New and improved NZ Transport Lyttelton tunnel safety infrastructure for 2016 2017 $12,605,000 - - - H H Agency retrofit (deluge) system state highways

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 49 38 Sustainability Start End Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Organisation Activity class Project name Total cost and resilience year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) New and improved NZ Transport Barters/Main South infrastructure for 2015 2017 $8,907,700 M L - H - Agency intersection state highways New and improved NZ Transport Ashley to Belfast safety infrastructure for 2016 2017 $400,000 - - - H L Agency improvements state highways New and improved NZ Transport Rakaia to Ashburton infrastructure for 2017 2020 $3,999,600 - - - H L Agency safety improvements state highways New and improved NZ Transport Woodend corridor infrastructure for 2016 2016 $350,000 - M - M - Agency safety improvements state highways New and improved State Highway 1 - NZ Transport infrastructure for Rolleston intersection 2016 2019 $1,000,000 H - L M M Agency state highways improvements New and improved NZ Transport Halswell Road four- infrastructure for 2018 2019 $16,939,397 L M L M M Agency laning state highways New and improved Carmen/Main South NZ Transport infrastructure for minor intersection 2015 2016 $1,500,000 M L - M - Agency state highways improvements New and improved Rolleston State Selwyn District infrastructure for Highway 1 grade 2020 2022 H - L M M Council 31,600,000 local roads separation

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 50 39 Priority 4: Other improvements

All other improvement projects are included in priority 4. Projects over $5M are deemed as regionally significant and shown in this summary. All other improvement projects with expenditure between $300,000 and $5M are shown by district in Appendix 1. Projects under $300,000 are covered within the minor improvements activities.

Access improvements to the Port of Timaru are currently included as being of regional significance under priority 4. Even though the current cost estimates are less than $5M, they are regarded as being of regional significance as, as noted earlier, freight demand to the Port of Timaru is expected to grow, and further investigation may result in elevating this project to priority 3.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 51 40 Table 4: Regionally significant priority 4 projects

Organisation Activity class Project name Start End Total cost Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Sustainability year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) and resilience (H,M,L) Ashburton New and improved New Second Ashburton 2020 2025 $27,861,980 L L - L H District Council infrastructure for urban bridge, local roads Ashburton River Ashburton New and improved Thompsons Track and 2015 2024 $15,762,833 L - - H M District Council infrastructure for Mayfield Valetta Road local roads improvements

Christchurch New and improved Fitzgerald Avenue 2017 2024 $21,070,000 L - H - M City Council infrastructure for bridges local roads

Christchurch New and improved Second coat sealing 2016 2022 $3,568,604 L - H - L City Council infrastructure for city-wide local roads

Christchurch New and improved AC surfacing CDB 2017 2022 $13,434,174 L L H - L City Council infrastructure for including Four Avenues local roads

Christchurch New and improved AC surfacing to roads 2017 2022 $17,910,514 L L H - L City Council infrastructure for outside the CBD local roads

Christchurch New and improved R102 Pages Road 2019 2023 $14,872,000 L - H - M City Council infrastructure for bridge local roads

Christchurch New and improved Network management 2015 2020 $9,661,600 M M L H H City Council infrastructure for improvement: Ferry local roads and Moorhouse road widening Christchurch New and improved Lincoln Road widening 2016 2019 $9,539,920 L M L M M City Council infrastructure for (Curletts to Wrights) local roads

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 52 41 Organisation Activity class Project name Start End Total cost Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Sustainability year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) and resilience (H,M,L) Christchurch New and improved AAC Moorhouse 2020 2024 $9,308,000 - M H M M City Council infrastructure for Avenue local roads

Christchurch New and improved AAC Bealey Avenue 2019 2024 $9,186,493 - M H M M City Council infrastructure for local roads

Christchurch New and improved Corridor: Sumner 2014 2017 $8,488,980 - L M M L City Council infrastructure for streets and lanes local roads corridor

Christchurch New and improved Corridor: Ferry Road 2014 2018 $7,546,500 L L L H L City Council infrastructure for corridor local roads

Christchurch New and improved Network management 2018 2024 $6,344,000 - M L M L City Council infrastructure for improvements: Main local roads North Road corridor

Christchurch New and improved AAC Montreal Street 2020 2024 $5,767,064 - M H M M City Council infrastructure for (Beveridge-Cambridge) local roads

Christchurch New and improved Network management 2016 2024 $5,512,000 M M M H M City Council infrastructure for improvements: local roads Blenheim Road-Main South Road

Christchurch Walking and cycling Coastal pathway 2014 2016 $9,424,802 - H L M L City Council

NZ Transport New and improved Enhanced network 2016 2018 $7,500,000 L - - M H Agency infrastructure for resilience Canterbury local roads

NZ Transport New and improved Christchurch to 2018 2018 $5,000,000 M L - - L Agency infrastructure for Rolleston alternative local roads route

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 53 42 Organisation Activity class Project name Start End Total cost Freight Choice Earthquake Safety Sustainability year year (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L) and resilience (H,M,L) NZ Transport New and improved Walnut Avenue 2018 2020 $5,162,538 M L - L - Agency infrastructure for intersection local roads improvements

Selwyn District New and improved Dunns Crossing/ 2019 2019 $5,000,000 M - L M M Council infrastructure for Rolleston Drive south local roads Rolleston State Highway 1 Timaru District New and improved Timaru Port southern 2016 2018 $4,750,000 L - - L M Council infrastructure for access local roads

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 54 43 EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE FORECASTS

Total public expenditure for Canterbury land transport projects is forecast to be nearly $4Mover $4B over the next ten years. Figures 5 and 6 show the distribution of this expenditure by activity class and approved authority, respectively.

Figure 6: Expenditure by approved organisation

Figure 7: Expenditure by activity class

Ten-year expenditure by activity and approved authority is shown in Table 5. The primary sources of revenue for publicly funded transport projects are the NLTF and local Government contributions. Local roads and public transport services are co-funded from the NLTF and local Government, with the respective contributions depending upon the Financial Assistance Rate (FAR) applied by the NZ Transport Agency to each authority. All NZ

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 55 44 Transport Agency and New Zealand Police activities are fully funded from the NLTF. NLTF contributions to the ten year expenditure figures are shown in Table 6.

Note: Funding for some projects is yet to be finalised; in particular, those Christchurch city projects associated with earthquake recovery are subject to further discussion and consultation.

In addition to the activities and funding shown in this Plan, the following activities are funded by local authorities without assistance from the NLTF:

 footpath infrastructure maintenance, renewals and improvements  public off-street parking provision, maintenance and enforcement of parking regulations  amenity improvements, landscaping and urban design elements within the street environment.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 56 45 Table 5: Ten-year expenditure by organisation and activity

NZ Transport Waimate Waimakariri Mackenzie Kaikōura Hurunui Dept. of Agency Ashburton Timaru District Selwyn District Environment Christchurch Activity class District District District District District Conservation Canterbury District Council Council Canterbury City Council Council Council Council Council Council (Mt Cook) Highway Council Network Transport planning - - $795,000 $418,000 - - $150,000 $3,400,000 - $3,000,000 -$820,000 $524,500

$200,000$182,0 $592,910$597,1 Road safety promotion - $1,200,000 $3,051161,000 $2,183,000 - - - $13,969,038 $1,380,000- $1,307,080 00 10 Walking and cycling - $1,100,000 $650,000 ------$193,550,802 - $215,650 $633,247,869$5 Public transport ------11,323,795 $525,935,420$4 - Existing ------86,251,658 $107,312,449$2 - New ------5,072,137 Public transport ------$23,423,000 - - infrastructure

Maintenance and $39,162,070$39 $439,290,471$1 $20,683,404 $60,815,000 $52,765,100 $64,880,000 $15,563,654 $4,990,000 - $590,500 - $44,211,491 operation of local roads ,687,634 84,680,578

- Maintenance, $39,162,070$39 $315,763,334$1 $20,683,404 $57,815,000 $14,815,000 $64,880,000 $15,563,654 $4,990,000 - $590,500 - $43,065,104 operations ,687,634 84,680,578

- Emergency works - $3,000,000 ------$123,527,137 - $1,146,387

- Network user ------information

$14,699,000$16 $37,020,300$37 $315,759,713$1 Renewal local roads $32,631,187 $49,555,000 $73,768,000 $56,702,000 $7,010,000 - $540,000 - $78,625,356 ,199,000 ,864,943 35,911,558

New and improved $3,000,000$2,5 $403,306,00035 $4,451,138 $13,780,000 $15,365,000 $57,045,000 $800,000 $3,991,233 - - - $6,982,250 infrastructure local roads 00,000 ,000,000

$3,000,000$2,5 - Minor improvements $3,556,138 $10,230,000 $15,365,000 $5,945,000 $500,000 $3,991,233 - - $35,000,000 -$26,497,233 $6,445,000 00,000 - Other $895,000 $3,550,000 - $51,100,000 - $300,000 - - - $368,306,000 -$,1312,000,000 $537,250

Maintenance and operation of state ------$385,380,870 - highways Renewal of state ------$176,747,490 - highways New and improved infrastructure for state ------$1,338,497,233 - highways

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 57 46 NZ Transport Waimate Waimakariri Mackenzie Kaikōura Hurunui Dept. of Agency Ashburton Timaru District Selwyn District Environment Christchurch Activity class District District District District District Conservation Canterbury District Council Council Canterbury City Council Council Council Council Council Council (Mt Cook) Highway Council Network

Total forecasted $146,394504,00 $33,262,654$36 $13,000,000$12 $80,916,513$82 $636,647,869$5 $1,392,299,024 $1,902,005,593$ $57,765,729 $126,450,000 $181,228,000 $1,130,500 $131,866,327 expenditure 0 ,762,654 ,982,000 ,300,920 14,723,975 $631,961,174 1,901,635,592

Table 6: Ten-year expenditure from National Land Transport Fund

NZ Transport Waimate Mackenzie Dept. of Agency Ashburton Waimakariri Timaru District Selwyn District Kaikōura Hurunui District Environment Christchurch Activity class District District Conservation Canterbury District District Council Council Council District Council Council Canterbury City Council Council Council (Mt Cook) Highway Council Network Transport planning - - $423,150 $221,540 - - $76,600 $1,737,400 - $1,512,000 -$820,000 $265,045 $1,684,200$1,62 $100,200$91,56 $302,944$305,1 Road safety promotion - $613,200 $1,156,990 - - - $7,047,931 $1,380,000- $663,011 4,850 0 00 Walking and cycling - $561,000 $347,500 ------$51,980,000 - $109,382 $323,482,374$2 Public transport ------61,185,074 $264,322,950$2 - Existing ------68,665,919 $12,786,790$54, - New ------816,455 Public transport ------$78,972,000 - - infrastructure

Maintenance and $20,002,262$22, $90,564,521$92, $12,125,318 $31,068,260 $28,112,203 $34,386,400 $8,248,737 $2,500,130 - $590,500 - $22,430,464 operation of local roads 277,049 319,142

- Maintenance and $20,002,262$22, $90,564,521$92, $12,125,318 $29,535,260 $7,998,650 $34,386,400 $8,248,737 $2,500,130 - $590,500 - $21,848,837 operations 277,049 319,1442

- Emergency works - $1,533,000 ------$581,627

- Network user ------information $7,789,270$8, $18,913,678$19, $62,730,628$68, Renewal local roads $19,158,225 $25,320,500 $39,302,240 $30,052,060 $3,511,870 - $540,000 - $39,869,261 584,270 347,420 136,157 New and improved $1,590,000$1, $17,640,000$17, $2,593,230 $7,047,300 $8,202,550 $30,233,850 $403,500 $2,038,873 - - - $3,541,448 infrastructure local roads 325,000 640,000 $1,590,000$1, - Minor improvements $2,084,730 $5,227,300 $8,202,550 $3,150,850 $250,500 $2,038,873 - - $17,640,000 -$26,497,233 $3,268,950 325,000 - Other $508,500 $1,820,000 - $27,083,000 - $153,000 - - - - -$1,312,000,000 $272,498

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 58 47 NZ Transport Waimate Mackenzie Dept. of Agency Ashburton Waimakariri Timaru District Selwyn District Kaikōura Hurunui District Environment Christchurch Activity class District District Conservation Canterbury District District Council Council Council District Council Council Canterbury City Council Council Council (Mt Cook) Highway Council Network Maintenance and operation of state ------$385,380,870 - highways Renewal of state ------$176,747,490 - highways New and improved infrastructure for state ------$1,338,497,233 - highways

Total forecasted $17,628,007$ $6,515,700$6,50 $41,334,357$42, $325,219,774$3 $1,902,005,593$ $33,876,772 $64,610,260 $78,071,790 $96,050,840 $1,130,500 $310,447,080 $66,878,610 expenditure 19,483,007 7,060 045,042 25,219,774 1,901,635,592

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 59 48 MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

The performance of the activities included this Plan will be assessed by monitoring the indicators and targets contained in Table 7. The 2024 and 2042 targets are consistent with those shown in the 2012 RLTS.

Table 7: Outcomes and performance measures

Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Lead agency

Objective 1: A land transport network that addresses current and future transport demand

Roads are maintained to a level that is To be developed in conjunction To be developed. To be developed. NZ Transport Agency, district fit for purpose. with ONRC. councils.

Travel times and travel time reliability Level of service on sample of key Level of service C Level of service C NZ Transport Agency/RCAs via for freight and passenger trips are routes outside greater or better is or better is annual survey conducted by maintained at current levels outside of Christchurch. maintained over maintained over Environment Canterbury. greater Christchurch. life of Plan. life of Plan. Travel time variability on sample No increase over No increase over Regional Council - via extension of of intra-regional and inter-regional 2015. 2015. NZ Transport Agency Travel Time freight routes. Survey methodology. Strategic freight routes are suitable for Percentage of strategic freight 100%. 100%. NZ Transport Agency. HPMVs. routes suitable for HPMVs. To be developed in conjunction with NZ Transport Agency. Within greater Christchurch, the Peak cycle mode share for all trip To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of percentage of peak trips made by cycle legs - greater Christchurch. Ministry of Transport HTS data. or bus is increased. Peak public transport mode share To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of for all trip legs - greater Ministry of Transport HTS data. Christchurch. Within greater Christchurch the total Total number of cycle and bus To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 60 49 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Lead agency

number of trips made by cycle or bus is trips. Ministry of Transport HTS data. increasing. Average travel time reliability is Travel time variability on strategic Less than 15% Less than 15% NZ Transport Agency/Environment maintained at 15% or better in greater road network within greater variability by variability by Canterbury/ Christchurch City Christchurch. Christchurch - AM and PM peak. 2024. 2042. Council - Christchurch Travel Time Surveys. Travel time variability on strategic Less than 10% Less than 10% NZ Transport Agency/Environment road network within greater variability by variability by Canterbury/Christchurch City Christchurch - inter-peak. 2024. 2042. Council - Christchurch Travel Time surveys.

Objective 2: A land transport system that is increasingly free from death and serious injury

Fewer deaths and serious injuries. Deaths per annum on regions' Not more than 30 Not more than 25 NZ Transport Agency - to supply roads. per annum. per annum. Regional Council with annual data. Serious injuries per annum on Not more than Not more than NZ Transport Agency - to supply regions' roads. 250 per annum. 200 per annum. Regional Council with annual data. Fewer crashes. Total crashes per annum. To be developed. To be developed. NZ Transport Agency - to supply Regional Council with annual data.

Objective 3: The Canterbury earthquakes recovery is supported

Repair of horizontal infrastructure is Percentage of road repairs To be developed. 100%. Christchurch City Council, delivered in accordance with timetables completed. Waimakariri District Council. and standards contained in infrastructure recovery plans and the Lane kilometres of road repairs To be developed. 100%. Christchurch City Council, cost-sharing agreement with completed. Waimakariri District Council Government. Percentage of repairs completed To be developed. To be developed. Christchurch City Council, to time frames and standards in Waimakariri District Council. recovery plans. Transport infrastructure supports the Percentage of AAC transport To be developed. 100%. Christchurch City Council.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 61 50 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Lead agency

redevelopment of central Christchurch. projects completed. The provision of transport infrastructure Measure to be developed in To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council. and services support the objectives conjunction with LURP reporting and policies of the Canterbury and review. Possibly biennial Earthquake Land Use Recovery Plan. evaluation report).

Objective 4: The land transport network is resilient and supports long-term sustainability

Infrastructure and services are more Number of events that close the To be developed. To be developed. NZ Transport Agency, resilient to disruption from acute events strategic road network and the dDistrict councils. such as natural hazards or crashes. number of hours to resolve them. Long-term sustainability issues are fully Total petrol sales per capita. Less than 600 Less than 500 Regional Council, with fuel sales incorporated into transport planning litres per capita by litres per capita by data supplied quarterly by decisions: energy efficiency. 2023. 2042. Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council and Timaru District Council. Total diesel sales/Regional GDP. Reduce to 22 Reduce to 20 Environment Canterbury - via litres/$1,000 GDP. litres/$1,000 GDP. Infometrics Regional GDP data and TA fuel sales data.

Long-term sustainability issues are fully Tonnes of CO2 from domestic land Return to 1998 Halve by 2040 Regional Council, with fuel sales incorporated into transport planning transport per capita. levels – 1.45M from 2007 levels - data supplied quarterly by decisions: climate change. tonnes per annum 0.95M tonnes per Christchurch City Council, annum Waimakariri District Council and Timaru District Council. Long-term sustainability issues are fully Number of public transport trips To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council. incorporated into transport planning made by people aged 65+. decisions: Ageing population. Long-term sustainability issues are fully Number of trips made by active To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of incorporated into transport planning travel modes. Ministry of Transport HTS decisions: public health. data/other travel diary data.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 62 51 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Lead agency

Transport infrastructure and services Average trip length for all trips - To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of are integrated with and support land Canterbury region. Ministry of Transport Household use and development patterns, Travel Survey (HTS) data. contained in the RPS and district plans. Percentage of households in To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via accessibility urban areas within ten minutes’ modelling that is updated walk of a key activity centre. biannually to reflect walking network changes Percentage of households in To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via accessibility greater Christchurch within 30 modelling that is updated minutes of public transport trip or biannually to reflect PT, cycle and ten minutes’ walk/cycle trip of a walking network changes. key activity centre.

Objective 5: Investment in land transport infrastructure and services is efficient

All agencies involved in the provision of Annual assessment and report by N/A. N/A. NZ Transport Agency, infrastructure and services will ensure NZ Transport Agency to RTC. Ddistrict councils, expenditure is efficient and strive for Regional Council. productivity improvements. NZ Transport Agency will monitor and Annual assessment and report by N/A. N/A. NZ Transport Agency. report on the efficiency of NLTF NZ Transport Agency to RTC. expenditure in Canterbury.

Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Monitoring responsibilities

Objective 1: A land transport network that addresses current and future transport demand

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 63 52 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Monitoring responsibilities

Roads are maintained to a level that is Percentage of roads complying To be developed. To be developed. NZ Transport Agency, district fit for purpose, as defined by the with ONRC. councils. ONRC. Travel times and travel time reliability Level of service on regional Level of service C Level of service C NZ Transport Agency/RCAs via for freight and passenger trips are strategic network outside greater or better is or better is annual survey conducted by maintained at current levels outside of Christchurch. maintained over maintained over Environment Canterbury. greater Christchurch. life of Plan. life of Plan. Travel time variability on key intra- No increase over No increase over Regional Council - via extension of regional and inter-regional freight 2015. 2015. NZ Transport Agency Travel Time routes. Survey methodology. Strategic freight routes are suitable for Percentage of strategic freight 100%. 100%. NZ Transport Agency. HPMVs. routes suitable for HPMVs.

Within greater Christchurch, the Peak cycle mode share for all trip To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of percentage of peak trips made by cycle legs - greater Christchurch. Ministry of Transport HTS data. or bus is increased. Peak public transport mode share To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of for all trip legs - greater Ministry of Transport HTS data. Christchurch. Average travel time reliability is Travel time variability on strategic Less than 15% Less than 15% NZ Transport Agency/Environment maintained at 15% or better in greater road network within greater variability by variability by Canterbury/ Christchurch City Christchurch. Christchurch - AM and PM peak. 2024. 2042. Council - Christchurch Travel Time Surveys. Travel time variability on strategic Less than 10% Less than 10% NZ Transport Agency/Environment road network within greater variability by variability by Canterbury/Christchurch City Christchurch - inter-peak. 2024. 2042. Council - Christchurch Travel Time surveys.

Objective 2: A land transport system that is increasingly free from death and serious injury

Fewer deaths and serious injuries. Deaths per annum on regions' Not more than 30 Not more than 25 NZ Transport Agency - to supply

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 64 53 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Monitoring responsibilities

roads. per annum. per annum. Regional Council with annual data.

Serious injuries per annum on Not more than Not more than NZ Transport Agency - to supply regions' roads. 250 per annum. 200 per annum. Regional Council with annual data. Fewer crashes. Total crashes per annum. To be developed. To be developed. NZ Transport Agency - to supply Regional Council with annual data.

Objective 3: The Canterbury earthquakes recovery is supported

Repair of horizontal infrastructure is Percentage of road repairs To be developed. 100%. Christchurch City Council, delivered in accordance with timetables completed. Waimakariri District Council. and standards contained in infrastructure recovery plans and the Lane kilometres of road repairs To be developed. 100%. Christchurch City Council, cost-sharing agreement with completed. Waimakariri District Council Government. Percentage of repairs completed To be developed. To be developed. Christchurch City Council, to time frames and standards in Waimakariri District Council. recovery plans. Transport infrastructure supports the Percentage of AAC transport To be developed. 100%. Christchurch City Council. redevelopment of central Christchurch. projects completed. The provision of transport infrastructure Measure to be developed in To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council. and services support the objectives conjunction with LURP reporting and policies of the Canterbury and review. Possibly biennial Earthquake Land Use Recovery Plan. evaluation report.

Objective 4: The land transport network is resilient and supports long-term sustainability

Infrastructure and services are more Hours per annum that sections of To be developed. To be developed. NZ Transport Agency. resilient to disruption from acute events the strategic road network are such as natural hazards or crashes. closed.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 65 54 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Monitoring responsibilities

Long-term sustainability issues are fully Total petrol sales per capita. Less than 600 Less than 500 Regional Council, with fuel sales incorporated into transport planning litres per capita by litres per capita by data supplied quarterly by decisions: energy efficiency. 2023. 2042. Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri District Council and Timaru District Council. Total diesel sales/Regional GDP. Reduce to 22 Reduce to 20 Environment Canterbury - via litres/$1,000 GDP. litres/$1,000 GDP. Infometrics Regional GDP data and TA fuel sales data.

Long-term sustainability issues are fully Tonnes of CO2 from domestic land Return to 1998 Halve by 2040 Regional Council, with fuel sales incorporated into transport planning transport per capita. levels – 1.45M from 2007 levels - data supplied quarterly by decisions: climate change. tonnes per annum 0.95M tonnes per Christchurch City Council, annum Waimakariri District Council and Timaru District Council. Long-term sustainability issues are fully Number of public transport trips To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council. incorporated into transport planning made by people aged 65+. decisions: Ageing population. Long-term sustainability issues are fully Percentage of trips made by To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of incorporated into transport planning active travel modes. Ministry of Transport HTS decisions: public health. data/other travel diary data. Transport infrastructure and services Average trip length for all trips - To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via analysis of are integrated with and support land Canterbury region. Ministry of Transport Household use and development patterns, Travel Survey (HTS) data. contained in the RPS and district plans. Percentage of households in To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via accessibility urban areas within ten minutes’ modelling that is updated walk of a key activity centre. biannually to reflect walking network changes Percentage of households in To be developed. To be developed. Regional Council - via accessibility greater Christchurch within 30 modelling that is updated minutes of public transport trip or biannually to reflect PT, cycle and

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 66 55 Outcome Performance indicator 2024 targets 2042 targets Monitoring responsibilities

ten minutes’ walk/cycle trip of a walking network changes. key activity centre.

Objective 5: Investment in land transport infrastructure and services is efficient

All agencies involved in the provision of Annual assessment and report by N/A. N/A. NZ Transport Agency. infrastructure and services will ensure NZ Transport Agency to RTC. expenditure is efficient and strive for productivity improvements. NZ Transport Agency will monitor and Annual assessment and report by N/A. N/A. NZ Transport Agency. report on the efficiency of public NZ Transport Agency to RTC. expenditure in Canterbury.

Monitoring implementation of the Plan

The implementation of the Plan will be monitored and reported to RTC no less than annually. Reporting will include:

 actual versus planned expenditure for all regionally significant activities  actual versus planned expenditure for each approved authority  actual versus planned project and programme delivery for all regionally significant activities.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 67 56 APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Regional programme details

The full regional programme is shown in the following tables. This includes projects that are not regionally significant but provide local benefit and are under $5M.

Table 8: Project information by approved authority

Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years Ashburton District Council 1 Transport planning Transport planning 2015 2024 $524,500 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $1,307,080 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $44,211,491 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $78,625,356 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $6,445,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Walnut Avenue intersection improvement 2018 2020 $2,100,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads New Second Ashburton urban bridge, Ashburton River 2020 2025 $27,861,980 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Thompsons Track and Mayfield Valetta Road improvements 2015 2024 $15,762,833 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Park Street extension 2015 2015 $400,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Tinwald corridor associated improvement 2016 2018 $150,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Land purchase, Ashburton second urban bridge 2016 2016 $860,000 Christchurch City Council 1 Transport planning Transport planning 2015 2024 $3,000,000 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $13,969,038 1 Public transport infrastructure Public transport infrastructure 2015 2024 $23,423,000 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $439,290,471 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $258,863,316 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $35,000,000 2 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Wigram Magdala link 2014 2016 $26,270,141 2 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Cranford Street upgrade 2014 2022 $19,455,828 2 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Northern arterial extension 2014 2022 $39,408,849 2 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Ferrymead Bridge replacement and improvement 2014 2015 $9,378,608 2 Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Northern cycle connection: Belfast-Kaiapoi 2018 2023 $3,848,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 68 57 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Papanui parallel (Grassmere route-Papanui to city) 2014 2016 $10,849,112 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Rapanui-Shag Rock (Sumner to city) 2014 2017 $21,145,053 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Uni-Cycle (University to city) 2014 2016 $9,623,488 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Little River link (Little River route) 2014 2016 $4,875,172 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Nor'West Arc (western inner orbital) 2014 2018 $21,133,734 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Southern Lights (south to city) 2014 2016 $2,070,622 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Wheels to Wings (airport route) 2015 2020 $12,372,880 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Northern Line (northern rail route-Belfast to Riccarton) 2014 2016 $6,748,786 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: South Express (Hornby rail-Templeton to city) 2014 2020 $4,016,192 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Quarryman's Trail (Halswell to city) 2014 2018 $17,822,621 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Otakaro (Avon River route-New Brighton to city) 2014 2020 $21,935,880 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Opawaho River route (Heathcote River trail) 2014 2019 $17,102,873 2 Walking and cycling Major cycleway: Heathcote expressway (Heathcote rail route-city) 2014 2019 $13,085,159 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads Annex/Birmingham/Wrights route upgrade 2014 2016 $11,351,260 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Belfast/Marshland intersection 2014 2019 $1,826,436 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Greers/Northcote/Sawyers Arms 2014 2015 $5,109,763 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads Northcote Road (four-laning) 2014 2016 $7,361,162 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream inter improvements: Cranford Street downstream 2015 2019 $8,875,000 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream inter improvements: Sawyers Arms/Waimakariri 2015 2019 $1,014,000 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream intersection improvements: Memorial/Orchard 2017 2019 $1,014,000 3a New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream route improvement: Marshland-QEII-Shirley 2016 2018 $1,014,000 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream route improvements: Harewood Road 2016 2018 $442,000 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads Sumner-Lyttelton/Evans Pass tbc tbc tbc $286,000$182 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream route improvements: Cotswold Avenue Tbc2023 Tbc2024 ,000 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Armagh Street (Durham-Montreal) 2017 2018 $2,047,743 $7,463,040$9, 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC central city: Wayfinding 2015 2019 463,040 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Colombo Street (Bealey-Kilmore) 2017 2018 $2.397,071 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Colombo Street (St Asaph-Moorhouse) 2017 2018 $3,029,994 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Ferry Rd (St Asaph-Fitzgerald) 2017 2018 $1,885,422 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Hereford Street (Cambridge-Montreal) 2016 2018 $1,494,474 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Hereford Street (Madras-Manchester) 2017 2018 $1,901,927 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Hereford Street (Manchester-Cambridge) 2016 2017 $4,451,273

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 69 58 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Hereford Street (Montreal-Rolleston) 2016 2017 $714,299 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC High Street (Manchester-St Asaph) 2017 2018 $2,924,651 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Cashel Street (Cambridge-Montreal) Tbc2023 Tbc2024 $1,302,013 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Madras street (Kilmore-Lichfield) Tbc2021 Tbc2023 $3,671,959 $14,914,024$ 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Kilmore Street (Fitzgerald-Park) two-way conversion 2015 2016 8,414,024 3b New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Victoria Street 2015 2016 $7,083,286 $1,435,487$2, 3b Walking and cycling AAC Antigua Street (St Asaph-Moorhouse) 2015 2016 935,487 3b Walking and cycling AAC High Street (Hereford-Manchester) 2017 2017 $2,796,057 3b Walking and cycling AAC Oxford Terrace (Kilmore-Madras) 2016 2016 $96,876 3b Walking and cycling AAC Salisbury Street 2016 2017 $6,161,314 3 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Slow core TP30k 2015 2016 $2,500,000 3 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Riccarton Avenue 2015 2020 $4,223,507 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Aldwins/Buckleys/Linwood (13) 2017 2019 $1,014,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Aldwins/Ensors/Ferry 2015 2017 $4,186,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Barrington/Lincoln/Whiteleigh (3) 2016 2018 $1,326,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Bealey/Madras (6) 2016 2018 $1,014,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Bealey/Papanui/Victoria (14) 2017 2019 $1,014,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Byron/Gasson (11) 2017 2019 $1,326,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Cashel/Fitzgerald (2) 2016 2018 $996,938 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Clarence/Riccarton/Straven Tbc2020 Tbc2021 $286,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Gloucester/Stanmore Tbc2018 Tbc2019 $286,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Gasson/Madras/Moorhouse (1) 2016 2018 $1,014,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Ilam/Middleton/Riccarton (7) 2016 2018 $1,014,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Manchester/Moorhouse/Pilgrim (5) 2016 2018 $1,014,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Marshland/New Brighton/North Parade/Shirley (8) 2017 2018 $286,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream inter safety: Main North Road/Marshland/Spencerville (Chaneys) 2015 2015 $988,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream safety improvements: Sawyers Arms route 2015 2017 $442,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Safety improvements: Guardrails – new assets Tbc2019 Tbc2024 $4,680,000 3d Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Northern cycle connection: Belfast-Kaiapoi 2019 2023 $3,848,000 3e Public transport infrastructure Core public transport route and facilities: Orbiter 2015 2017 $5,200,000 3e Public transport infrastructure Core public transport route and facilities: South-west (Wigram and Halswell) 2016 2019 $7,348,640 3e Public transport infrastructure Core public transport route and facilities: South (Colombo Street) 2019 2021 $2,190,240

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 70 59 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 3e Public transport infrastructure Core public transport route and facilities: North (Papanui and Belfast) 2018 2020 $1,508,000 3e Public transport infrastructure Public transport facilities: Northlands hub 2016 2017 $1,040,000 3e Public transport infrastructure Transitional public transport infrastructure to support hubs and spokes 2016 2020 $1,560,000 3e Public transport infrastructure Public transport facilities Tbc2017 Tbc2019 $3,796,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Lower Styx/Marshland 2014 2015 $1,676,267 3f New and improved infrastructure for local roads Marshland Road bridge (linked to intersection safety improvement) 2014 2015 $5,172,220 3 New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream safety improvements: Sawyers Arms pedestrian crossing 2014 2016 $487,272 34 Walking and cycling Belfast Park: Cycle/pedestrian rail underpass 2014 2015 $1,261,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Fitzgerald Avenue bridges 2017 2024 $21,070,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Second coat sealing city-wide 2016 2022 $3,568,604 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AC surfacing CDB including Four Avenues 2017 2022 $13,434,174 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AC surfacing to roads outside the CBD 2017 2022 $17,910,514 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads R102 Pages Road bridge 2019 2023 $14,872,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Network management improvement: Ferry and Moorhouse Road widening 2015 2020 $9,661,600 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Lincoln Road widening (Curletts to Wrights) 2016 2019 $9,539,920 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Moorhouse Avenue 2020 2024 $9,308,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Bealey Avenue 2019 2024 $9,186,493 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: Sumner streets and lanes corridor 2014 2017 $8,488,980 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: Ferry Road corridor 2014 2018 $7,546,500 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Network management improvements: Main North Road corridor 2018 2024 $6,344,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Montreal Street (Beveridge-Cambridge) 2020 2024 $5,767,064 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Network management improvements: Blenheim Road-Main South Road 2016 2024 $5,512,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Awatea route upgrade 2014 2015 $2,009,111 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Halswell Junction Road extension 2014 2016 $4,855,500 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Wigram Road extension-Halswell Junction to Marshs 2014 2015 $2,786,234 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Wigram Road upgrade 2014 2015 $1,392,862 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Curries/Tanner 2015 2016 $520,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Ferry/Humphries/Main Tbc2023 Tbc2024 $182,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Ferry/Moorhouse/Wilsons Tbc2022 Tbc2024 $702,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Highsted/Sawyers Arms 2017 2019 $2,288,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream safety improvements: Sawyers Arms pedestrian crossing 2014 2016 $487,272 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Clyde/Riccarton/Wharenui 2016 2018 $680,160 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Network management improvements: Dunbars Road 2016 2017 $728,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 71 60 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Deans/Moorhouse 2016 2017 $520,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Matipo/Riccarton 2017 2019 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Inner Harbour Road improvements (Lyttelton-Diamond Harbour) 2015 2020 $2,769,520 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvements: Blenheim/Foster/Mandeville 2018 2024 $26,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvements: Blenheim/Hansons 2018 2024 $26,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvements: Blenheim/Wharenui 2018 2024 $26,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads New links: Main South Road to CB2/7 2019 2020 $2,080,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Cranford/Main North 2020 2022 $702,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream intersection safety: Orchard/Wairakei (29) 2016 2019 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Network management improvement: Waterloo Park 2015 2016 $832,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Network management improvements: Halswell Junction Road 2018 2024 $936,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads New links: Halswell Junction Road to Connaught 2018 2019 $1,040,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: Edgeware corridor 2015 2016 $3,043,040 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: Linwood corridor 2015 2017 $920,400 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: Main North Road corridor 2016 2019 $2,568,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: New Brighton corridor 2014 2015 $4,329,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Corridor: Selwyn Street corridor 2014 2016 $490,178 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvements: Memorial/Roydvale 2020 2021 $416,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Barbadoes/Bealey (16) 2018 2020 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Durham/Moorhouse (20) 2018 2020 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Falsgrave/Fitzgerald/Moorhouse (21) 2019 2021 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream intersection safety: Cotswold/Sawyers Arms 2017 2019 $702,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Harewood/Main North/Papanui 2018 2020 $1,066,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Burwood/Mairehau 2014 2019 $1,114,839 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Greers/Harewood 2018 2020 $1,319,760 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Harewood/Railway 2020 2022 $442,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection improvement: Harewood/Stanleys 2019 2020 $416,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Blenheim/Matipo (24) 2019 2021 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Cavendish/Styx Mill (28) 2020 2022 $702,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Fitzgerald/Hereford (17) 2018 2020 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Hills/North Avon (25) 2019 2021 $1,326,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Moorhouse/Selwyn (22) 2018 2019 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Riccarton/Waimairi (18) 2018 2019 $286,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 72 61 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Cashmere/Centaurus/Colombo/Dyers Pass (260) 2014 2018 $1,752,988 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Safety improvements: Guardrails-Dyers Pass Road 2015 2018 $1,716,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Ferry/St Johns 2018 2023 $338,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Route improvements : Old Main North Road 2018 2024 $416,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Riccarton Avenue 2018 2019 $4,223,507 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Montreal Street (Bealey-Beveridge and St Asaph-Moorhouse) 2020 2022 $2,702,769 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Gloucester Street (Oxford-Montreal) 2019 2020 $2,475,002 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Gloucester Street (Manchester-Colombo) 2019 2020 $1,992,775 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Rolleston Avenue (Hereford-Armagh) 2018 2019 $1,262,061 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC central city connecting roads and lanes 2019 2020 $1,081,280 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Park Terrace 2018 2019 $1,040,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Bealey/Manchester (15) 2018 2020 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Intersection safety: Deans/Riccarton/Riccarton (31) 2020 2022 $1,014,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Gloucester Street (Madras-Manchester) 2019 2020 $961,584 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Worcester Street (Oxford-Montreal) 2018 2019 $846,050 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Worcester Street (Montreal-Rolleston) 2018 2019 $782,758 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Durham Street (Tuam-St Asaph) 2018 2019 $765,966 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Montreal Street (Cambridge-Tuam) 2019 2020 $765,966 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Montreal Street (Tuam-St Asaph) 2019 2020 $765,966 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Armagh Street (Manchester-Colombo) 2018 2019 $759,077 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads RONS downstream intersection improvements: Crofton/Sawyers 2019 2021 $702,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Cambridge Terrace (Montreal-Rolleston) 2019 2020 $531,383 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Chester Street (Madras-Oxford) 2019 2020 $520,978 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Lichfield Street (Madras-Manchester) 2018 2019 $443,118 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Rolleston Avenue (Cambridge-Hereford) 2018 2019 $373,726 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Cambridge Terrace (Kilmore-Barbadoes) 2019 2020 $279,864 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Armagh Street (Montreal-Park) 2018 2019 $215,280 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Chester Street (Cranmer-Park) 2019 2020 $183,706 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads AAC Chester Street (Durham-Cranmer) 2019 2020 $101,899 4 Walking and cycling Coastal pathway 2014 2016 $9,424,802 4 Walking and cycling AAC Cashel Street (Manchester-Cambridge) 2019 2021 $4,620,483 4 Walking and cycling Belfast Park: Cycle/pedestrian rail underpass 2014 2015 $1,261,000 4 Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Development connections-North 2021 2024 $2,288,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 73 62 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 4 Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Development connections-east 2019 2024 $4,368,000 4 Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Development connections-south 2019 2024 $4,368,000 4 Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Development connections-west 2021 2024 $2,288,000 4 Walking and cycling Local cycleway: Northern arterial link Cranford-Rutland Reserve 2018 2020 $1,040,000 Department of Conservation (Mt Cook) 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $590,500 Environment Canterbury 1 Transport planning Transport planning 2015 2024 $3,400,000 1 Public transport (existing) Public transport (existing) 2015 2024 $525,935,420 Hurunui District Council 1 Transport planning Transport planning 2015 2024 $150,000 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $592,910 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $39,162,070 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $37,020,300 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $3,991,233 Kaikōura District Council 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $200,000 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $4,990,000 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $7,010,000 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $500,000 Mackenzie District Council 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $15,563,654 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $14,699,000 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $3,000,000 NZ Transport Agency 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $1,380,000 1 Maintenance and operation of state highways Maintenance and operation of state highways 2015 2024 $385,380,870 1 Renewal of state highways Renewal of state highways 2015 2024 $176,747,490 1 New and improved infrastructure for state highways State highway minor improvements 2015 2024 $26,497,233 2 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Christchurch northern arterial rural with QEII 2015 2015 $214,379,715 Christchurch southern motorway Halswell Junction Road to Rolleston (stages 2 and 2 New and improved infrastructure for state highways 2015 2015 $256,575,401 3) 2 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Harewood Road to Yaldhurst Road four-laning 2015 2015 $75,140,981 2 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Western Belfast bypass 2014 2015 $121,750,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 74 63 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 2 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Groynes to Sawyers Arms Road 2014 2015 $42,300,000 3a New and improved infrastructure for state highways Brougham Street corridor improvements 2017 2019 $12,500,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for state highways Pineacres safety improvements 2016 2016 $3,300,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for state highways Brougham/Burlington intersection 2015 2016 $1,350,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Lyttelton tunnel safety retrofit (deluge) system 2017 2017 $12,605,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Barters/Main South intersection 2015 2017 $8,907,700 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Ashley to Belfast safety improvements 2016 2017 $400,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Rakaia to Ashburton safety improvements 2017 2020 $3,999,600 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Woodend corridor safety improvements 2016 2016 $350,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways State Highway 1-Rolleston intersection improvements 2016 2019 $1,000,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Halswell Road four-laning 2018 2019 $16,939,397 3f New and improved infrastructure for state highways Carmen/Main South minor intersection improvements 2015 2016 $1,500,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Western corridor improvements 2019 2023 $3,001,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways HPMV T2 Darfield to Lyttelton 2016 2018 $450,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Ashburton intersection improvements 2018/19 2021/22 $800,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Bridge Street to Waimataitai Street four-laning 2019/20 2020/21 $1,490,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Christchurch to Rolleston alternative route 2018/19 2020/21 $5,000,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Enhanced network resilience Canterbury 2016/17 2018/19 $7,500,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Hilton Highway four-laning 2019/20 2020/21 $4,800,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Leadleys Road right turn bay 2019/20 2020/21 $213,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Main South/Aylesbury intersection 2018/19 2019/20 $1,500,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Marshand to Burwood median barrier 2019/20 2020/21 $4,000,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways State Highway 1 Kaikōura coast resilience project 2018/19 2021/22 $2,850,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways State Highway 74/Scruttons 2019/20 2019/20 $2,844,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways State Highway 77/Park Street int TS 2018/19 2020/21 $1,710,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways State Highway 82 Elephant Hill Stream bridge 2019/20 2020/21 $3,446,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Timaru intersection improvements 2019/20 2020/21 $1,760,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Waimataitai to Te Weka four-laning 2019/20 2019/20 $4,920,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Walnut Avenue intersection improvements 2018/19 2020/21 $5,162,538 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Washdyke Creek bridge 2019/20 2019/20 $1,700,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways West Melton to Darfield passing opp 2019/20 2020/21 $1,270,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for state highways Yaldhurst to West Melton passing opp 2019/20 2020/21 $1,170,000 4 Transport planning Christchurch network operating plan implementation 2015/16 2015/16 $50,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 75 64 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 4 Transport planning State Highway 1 Christchurch to Dunedin corridor (Christchurch section) 2015/16 2016/17 $200,000 4 Transport planning State Highway 73/76 West Melton – tunnel 2015/16 2015/16 $250,000 4 Transport planning State Highway 75 Halswell Road corridor 2016/17 2016/17 $100,000 4 Transport planning State Highway 1 and 71 Picton to Christchurch (NRR22) 2015/16 2016/17 $150,000 4 Transport planning Strategic transport model updating 2014/15 2018/19 $115,000 4 Transport planning Weigh right facilities – Canterbury 2016/17 2017/18 $560,898 Selwyn District Council 1 Transport planning Transport planning 2015 2024 $418,000 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $2,183,000 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $64,880,000 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $56,702,000 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $5,945,000 3c New and improved infrastructure for local roads Prebbleton Hampton Shands CSM2 upgrades 2018 2018 $3,000,000 3 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Prebbleton Blakes Shands CSM2 upgrades 2020 2020 $3,500,000 3f New and improved infrastructure for local roads Rolleston State Highway 1 grade separation 20220 20232 $31,600,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Rolleston Drive south Dunns Crossing/Rolleston State Highway 1 2019 2019 $5,000,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Prebbleton Blakes Shands CSM2 upgrades 2020 2020 $3,500,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Tennyson/Brookside Rolleston State Highway 1 2018 2018 $2,500,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Prebbleton Hampton Springs CSM2 upgrades 2016 2016 $2,000,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Dunns Crossing/Rolleston State Highway 1 2020 2020 $500,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Prebbleton Trentds upgrade CSM2 upgrades 2021 2021 $500,000 Timaru District Council 1 Transport planning Transport planning 2015 2024 $795,000 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $3,161,000 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $52,765,100 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $73,768,000 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $15,365,000 2 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Factory Road bridge 2011 2014 $3,589,000 4 Walking and cycling New cycleways 2015 2017 $300,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Timaru Port southern access 2016 2018 $4,750,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Washdyke industrial area road upgrades 2015 2017 $2,700,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Arowhenua Road upgrade 2016 2019 $2,800,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Washdyke new local roads-land purchase 2017 2017 $300,000

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 76 65 Start End Total cost for Priority Activity class Project name year year all years 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Brenton Road reconstruction 2016 2017 $890,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Orari Station Road upgrade 2016 2016 $300,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Rangitata Island Road improvement 2016 2016 $800,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Rangitata Island Road improvement 2017 2017 $400,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Orari Back Road seal extension 2015 2016 $800,000 Waimakariri District Council 1 Road safety promotion Road safety promotion 2015 2024 $1,200,000 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $60,815,000 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $49,555,000 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $10,230,000 3d Walking and cycling Old Waimakariri Bridge pedestrian and cycle facilities 2015 2015 $750,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Southbrook Road/South Belt intersection upgrade 2015 2015 $965,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Kaiapoi Pa Road upgrade 2015 2015 $750,000 4 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Thongcaster Road (Depot Road to Browns Rock Road) improvements 2015 2015 $1,000,000 Waimate District Council 1 Maintenance and operation of local roads Maintenance and operation of local roads 2015 2024 $20,683,404 1 Renewal of local roads Renewal of local roads 2015 2024 $32,631,187 1 New and improved infrastructure for local roads Local road improvements (minor improvements) 2015 2024 $3,556,138

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 77 66 Appendix 2: Significance policy

Each regional transport committee must, in accordance with section 106(2) of the Act, adopt a policy that determines “significance” in respect of variations it wishes to make to its RLTP as provided for by section 18D of the Act and the activities that are included in the plan under section 16.

If good reason exists to do so, a regional transport committee may prepare a variation to its RLTP during the period to which it applies. A variation may be prepared by a regional transport committee:

i. at the request of an approved organisation or the transport agency

ii. on the regional transport committee‘s own motion.

Consultation is not required for any variation to the RLTP that is not significant in terms of this Significance Policy.

The Significance Policy is defined below.

Variations are considered significant if:

 An improvement activity is large or of strategic importance. These are activities with an estimated construction cost (including property) exceeding $5M and/or that have significant effect on the objectives in this Plan or have significant network, economic or land use implications or impact on other regions.  Activities relating to local road maintenance, local road renewals, local road minor capital works, and existing public transport services valued at over $5M or 20 per cent of the total value of the activity class for the relevant authority, whichever is the larger.  Removal of activities within the programmes identified as priority 2 or 3 which would individually or collectively reduce programme expenditure by more than 20 per cent over the six years of this Plan.

 Any other activity that the regional transport committee resolves as being regionally significant.

For the avoidance of doubt, the following variations to the RLTP are considered not significant for purposes of consultation:

i. Addition of an activity or combination of activities that has previously been consulted on in accordance with section 18 of the Act.

ii. A scope change to an activity that, when added to all previous scope changes for the same activity, varies by less than $5M from its cost as shown in the current NLTP and does not materially change the objective(s) and proposed outcomes of the activity. iii. Replacement of activities within an approved programme or group with activities of the same type and general priority. iv. Funding requirements for preventative maintenance and emergency reinstatement activities. v. For improvement projects variations to timing, cash flow or total cost resulting from costs changes.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 78 67 vi. End-of-year carry-over of allocations. vii. Addition of the investigation or design phase of a new activity which has not been previously consulted upon in accordance with section 18 of the Act. viii. Variations to timing of activities if sufficient reasoning is provided for the variation and the variation does not substantially alter the balance.

For activities included in the Plan, section 16(3)(d) of the LTMP requires the Plan to show the order priority for all activities identified by the regional transport committee as significant. The policy for determining significance for 16(3)(d) is that projects are deemed regionally significant if they are:

 priority 1, 2 or 3 activities  priority 4 activities and have a total cost of over $5M  any other activity that the regional transport committee resolves as being regionally significant.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 79 68 Appendix 3: Assessment of compliance with LTMA section 14

Section 16(6) of the LTMA requires the inclusion of an assessment of how the Plan complies with section 14 of the Act. The following outlines how this requirement has been met.

An RLTP must contribute to the purpose of the LTMA which is “to contribute to an effective, efficient, and safe land transport system in the public interest” (section 3, LTMA). This purpose is reflected in the objectives of this Plan and the prioritisation process and the resulting statement of priorities. In addition, the NZ Transport Agency and approved authorities provide assessments of effectiveness and efficiency in submitting projects for funding. Safety is explicitly included as an objective in the Plan.

An RLTP must be consistent with the GPS which has . Although the GPS is a consultation draft at this point, it has been incorporated in the development of this Plan and referenced at numerous points. There is also a significant degree of overlap between the objectives of the draft GPS and this Plan.

The RTC must have considered alternative regional land transport objectives that would contribute to the purpose of the LTMA, and the feasibility and affordability of those alternative objectives. The development of theis consultation draft took account of the existing 2012 RLTS and the objectives within that. An ILM process was also completed and provided consideration of alternatives and their feasibility. The public notification, submissions and hearings will provide further opportunity for consideration of alternative objectives.

The RLTP must take into account any:

 NEECS  relevant NPS and any relevant RPSs or plans that are, for the time being, in force under the RMA  likely funding from any source.

The Plan supports the NEECS through the objectives of improving transport choice and improving resilience and long-term sustainability, and the assessment of regional priorities in the Plan. Similarly, the relevant sections of the Canterbury RPS and district plans are reflected in the projects put forward in this Plan and the respective priorities applied.

All likely funding sources have been taken into account and are identified within this Plan.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 80 69 Appendix 4: Assessment of the relationship of Police activities to the RLTP

Section 16(6) of the LTMA requires the inclusion of an assessment of the relationship of Police activities to the RLTP.

Police in Canterbury are bound by the New Zealand Police Statement of Intent 2014/15 to 2017/18, which establishes the strategic programme of works for the Police and aligns with the Government priorities of reducing death and injuries on our roads. New Zealand’s road safety strategy, Safer Journeys, provides a focus for road policing. This strategy has led to the introduction of a range of measures to promote a safe road system which will reduce the number of deaths and injuries on the roads. The New Zealand Police receives annual Government funding of around $300M for road safety work. In the Canterbury Police district, which does not include Kaikōura, Police have identified the following as priorities:

 speeding  drink/drug driving  restraint use  intersections.

The Police work with other transport sector agencies, including the Road Safety Trust and local authorities to co-ordinate delivery of programmes. In Canterbury local authorities, the Police and other partner agencies develop annual road safety action plans and regularly report against these plans.

The New Zealand Police were invited to provide a summary of expenditure for the Canterbury district to include in this Plan, but declined to do so.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 81 70 Appendix 5: Summary of consultation

The Ddraft RLTP was developed with input from district council staff, the NZ Transport Agency and the New Zealand Police. It took into account relevant existing public documents as required by the LTMA. Where appropriate, the aspirations and targets of the existing 2012 Canterbury RLTS have been incorporated.

The Plan was approved for consultation by the RTC on 23 December 2014 and will be available for the public to make submissions from Wednesday, 21 January 2015. Was open for submissions from 21 January-20 February 2015. A total of 53 submissions were received.

Hearings were held at Rolleston on 4 March 2015 to hear the ten submitters who wished to be heard. The Hearing Panel consisted of Commissioner Mr Rex Williams (Chair), Mayor David Ayers, Cr Kerry Stevens, Cr Phil Clearwater, Mr Jim Harland and Cr Derek Milton. The Hearing Panel decisions were recommended to the RTC on 30 March 2015 and approved by Environment Canterbury in April 2015. The Hearing Panel’s report is available on the Environment Canterbury website.

Submissions on the draft RLTP must be delivered by 4.00pm on Friday, 20 February 2015 to:

Free Post 1201 Email: [email protected] RLTP Submissions Fax: (03) 365 3194 Environment Canterbury PO Box 345 CHRISTCHURCH

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 82 71 Appendix 6: Legislative requirements

The following extracts from the LTMA outline the key requirements with respect to regional land transport plans.

Section 14 - core requirements of regional land transport plans

Before a regional transport committee submits a regional land transport plan to a regional council, the regional transport committee must:

a. be satisfied that the regional land transport plan

i. contributes to the purpose of this Act ii. is consistent with the GPS on land transport

b. have considered

i. alternative regional land transport objectives that would contribute to the purpose of this Act ii. the feasibility and affordability of those alternative objectives

c. have taken into account any

i. NEECS ii. relevant NPS and any relevant RPSs or plans that are, for the time being, in force under the RMA iii. likely funding from any source.

Section 16 – form and content of regional land transport plants

1. A regional land transport plan must set out the region’s land transport objectives, policies, and measures for at least ten financial years from the start of the regional land transport plan.

2. A regional land transport plan must include:

a. a statement of transport priorities for the region for the ten financial years from the start of the regional land transport plan b. a financial forecast of anticipated revenue and expenditure on activities for the ten financial years from the start of the regional land transport plan c. all regionally significant expenditure on land transport activities to be funded from sources other than the NLTF during the six financial years from the start of the regional land transport plan d. an identification of those activities (if any) that have inter-regional significance.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 83 72 3. For the purpose of seeking payment from the national land transport fund, a regional land transport plan must contain for the first six financial years to which the plan relates:

a. … activities proposed by approved organisations in the region relating to Local road maintenance, local road renewals, local road minor capital works, and existing public transport services

b. (not relevant to Canterbury)

c. the following activities that the regional transport committee decides to include in the regional land transport plan: i. activities proposed by approved organisations in the region … other than those activities specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) ii. activities relating to state highways in the region that are proposed by the agency iii. activities, other than those relating to state highways, that the agency may propose for the region and that the agency wishes to see included in the regional land transport plan

d. the order of priority of the significant activities that a regional transport committee includes in the regional land transport plan under paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)

e. an assessment of each activity prepared by the organisation that proposes the activity under paragraph (a), (b), or (c) that includes: i. the objective or policy to which the activity will contribute ii. an estimate of the total cost and the cost for each year iii. the expected duration of the activity iv. any proposed sources of funding other than the NLTF (including, but not limited to, tolls, funding from approved organisations, and contributions from other parties) v. any other relevant information f. the measures that will be used to monitor the performance of the activities.

4. An organisation may only propose an activity for inclusion in the regional land transport plan if it or another organisation accepts financial responsibility for the activity.

For the purpose of the inclusion of activities in a national land transport programme:

a. a regional land transport plan must be in the form and contain the detail that the agency may prescribe in writing to regional transport committees b. the assessment under subsection (3)(e) must be in a form and contain the detail required by the regional transport committee, taking account of any prescription made by the agency under paragraph (a)

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 84 73 5. For the purpose of the inclusion of activities in a national land transport programme:

a. a regional land transport plan must be in the form and contain the detail that the agency may prescribe in writing to regional land transport committees b. the assessment under subsection (3)(e) must be in a form and contain the detail required by the regional transport committee, taking account of any prescription made by the agency under paragraph (a).

6. A regional land transport plan must also include:

a. an assessment of how the plan complies with section 14 b. an assessment of the relationship of Police activities to the regional land transport plan c. a list of activities that have been approved under section 20 but are not yet completed d. an explanation of the proposed action, if it is proposed that an activity be varied, suspended or abandoned e. a description of how monitoring will be undertaken to assess implementation of the regional land transport plan f. a summary of the consultation carried out in the preparation of the regional land transport plan g. a summary of the policy relating to significance adopted by the regional transport committee under section 106(2) h. any other relevant matters.

For the purposes of this section, existing public transport services means the level of public transport services in place in the financial year before the commencement of the regional land transport plan, and any minor changes to those services.

Section 18 - consultation requirements

1. When preparing a regional land transport plan, a regional transport committee:

a. must consult in accordance with the consultation principles specified in section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 b. may use the special consultative procedure specified in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Section 106 - functions of regional transport committees

1. The functions of each regional transport committee are:

a. to prepare a regional land transport plan, or any variation to the plan, for the approval of the relevant regional council b. to provide the regional council with any advice and assistance the regional council may request in relation to its transport responsibilities.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 85 74

2. Each regional transport committee … must adopt a policy that determines significance in respect of:

a. variations made to regional land transport plans under section 18D b. the activities that are included in the regional land transport plan under section 16.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 86 75 Appendix 7: Glossary Active transport – Transport modes that rely on human power, primarily walking and cycling.

AM peak – The period between 07:00 and 09:00 on weekdays.

An Accessible City (AAC) – An Accessible City refers to the transport chapter of the Christchurch Central Recovery Plan. It was launched in October 2013 and is available from the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority.

Canterbury – For the purposes of this strategy, the Canterbury region is the administrative area covered by the Canterbury Regional Council, excluding the administrative area covered by the Waitaki District Council. The whole of the Waitaki district is covered under the Otago Regional Land Transport Strategy.

Capacity – The theoretical maximum number of vehicles (vehicular capacity) or persons (person capacity) that can pass through a given section of road or an intersection during a given period of time, usually expressed as vehicles per hour or persons per hour.

Community transport – A transport service established and operated by a community for members of that community.

Corridor – A geographical area usually defined by a railway, motorway, roadway, or other physical element and its immediate surrounding area. Freight hub – Is a physical location where freight vehicles converge on a common user facility for the purpose of transferring goods within or between transport modes.

Greater Christchurch – For the purpose of this strategy, greater Christchurch is the area covered by the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy (UDS). Greater Christchurch comprises the Christchurch City Council area, including Lyttelton Harbour but not the remainder of Banks Peninsula, and parts of Waimakariri and Selwyn district councils. For a map of the UDS area, visit www.greaterchristchurch.org.nz.

Infrastructure – All fixed components of a transportation system, including roadways and bridges, railways, ports, park-and-ride sites, bus stops/shelters and other physical elements. Interchanges – Places where people or goods transfer between vehicles or from one mode to another.

Inter-peak – The period between 09:00 and 16:00 on weekdays.

Investment Logic Mapping (ILM) – A technique to test and confirm the rationale for a proposed investment.

Land transport – means: (a) transport on land by any means, (b) the infrastructure, goods and services facilitating that transport. The definition also includes coastal shipping. Land transport system – All infrastructure, services, mechanisms and institutions that contribute to providing for land transport. Level of service – A qualitative measure that describes the operational conditions of a road or intersection.

Level of service ‘C’ – The Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 2 Roadway Capacity describes this level of service as “The zone of stable flow but most

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 87 76 drivers are restricted to some extent in their freedom to select their desired speed and to manoeuvre within the traffic stream. The general level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level”. In the context of this RLTS, the term is used to describe the desired minimum level of service on the regional strategic road network that lies outside of greater Christchurch.

Local roads – Roads operated by territorial local authorities. LTMA – Land Transport Management Act 2003.

Mobility – The ability to move or be moved freely and easily. Mobility is not the same as accessibility which is about the ease of reaching a specific location or service. Multi-modal – Used to describe travel or transport of goods involving more than one transport mode. Mode – A categorisation of transport methods, e.g. private motor vehicle, walking, cycling, rail, public transport.

Motor vehicles – A vehicle powered by an engine or motor, including cars, vans, trucks, trains and motorbikes.

National Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (NEECS) – A Government strategy prepared under the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act 2000. National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) – The dedicated part of the Crown Bank Account into which land transport revenue, as defined in section 6 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003, is paid. National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) – The mechanism through which the NZ Transport Agency allocates funds for land transport infrastructure and services. New Zealand Transport Agency (NZ Transport Agency) – A Government transport agency created under section 93 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003.

Network – Infrastructure or services that are connected to enable the transition of people and goods from one piece of infrastructure or service to another.

One Network Road Classification (ONRC) – A road classification system jointly developed by the NZ Transport Agency and local government to provide a nationally consistent framework for determining road function, future levels of service, the appropriate maintenance levels, and improvement priorities.

Outcome – Outcomes set out how the objectives of the strategy will be delivered.

Peak period – The time period, usually in the morning and in the afternoon, when the heaviest demand occurs on a transportation facility or corridor.

PM peak – The period between 16:00 and 18:00 on weekdays.

Private motor vehicles – Motor vehicles owned, leased or hired for sole use by an individual, household or organisations.

Public transport – Passenger transportation services available to the public on a regular basis using vehicles, including buses, trains, trams, ferries and taxis, that transport people for payment of a fare, usually but not exclusively over a set route or routes from one fixed point to another.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 88 77 Regional GDP – Annual estimates of regional Gross Domestic Product for the Canterbury region. These estimates are provided by Infometrics.

RMA – Resource Management Act 1991.

Rideshare – The act of co-ordinating the sharing of rides with other people in a private motor vehicle, sometimes referred to as carpooling. RLTS – Regional Land Transport Strategy.

Road Controlling Authority (RCA) – City councils, district councils and the NZ Transport Agency.

Roads of National Significance (RONS) – A group of state highway projects commenced in 2009 to address Government priorities for the state highway system within, or close to, New Zealand’s five largest population centres.

Regional Transport Committee (RTC) – A committee of Environment Canterbury required by the Land Transport Management Act 2003. The Committee is responsible for the preparation and approval of this Plan.

Rural area – For the purposes of this strategy, the definition used by Statistics New Zealand is applied: “The rural areas of New Zealand are those which are not specifically designated as 'urban'. They include rural centres and district territories where these are not included in main, secondary or minor urban areas”. (Refer to definitions in this glossary of rural centres, main, secondary and minor urban areas.)

Single occupancy vehicle – A vehicle carrying a driver with no passengers. State highway – A road managed by the NZ Transport Agency and gazetted as state highway. Strategic network – A network of routes that has been defined as having strategic significance at a regional level.

Sustainability - In the transport sector, this is taken to mean finding ways to move people and goods in ways that reduce the impact upon the environment, economy and society.

Territorial local authorities – City councils and district councils. Transport Officer Group – An informal group of transport staff from the regional council, district councils and the NZ Transport Agency. Total Mobility – A subsidised transport service to increase the mobility of people with serious mobility constraints. Volume – The number of vehicles or people on a motorway, roadway or any other transportation facility.

Vehicle occupancy – The number of people in a vehicle.

Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 89 78 Item 6 Attachment 2

Draft Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025

Hearing decisions

March 2015

90 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Table of contents

1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Index by submitter ...... 4 3. Summary of decisions and reasons ...... 6 4. Summary of additional amendments to Draft RLTP ...... 52

Environment Canterbury 91 2 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

1. Introduction

Hearings of the Draft Regional Land Transport Plan 2015-2025 were held in the Selwyn District Council Chambers in Rolleston on Wednesday, 4 March 2015. This report records the decisions and the reasons for the decisions as agreed by the Hearing Panel. The decisions are the Hearing Panel’s recommendations to the Regional Transport Committee (RTC). The Hearing Panel consisted of Commissioner Rex Williams (Chair), Mayor David Ayers, Cr Kerry Stevens, Cr Phil Clearwater, Mr Jim Harland and Cr Derek Milton. A total of 53 submissions were received. An index of all submissions is provided in Section 2 of this report. Ten of the 53 submitters appeared and spoke to their submissions at the Hearing. Section 3 outlines the Panel’s decisions. The table in section 3.1 shows the decisions on each individual submission. Changes to the monitoring tables arose in a number of submissions and proposed changes to the Monitoring and Performance Indicators section are outlined in section 4.1. Further work in this area is also recommended to the RTC. Section 4.2 outlines additional minor changes required in moving from the draft to the final version of the Plan. A tracked changes version of the Plan showing the all recommended changes sits alongside this decisions report as a separate document.

Environment Canterbury 92 3 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

2. Index by submitter

Submission Submitter name (written) Representing # 1 Michael de Hamel 2 Russell Hawkes Environment Southland 3 Nichola Costley West Coast Regional Council 4 Jeska McNicol Spencerville Residents Association 5 Andrew Mazey Selwyn District Council 6 Steven Muir Cycle Trailers New Zealand 7 Fallon Foster 8 Rosemary Neave 9 Martine Marshall 10 Phil Melhopt Prime Port Timaru 11 Robert Fleming 12 LK Luda 13 Kaila Colbin 14 Geoff Butcher 15 Anake Goodall 16 Barbara Insull 17 Adam Lines 18 Dirk De Lu Spokes Canterbury Cyclists Association 19 Meg Christine Living Streets Otautahi/Christchurch 20 Alisa Davies ACC 21 Rory Jones 22 Mark Wareing Philip Wareing Ltd 23 David Gordon KiwiRail Holdings Ltd 24 Dr Alistair Humphrey Canterbury District Health Board 25 Peter Bodeker Otago Regional Council 26 Patrick Morgan CAN - Cycling Advocates Network 27 Martin Trusttum 28 Laurie McCallum 29 David Hawke 30 Eileen Hennessy 31 Jacqui Wood 32 Carina Duke Blind Foundation 33 Brian Fauth Ashburton District Council 34 Catarina Gutierrez 35 Paul Gains 36 Mary Jane Newman 37 Vivien Dostine New Zealand Horse Network 38 Ali Jones, Phil Clearwater Christchurch City Council 39 Jennifer Kenix 40 Laura Furneaux 41 Dr Malcolm McKellar Cataract and Refractive Surgeon 42 Claire Fell BECA, on behalf of New Zealand Fire Services 43 Wendy Smith Aoraki Development Business and Tourism

Environment Canterbury 93 4 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Submission Submitter name (written) Representing # 44 Wendy Smith South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce 45 Mark Yaxley New Zealand Transport Agency 46 Andrew Dixon Timaru District Council 47 Rex Verity 48 Robert Henderson Bicycle Ventures Ltd/Nextbike 49 Carla Dodds New Zealand Automobile Association Inc. 50 Warren Suckling Oil Distributors Ltd 51 Chanelle Smith 52 Peter Davie Lyttelton Port of Christchurch 53 Ian Barker, Carolyn Shaw 54 John Ombler Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority

Environment Canterbury 94 5 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

3. Summary of decisions and reasons

3.1 Decisions listed by submitter

Draft RLTP Submitter Submission point/amendment sought Evaluation and recommendation reference Michael Hamel Seeks to have the Lyttelton-Sumner route via Decision 1.1: Incorporate the Evans Pass route with the other Evans Pass removed from the Plan until emergency works being undertaken jointly by the CCC and NZ Submission #1 further analysis is provided to justify the Transport Agency as part of the repair of horizontal infrastructure. expense. Reasons: The CCC and NZ Transport Agency have now committed to undertake this work as part of the repair of horizontal infrastructure to be completed by 2016/2017.

Environment General comment Submitter seeks greater recognition of the Decisions: Southland inter-regional dependence between Otago/ 2.1 Southland and Canterbury, and the road and : Change mapping (page 7) to reflect cross boundary linkages on Submission #2 rail links that support these. the road and rail network outside of Canterbury. 2.2: Amend paragraph six on page 8 as follows to provide greater emphasis on the cross boundary links:

State Highway 1 and the South Island main trunk rail line provide an essential links north to Marlborough and the North Island and south to Otago and Southland for both tourists and freight. State Highways 7 and 73 link Nelson and the West Coast, and State Highway 8 provides a key tourist and freight link to Queenstown and Central Otago and Southland. With international airports in both Christchurch and Queenstown and the concentration of warehousing and freight distribution within greater Christchurch, maintaining the reliability of these inter-regional routes is critical for tourism and freight.

Reasons: The Panel acknowledges the importance of the inter- regional links and agrees with the submitter.

Environment Canterbury 6 95 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Seeks inclusion of Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail as Decision 2.3: Add Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail as a link of inter-regional a significant transport link. significance.

Reason: The Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail crosses regional boundaries and supports active transport and tourism.

The West Coast Pages 23-24 Submitter supports the inclusion of Mingha Decision 3.1: Add Mingha Bluff to Rough Creek project to Table 2, Regional Council Bluff to Rough Creek project as priority 2. page 24. Statement of Submission #3 priorities Seeks project to be added to Table 2, page 24. Reasons: The project is referred to within the text on priority 2. Omission of this project from Table 2 was an error. Priority 2 - Finishing what we have started

Spencerville Pages 13-16 Support. Decision 4.1: No change to document. Residents’ Reasons Association Issues and : Support noted. No change required. challenges Submission #4

Pages 17-18 Support. Decision 4.2: No change to document.

Objectives Reasons: Support noted. No change required.

Page 19 Support, but feel safety should be the number Decision 4.3: The Panel confirms that the alphanumeric labelling one priority, not number four. within priority 3 did not imply priority. Consequential changes are: Priorities  Removal of alphanumeric labelling on page 25.  Removal of column 1 of Table 3.  Amend text of final sentence on page 24 to read:

The grouping of projects into subcategories and the ordering of these subcategories does not imply any priority order. The relative priority and importance of individual projects can be seen through the assessment of strategic priority.

Reasons: The Panel recognises the importance of safety through inclusion in the issues and objectives within the Plan. The inclusion

Environment Canterbury 7 96 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

of these safety projects within priority 3 reflects this.

The Panel confirmed that all projects within priority 3 are of equal priority.

Additional Support Main North Road/Marshlands Road/ Decision 4.4: No change to document. comments Spencerville Road project in the Plan. Reasons: Support noted. No change required.

Selwyn District Pages 13-16 Support. Decision 5.1: No change to document. Council Future transport Reasons: Support noted. No change required. Submission #5 challenges for the region

Pages 17-18 Support. Decision 5.2: No change to document.

Objectives Reasons: Support noted. No change required.

Pages 19-30 Support with amendments. Decision 5.3: No change to document.

Priorities Reasons: Support noted. Amendments sought are addressed separately in decisions below.

Page 24 Seeks inclusion of Mingha Bluff to Rough Decision 5.4: Add Mingha Bluff to Rough Creek project to Table 2, Creek project in Table 2. page 24. Priority 2 Reasons: The project is referred to within the text on priority 2. Omission of this project from Table 2 was an error.

Page 28 Seeks inclusion of Prebbleton/Hamptons/ Decision 5.5: No change to document. Shands intersection upgrade as priority 3c Reasons Priority 3 rather than priority 3f. : Current status of this project reflects evaluation of the Transport Officers Group. While there may be safety benefits, this is not in the national list of top 100 intersections; the primary benefits relate to traffic flow and the project is yet to have confirmation of funding from NZ Transport Agency.

Panel confirmed that all projects within priority 3 are of equal priority.

Environment Canterbury 8 97 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Page 28 Seeks inclusion of Shands Road/Shands Road Decision 5.6: Amend to include Prebbleton/Hampton/Shands intersection upgrade in priority 3c. intersection upgrade as priority 3c. Priority 3 Reasons: This intersection was included in the national list of top 100 intersections requiring safety improvements, which is the primary criterion for inclusion as priority 3c.

Page 29 Seeks amendment to timing for Rolleston Decision 5.7: Change timing for Rolleston State Highway 1 grade State Highway 1 grade separation. separation to start 2022 and end 2023. Priority 3 Reasons: Revised timing improves accuracy.

Page 29 Submits that the scoring for Rolleston State Decision 5.8: No change to document. Highway 1 grade separation project be Priority 3 amended to “H” (high) for Transport Choice. Reasons: This intersection already has traffic signals and the The project involves supporting existing metro additional benefits for transport choice through grade separation do PT route and aligning pedestrian/cycling not warrant an assessment as H (high). improvements and rail through grade separation.

Page 30 Rolleston Drive south Rolleston should be Decision 5.9: Agree and amend page 30 Rolleston Drive south called Dunns Crossing/Rolleston State Rolleston to Dunns Crossing/Rolleston State Highway 1. Priority 3 Highway 1. Reasons: Minor amendment.

Page 42 Delete Dunns Crossing/Rolleston State Decision 5.10: Agree, on page 42, delete Dunns Crossing/Rolleston Highway 1 as a separate activity and amend State Highway 1 as a separate project and amend Rolleston Drive Appendix 1 Rolleston Drive south Rolleston activity as South Rolleston to Dunns Crossing/Rolleston State Highway 1. above in table on page 42. Reasons: Minor amendment.

Page 42 Change Trends Road to Trents Road. Decision 5.11: Agree; change Trends Road to Trents Road.

Appendix 1 Reasons: Minor correction.

Steven Muir Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 6.1: No change to document. Cycle trailers should be Christchurch. Reasons New Zealand removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed

Environment Canterbury 9 98 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Submission #6 added to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

F Foster Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 7.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #7 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

R Neave Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 8.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #8 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

M Marshall Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 9.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #9 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

PrimePort Timaru Page 12 Submitter pleased to note reference to Port of Decision 10.1: No change to document. However, refer to proposed Timaru and the expected significant growth. changes to NZ Transport Agency four-to-six-year programme. Submission #10 Transport Submitter suggests that further improvements Reasons demand will be required to accommodate increasing : Projects submitted by NZ Transport Agency for inclusion demand from the port, rather than may be in their four-to-six-year programme address these at least in part. required.

Pages 13-16 Supports. Decision 10.2: Support noted. No change to document.

Future transport Submitter notes the importance of well- Reasons: None required. challenges for the planned and maintained freight transport region routes from Rolleston to Timaru.

Page 17 Submitter cautions the generalisation that the Decision 10.3: No change to document. However, refer to proposed existing network outside of Christchurch has changes to NZ Transport Agency four-to-six-year programme. Objective 1 adequate throughput capacity for expected Reasons: The text within the Plan is prefaced by the words “In traffic volumes. Container and other freight ” and it is acknowledged that through Timaru is growing. Freight through general ... there are some specific areas that require capacity improvements outside of greater Christchurch.

Environment Canterbury 10 99 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Timaru can alleviate pressure on the Projects submitted by NZ Transport Agency for inclusion in their four- Christchurch network. to-six-year programme address these at least in part.

Page 17 Support. Decision 10.4: No change to document.

Objectives 2-5 Reasons: Support noted.

Page 19 Submitter agrees that a provision must be Decision 10.5: No change to document. made for a permanent southern access to the Reasons Priorities port. : Support noted.

Activities that Seeks Timaru State Highway 1 four-laning. Decision 10.6: No change to document. Refer to proposed changes should be Congested areas of Evans Street are a to NZ Transport Agency four-to-six-year programme. removed or bottleneck for freight to and from the port and Reasons: The text within the Plan is prefaced by the words “In added affects overall efficiency and effectiveness of general..” and it is acknowledged that there are some specific areas the South Island network. that require capacity improvements outside of greater Christchurch. Projects submitted by NZ Transport Agency for inclusion in their four- to-six-year programme address these at least in part.

Additional Without appropriate investment in the capillary Decision 10.7: No change to document. comment of the network the arteries will be less Reasons effective. It is difficult to determine the level of : Agreed with sentiment regarding capillary network. The investment at a local level on minor roads and inclusion of all minor works is not appropriate for the RLTP. Details bridges to support the whole freight task. of these works can be obtained from district councils or the NZ Transport Agency.

R Fleming Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 11.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #11 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

L K Luda Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 12.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #12 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Environment Canterbury 11 100 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

K Colbin Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 13.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #13 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

G Butcher Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 14.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #14 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

A Goodall Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 15.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #15 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

B Insull Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 16.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #16 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

A Lines Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 17.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #17 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Spokes Pages 13-16 Traffic congestion a major issue. Decision 18.1: Amend last paragraph, page 15. Replace with: Canterbury “ Cyclist Issues and Greenfield development has been advantaged At a regional level, the infrastructure and services proviced will Association challenges in the LURP, meaning greater travel distances. make relatively little difference to these issues-

Submission #18 Funding active transport infrastructure and the with benefits of using it will attract a critical mass to normalise it. Earthquake recovery should have At a regional level, substantial changes are required in infrastructure, included an emphasis on active and public services and travel behaviour to make a meaningful difference to

Environment Canterbury 12 101 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

transport. these issues.

Submitter strongly disagrees with the comment Reasons: The comments are noted. While the statement regarding “at a regional level the infrastructure and the impact of the national and international changes and services provided will make relatively little technological change remains true, the change included in the above difference to these issues (climate change and recommendation more accurately reflects the situation. It is noted sustainability)”. that the scale of the active travel programme being implemented by CCC will have an impact if it achieves its aims.

Pages 17-18 Objective 1: The implicit recognition that road Decision 18.2: No change to document. width expansion is not viable and support for Reasons Objectives people to walk, cycle and use public transport : Christchurch is the largest urban centre and the largest egion’s major is refreshing. CCC is the only Canterbury market in Canterbury. Christchurch also includes the r body to be seriously taking up this enlightened port and airport through which exports and imports traverse. approach. Bottlenecks within Christchurch have been exacerbated by earthquake events. This Plan is an attempt to remedy identified With priority on support for RONS and bottlenecks and ensure movement of people and freight is efficient infrastructure to accommodate even larger and effective. trucks the submitter does not support the implementation of this objective. The RONS are a national priority in the GPS and this Plan must give effect to the GPS.

Objective 2: The emphasis on fewer deaths Decision 18.3: No change to document. and injuries is nice. How this Plan will achieve Reasons this is unclear. : These issues are addressed in this Plan through a combination of road safety promotion, enforcement and infrastructure It is more than disappointing that the Police improvements that are primarily focused on intersections, cyclists chose not to report a summary of expenditure and vulnerable users. Submitter may also be referred to the work of for road safety. Just how they allocate their the Regional Road Safety Working Group and particularly their action $300M budget to their priorities of speeding, plan. impaired driving and intersections would be of great interest.

Objective 3: Earthquake recovery is supported. Decision 18.4: No change to document. Submitter notes that the hopes people Reasons expressed in Share an Idea are little reflected : There are a number of activities in the Plan from CCC in in this Plan. particular and the AAC programme. These involve considerable

Environment Canterbury 13 102 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

The opportunities for rebuilding for the 21st expenditure for the city and the region in general. century, delivering active and public transport infrastructure, are poorly exploited.

Objective 4: Healthy transportation/active Decision 18.5: No change to document. transport is resilient to earthquakes and Reasons accidents due to its decreased reliance on : The RLTP is reliant on approved agencies nominating smooth wide lanes and fuel. Active travel activities for funding. This is a reflection of the long-term plans set at reduces climate change impact and reliance council level and the need to balance a variety of sometimes on fossil fuels and improves public health. competing requests on resources.

The disconnects between the priorities and projects offered in this Plan and the foresight found in this objective are stark. Support with hopes of major improvement.

Objective 5: The RONS value for money Decision 18.6: No change to document. figures are pathetic when compared to the cost Reasons benefit ratios found in active transport projects. : The RONS programme is a national priority under the GPS and must be included within the Plan. When public health, environmental impacts, balance of trade impacts and maintenance The evaluation of efficiency does not preclude consideration of the costs are factored in, big roading projects are wider impacts outlined by the submitter. even less efficient. This objective is ethically and factually corrupt. To measure the efficiency of policy and projects accurately and truthfully all impacts and alternatives must be included. Support only if all factors are considered.

Page 19 Priority 1 enshrines what we have. It accepts Decision 18.7: no change to document that we have already committed nearly 40% of Reasons Priorities rates to simply maintaining roads for cars. : The RLTP is reliant on approved agencies nominating Submitter does not support as presented. activities for funding. This is a reflection of the long-term plans set at council level and the need to balance a variety of sometimes Priority 2 reaffirms business as usual by competing requests on resources. recommitting to projects already underway. Spokes opposition to some priorities and support for others, as

Environment Canterbury 14 103 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Not in support as presented. outlined, is noted.

Priority 3 is more business as usual with freight movement as number one. Not in support as presented.

Priority 3a High Priority Road Projects are all in support of RONS. Submitter is not in support.

Priority 3b supports the next stages of the AAC. Spokes is very concerned that what little AAC offers will not even be delivered. CCC will require a great deal of support from this plan if AAC is to be fully implemented in a timely fashion.

Priorities 3c, intersection safety improvements and 3d cycle routes are easily and gladly supported. Spokes also supports 3e public transport funding.

Page 35 The monitoring and performance measures Decisions: found in Table 7 are disappointing. 18.8 Monitoring and Submitter’s concern is that the lack of cycling : That minor amendments are made to the Plan as outlined in performance and public transport targets underlies a lack of section 3.2 of this report. indicators commitment and will encourage lack of 18.9: That further work is undertaken to improve the Monitoring and delivery. Performance Indicators section of the Plan, and this be included by Objective 2 is inadequate. As presented, way of variation or for the next iteration of the Plan. actually focusing on where the problems are Reasons: Many of the indicators and targets were derived from the and potentially responding effectively is not 2012-2015 RLTS, including indicators “to be developed”. However, achieved. no further work appears to have been done over the intervening Objective 3 earthquake recovery metrics need years. to document the delivery or lack thereof of This is an area requiring considerable further analysis, drawing on a active and public transport infrastructure. number of agencies and using data sources that were not previously Objective 4 underlines the commitment to available, such as Bluetooth data. While minor changes can be

Environment Canterbury 15 104 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

resilience and sustainability. In addition to made for this iteration, a far more rigorous analysis is required. road closures and fuel sales please include congestion, cost of infrastructure maintenance and delivery, and cost of fuels. That AT and PT do not have set targets would also seem to confirm that they are not taken seriously. Please consider adding metrics to gauge the uptake for both where infrastructure and/or service is provided and/or improved.

Additional CCC is to be commended for developing its Decision 18.10: No change to document. comments major cycle routes projects and putting them Reasons forward. CCC has bravely offered well thought : Support for the CCC cycle programme is noted. out publicly supported active transport projects Other funding issues are matters for councils’ Long-Term Plans and and should be richly rewarded with funding. NZ Transport Agency funding. The central Government infusion of an additional $100M over the next three years for AT represents an opportunity for this RLTP and local bodies to develop and seek funding for additional AT projects. It is hoped that the RTC and local bodies will move quickly to seize this opportunity.

Given the apparent lack of cycling projects by local bodies aside from CCC and Timaru’s $300,000 request, how can the RTC encourage all Canterbury local bodies to switch from private vehicles to active travel?

Submitter again asks that ECan fund and actively promote transport champions to assist local bodies in taking the lead to develop and propose healthy transportation alternatives.

Submitter supports this Plan’s resilience and long-term sustainability concerns, and applauds recognition of the link to poor land

Environment Canterbury 16 105 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

use planning creating further dependency on fossil fuels and vulnerability of services to natural hazards.

A business as usual approach is locked in despite the rhetoric in support of active and public transport. Submitter is cognizant that road-based freight has a vital role to play in economic health. Creative thinking for how it may be better managed to minimise the impact on our communities is sorely needed, absent at central Government level and incumbent on local bodies to develop on behalf of their constituencies.

AT and PT are clear winners when assessed against criteria, yet do not receive the emphasis one would expect. That is in part as central Government continues to prioritise the RONS and road freight to the detriment of sound transportation and economic planning.

Submitter appreciates that the RTC has been supportive of active and public transport within the confines of central Government direction.

Living Streets Pages 13-16 Submitter agrees that these are important Decision 19.1: Note support for active modes, public transport and Otautahi/ issues. sustainability issues. No change to document. Christchurch Issues and Reasons (LSO/C) challenges Submitter believes that generic improvement in : The matter of passenger rail for greater Christchurch active transport, including public transport, is needs to be subject to a wider discussion and commitment from all Submitter #19 the key to the provision of an effective network parties involved. The RLTP cannot put forward projects that have for all road users. not been committed to by the relevant authority.

Strongly supports measures that protect pedestrians. Of particular concern are issues of speed, alcohol and intersections.

Environment Canterbury 17 106 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Agrees that the current system is not sustainable in terms of resilience, reliance on fossil fuels and related emissions as discussed in the Plan.

Recommend that key outcomes under this objective are broadened out to include rapid rail transit.

Pages 17-18 Submitter agrees with these objectives but Decision 19.2: Include the following text as a new second paragraph has the following comments: under objective 2 on page 17: Objectives Zero tolerance of death and injury on our The ultimate aim of transport safety programmes is zero harm. roads. While the Swedish Vision Zero has not been formally adopted in New Zealand the underlying philosophy is equally applicable. This Supports objective 3 but requests that requires recognition of human error. It seeks not only to reduce the horizontal infrastructure include footpaths and incidence of human error but to reduce the consequences of human cut-downs, not just the on-road infrastructure. error in all aspects of our transport system.

Supports objective 4 in theory. Note fuel and Reasons: Role of active transport is noted within the Plan as a key road dependent transport is not resilient. component for addressing future demand, particularly in greater Active transport reduces climate change Christchurch. impact and improves public health, creating The Vision Zero adopted by Sweden reflects the view that no loss of resilience in those sectors as well. life is acceptable. Vision Zero has not been adopted at a national Supports objective 5. level in New Zealand but has had a significant effect on the approach taken to road safety. The targets set within the Plan present a 23% Less than 1% expenditure on walking and reduction in deaths over the next ten years and will require a cycling is not great value for current active concerted effort if they are to be achieved. While a laudable aim, transport users considering 16% of Vision Zero is not achievable in the life of this Plan. The proposed Christchurch residents walk or cycle to work or amendment is intended to acknowledge the vision and philosophy school. underpinning it. The Plan acknowledges that a renewed focus is required on safety as the Canterbury figures have flat-lined.

With regards to the other matters raised, the Panel notes that horizontal infrastructure does include footpaths and cut-downs but funding may come from different sources due to NZ Transport

Environment Canterbury 18 107 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Agency funding requirements.

Support noted regarding active transport benefits for sustainability and resilience.

Some expenditure on cycling and walking projects is included within road projects where they included the entire road corridor.

Page 35 Freight and travel times have ambitious Decisions: targets, but no targets are set for active 19.3 Monitoring and transport and public transport in Christchurch : That minor amendments are made to the Plan as outlined in performance to increase their peak share. This could be section 3.2 of this report. indicators seen as a lack of commitment, even though 19.4: That further work is undertaken to improve the Monitoring and both have the potential to make real Performance Indicators section of the Plan and this be included by contributions to reduced peak travel times. way of variation or for the next iteration of the Plan.

Currently there is no commitment indicated to Reasons: Many of the indicators and targets were derived from the measure walking, even though this mode has 2012-2015 RLTS, including indicators “to be developed”. However, great potential for improving peak travel times. no further work appears to have been done over the intervening years.

This is an area requiring considerable further analysis, drawing on a number of agencies and using data sources that were not previously available, such as Bluetooth data. While minor changes can be made for this iteration, a far more rigorous analysis is required.

Accident Supportive submission. Decision 20.1: Support noted. No change to document. Compensation Reason Corporation Submitter strongly supports the RLTP 2015- : None required. 2025, especially with the fresh focus on safety. Submission #20 Submitter acknowledges that the costs of road claims in Canterbury follow the serious injury and fatal crash trends as stated by the NZ Transport Agency. These show that, collectively, our priorities are reducing risk in the areas as stated on page14 of the draft.

Environment Canterbury 19 108 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Submitter acknowledges and appreciates the Regional Land Transport Committee’s support of the Regional Road Safety Working Group to ensure that the risks are addressed as we work together to reduce crashes and injury on Canterbury roads.

R Jones Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 21.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #21 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Philip Wareing Pages 13-16 Support in part. Decision 22.1: No change to document. Ltd Issues and Alternatives to private cars correct but should Reasons: Funding processes are outside the scope of this Plan. Submission #22 challenges be paid by ratepayers. Cycleways off freight routes.

Earthquake recovery important.

Road User Charges and rural rate money should not be used for infrastructure that is not related to revenue

Pages 17-18 Support. Decision 22.2: No change to document.

Objectives Concerns that rest of region is prioritized Reasons: Christchurch is the largest urban centre and the largest behind largely Christchurch projects. market in Canterbury. Christchurch also includes the region’s major port and airport through which exports and imports traverse. Bottlenecks within Christchurch have been exacerbated by earthquake events. This Plan is an attempt to remedy identified bottlenecks and ensure movement of people and freight is efficient and effective for the benefit of the regional economy.

Additional As a rural cartage business submitter notes Decision 22.3: No change to document. comments much of their travel is on rural roads and questions whether rural networks are being All projects proposed by districts outside of greater Christchurch have been included within the Plan. It is acknowledged that the

Environment Canterbury 20 109 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

sufficiently supported. requirement to find the local share of funding is a barrier for many districts but this is outside the scope of the Plan.

KiwiRail Holdings Page 7 Supports KiwiRail network being noted in the Decision 23.1: No change to document. Ltd document and mapping. The Canterbury Reason: Support noted. Submission #23 region

Submitter supports the discussion on the Decision 23.2: No change to document but recommends RTC existing network within the region, however, further engages with KiwiRail to work more closely to coordinate notes that there is no discussion in this section transport infrastructure planning. in relation to rail. Reasons: Canterbury RTC acknowledges the importance of the Within the 2013 financial year KiwiRail spent South Island main trunk rail line. This is nationally significant approximately $16.1M within the Canterbury infrastructure and has been acknowledged by being placed under region maintaining and improving the rail management of KiwiRail. Investment in rail is subject to commercial network. criteria of KiwiRail New Zealand and the Government and is not part of the NLTF. RTC agrees that the role of rail has a major influence on transport decision-making and has endeavoured to liaise more closely with KiwiRail.

Page 13 Submitter supports the discussion and key Decision 23.3: No change to document. challenge identified around improving Reason Future transport connections between road and rail freight : Support noted. challenges - within the region. freight

Page 14 Submitter supports the strong safety element Decisions: to the RLTP; however, notes that there is no 23.4 Future transport discussion in relation to rail safety. The : No change to document. challenges - section as currently worded focusses on road 23.5 safety : Refer this matter to the Regional Road Safety Working Group safety. KiwiRail requests that rail elements, requesting engagement with KiwiRail to enhance safety planning such as level crossing incidents, be specifically across the networks. referenced in the RLTP. These are a safety concern for KiwiRail in relation to the rail Reasons: Rail safety, particularly where rail intersects with other network, and the consequences of an incident land transport infrastructure such as level crossings, is relevant for can often be fatal. the Plan. The safety priorities within the Plan reflect those from the

Environment Canterbury 21 110 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Regional Road Safety Working Party.

Page 15 Submitter supports the discussion around the Decision 23.6: No change to document. vulnerabilities of the land transport network, Reason Future transport including the rail from sea level rise along the : Support noted. challenges - Kaikōura coast. KiwiRail also supports the resilience discussion around integration of the land transport network with land use planning as proposed, including seeking to make the land transport system more efficient and providing economic, social and environmental benefits

Pages 17-18 Support. Decision 23.7: No change to document.

Objectives Reason: Support noted.

Page 19 Priority 1, Looking after what we have: Decision 23.8: No change to document. Support. Priorities Reason: Support noted.

Page 35 Objective 1 – Support and retain as proposed. Decisions:

Monitoring and Objective 2 - Support in part. 18.8: That minor amendments are made to the Plan as outlined in performance section 3.2 of this report. indicators Submitter supports the proposed targets and performance indicators for fewer deaths and 18.9: That further work is undertaken to improve the Monitoring and serious injuries on the road network, however, Performance Indicators section of the Plan and this be included by would support should this be broadened to way of variation or for the next iteration of the Plan. include the land transport network, with Reasons incidents from trespassing also having the : Many of the indicators and targets were derived from the 2015 RLTS, including indicators “to be developed”. potential for deaths and serious injuries. 2012- However, no further work appears to have been done over the intervening Objective 4 - Support in part. years.

Submitter notes that the performance This is an area requiring considerable further analysis, drawing on a indicators for this objective relate to road number of agencies and using data sources that were not previously networks, while the objective itself is focused available, such as Bluetooth data. While minor changes can be on the land transport network. Submitter also made for this iteration, a far more rigorous analysis is required. notes that the integration element appears to

Environment Canterbury 22 111 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

not be required for land use development adjoining land transport networks, often included through district plan provisions and resource consent considerations. KiwiRail would support a performance indicator that sought all district plans in the region having recognition of integrated land transport network provisions – both from the land transport network on adjoining development, but also importantly from the adjoining development on the land transport network.

Canterbury Supports the summary of key challenges on Decision 24.1: No change to document. District Health page 13 of the Plan. Reasons Board : Support noted.

Submission #24

Seeks amendment so that “Objective 1 Decision 24.2: Amend final sentence on third paragraph on page 17 explicitly states the critical importance of active to read: and public transport and makes specific reference to rail transit … as a vision for the Greater investment in active travel modes, such as walking, cycling future to meet travel demand”. and public transport is critical to providing for future travel demand and enhanced sustainability.

Do not include rail transit as a vision for the future.

Reasons: Investment in walking, cycling and public transport is a key component of the Plan and the proposed amendment highlights that.

Rail transit has been debated at length over several decades and with numerous studies. Currently it is not clear that this is part of the long-term vision, hence it is not referred to within the Plan.

Seeks amendment to objective 2 to aim to Decision 24.3: Include the following text as a new second reduce deaths and serious injuries annually to paragraph under objective 2 on page 17: zero, whilst this may not be achieved.

Environment Canterbury 23 112 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

The ultimate aim of transport safety programmes is zero harm. While the Swedish Vision Zero has not been formally adopted in New Zealand the underlying philosophy is equally applicable. This requires recognition of human error. It seeks not only to reduce the incidence of human error but to reduce the consequences of human error in all aspects of our transport system.

Reasons: Role of active transport is noted within the Plan as a key component for addressing future demand, particularly in greater Christchurch.

The Vision Zero adopted by Sweden reflects the view that no loss of life is acceptable. Vision Zero has not been adopted at a national level in New Zealand but has had a significant effect on the approach taken to road safety. The targets set within the Plan present a 23% reduction in deaths over the next ten years and will require a concerted effort if they are to be achieved. While a laudable aim, Vision Zero is not achievable in the life of this Plan. The proposed amendment is intended to acknowledge the vision and philosophy underpinning it. The Plan acknowledges that a renewed focus is required on safety as the Canterbury figures have flatlined.

Supports objectives 3, 4 and 5 entirely. Decision 24.4: No change to document.

Reason: Support noted

Seeks further detail within priority 1 on Decision 24.5: No change to document. anticipated expenditure levels on roads, Reasons footpaths, cycleways and public infrastructure. : The information sought is not readily available as maintenance and renewal expenditure on these categories is intermingled.

It is acknowledged that spending on maintenance for footpaths, cycleways and public transport infrastructure will be very low when compared to road maintenance.

Seeks inclusion of Eastgate, Barrington, 24.6 Decision: No change to document. Shirley and Hornby interchanges as priority 2

Environment Canterbury 24 113 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

(matching Riccarton and Northlands). Reasons: Priority 2 includes projects for which work has already commenced or funding has been committed. The interchanges referred to are a high priority but do not fit the criteria for priority 2.

Seeks promotion of the priorities given to Decision 24.7: The Panel confirms that the alphanumeric labelling Urban Cycleways and Public Transport from within priority 3 did not imply priority. Consequential changes are: 3d and 3e to 3a and 3b, respectively.  Removal of alphanumeric labelling on page 25.  Removal of column 1 of Table 3.  Amend text of final sentence on page 24 to read:

The grouping of projects into subcategories and the ordering of these subcategories does not imply any priority order. The relative priority and importance of individual projects can be seen through the assessment of strategic priority.”

Reasons: The Panel recognizes the importance of safety through inclusion in the issues and objectives within the Plan. The inclusion of these safety projects within priority 3 reflects this.

The Panel confirmed that all projects within priority 3 are of equal priority.

The Panel also refers the submitter to decision 38.3 which recommends the CCC Major Cycleways Programme be moved from priority 3 to priority 2.

Seeks to have Environment Canterbury Decision 24.8: No change to document. instruct territorial local authorities to construct Reasons priority bus lanes and suburban interchanges. : There is no legislative mechanism for Environment Canterbury to instruct territorial local authorities to undertake this within this Plan.

Otago Regional General comment Submitter seeks greater recognition of the Decisions: Council inter-regional dependence between 25.1 Otago/Southland and Canterbury networks. : Change mapping (page 7) to reflect cross boundary linkages Submission #25 on the road and rail network outside of Canterbury.

25.2: Amend paragraph six on page 8 as follows to provide greater

Environment Canterbury 25 114 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

emphasis on the cross boundary links:

State Highway 1 and the South Island main trunk rail line provide an essential links north to Marlborough and the North Island and south to Otago and Southland for both tourists and freight. State Highways 7 and 73 link Nelson and the West Coast, and State Highway 8 provides a key tourist and freight link to Queenstown and Central Otago and Southland. With international airports in both Christchurch and Queenstown, and the concentration of warehousing and freight distribution within greater Christchurch, maintaining the reliability of these inter-regional routes is critical for tourism and freight.

Reasons: The Panel acknowledges the importance of the inter- regional links and agrees with the submitter.

Submitter notes the significance of the South Decision 25.3: Amendment as shown in decision 25.2 (above). Island main trunk rail line. Reasons: Canterbury RTC acknowledges the importance of the South Island main trunk rail line. This is nationally significant infrastructure and has been acknowledged by being placed under management of KiwiRail.

Investment in rail is subject to commercial criteria of KiwiRail New Zealand and the Government and is not part of the NLTF. RTC agrees that the role of rail has a major influence on transport decision-making and has endeavoured to liaise more closely with KiwiRail.

Seeks inclusion of Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail as Decision 25.4: Add Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail as an inter-regionally a significant transport link. significant transport link.

Reasons: The Alps 2 Ocean Cycle Trail crosses regional boundaries and supports active transport and tourism.

Submitter asks that the northern part of Decision 25.5: Amend map on page 7 to show Waitaki district as Waitaki district be removed from map on page being covered by the Otago RLTP map.

Environment Canterbury 26 115 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

7 as it is covered by Otago RTC/RLTP. Reason: As noted in the Plan, the Waitaki district is covered by the Otago RLTP.

P Morgan Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 26.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #26 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

M Trusttum Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 27.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #27 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Laurie McCallum Supports issues and objectives. Decision 28.1: No change to document.

Submission #28 Reason: Support noted.

Seeks greater priority and funding for walking, Decision 28.2: No change to document. cycling and public transport. Reasons: The funding share between walking, cycling, public transport and road projects reflects the programmes proposed by the approved authorities within the region. Within greater Christchurch, investment in cycling is dramatically increased from historical levels and the investment in Central Christchurch associated with earthquake recovery has a strong focus on active travel and public transport. The completion of the RONS projects, as a national priority, skews the overall picture in favour of roads. No change is recommended but it is noted that further, ongoing investment in active and public transport will need to continue to meet demand, particularly within Christchurch.

David Hawke Pages 13-16 Support. Notes role of active transport in Decision 29.1: Include the following text as a new second paragraph reducing pressure on roads and improving under objective 2 on page 17: Submission #29 Issues and economic efficiency for business. challenges The ultimate aim of transport safety programmes is zero harm. Suggests formally adopting the ’Vision Zero’ While the Swedish Vision Zero has not been formally adopted in New Zealand the underlying philosophy is equally applicable. This

Environment Canterbury 27 116 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

approach to transport safety. requires recognition of human error. It seeks not only to reduce the incidence of human error but to reduce the consequences of human error in all aspects of our transport system.

Reasons: Role of active transport is noted within the Plan as a key component for addressing future demand, particularly in greater Christchurch.

The Vision Zero adopted by Sweden reflects the view that no loss of life is acceptable. Vision Zero has not been adopted at a national level in New Zealand but has had a significant effect on the approach taken to road safety. The targets set within the Plan present a 23% reduction in deaths over the next ten years and will require a concerted effort if they are to be achieved. While a laudable aim, Vision Zero is not achievable in the life of this Plan. The proposed amendment is intended to acknowledge the vision and philosophy underpinning it. The Plan acknowledges that a renewed focus is required on safety as the Canterbury figures have flatlined.

Pages 17-18 Support. Decision 29.2: No change to document.

Objectives Objective 1: More emphasis could be put on Reasons: Numerical targets would be helpful but there is currently numerical targets. Simply stating unquantified insufficient analysis to support inclusion of specific numerical targets. verbs such as "expanded", "improved", or This area requires work as noted in submissions relating to "increased" isn't really contributing anything. Monitoring and Performance Indicators.

Objective 2: As above, reference to Vision Response to Vision Zero noted in decision 29.1. Zero would be a good way of demonstrating a commitment to a truly safe transport system.

Additional Seeks all RONS projects having associated Decision 29.3: No change to document. comments cycleway provision. This would contribute Reasons substantially to priorities around transport : Inclusion of cycleways is a matter for the NZ Transport choice, by providing direct routes across at Agency and the relevant district councils. In the case of CCC, its least part of the city. The cycleway alongside cycleway programme will address the issue and the link to the Southern Motorway is a good example of Waimakariri district would provide the link over the Waimakariri what could be achieved across Christchurch River.

Environment Canterbury 28 117 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

as new RONS projects are implemented. Note decision 29.1 regarding Vision Zero.

Submitter would like to see Vision Zero implemented as a target for our transport system.

E Hennessy Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 30.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #30 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

J Wood Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 31.0: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #31 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Blind Foundation Supports transport choice for all people and Decisions: the priority given to intersection safety. Seeks 32.1 Submission #32 greater priority for pedestrians with pedestrian : Replace paragraph five on page 13 to read: needs prioritised over freight and other motor An important aspect of transport choice is providing for those people vehicles. who are unable to use or afford cars or choose other modes for health or other reasons. This includes young people, those who are mobility-impaired (including people with limited or no vision) and many elderly. Some provision already exists in this regard. For example, in addition to scheduled bus services, specialist services are provided for those with impaired mobility, and community-based transport services are provided in many rural areas for those without access to private cars.

With an ageing population, the provision of safe and effective access for everyone will become increasingly important and require changes in current practice. All sections of a trip need to be considered. For example, for people with limited or no vision to use public transport, the pedestrian sections of the journey need to have sufficient tactile or audible navigation aids to enable the journey to be completed

Environment Canterbury 29 118 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

safely before and after the bus trip. Similarly, increased use of mobility scooters may require wider footpaths, which are not currently funded from the NLTF unless they are part of road improvements.

32.2: All pedestrian projects be included as priority 3.

Reasons: The recommendation is proposed to acknowledge and promote the special needs of the blind, as outlined in the submission, and to encourage the agencies responsible for infrastructure provision to take greater account of their special needs in the design and provision of infrastructure.

The inclusion of specific projects in the Plan is dependent on the programmes put forward by approved authorities. Within the projects proposed, pedestrian projects are regarded as a high priority, particularly in areas such as central Christchurch. Inclusion of all projects, including pedestrian projects, for the implementation of AAC is also recommended even though these may not be funded from the NLTF.

The priority given to freight and vehicle movement is not generally within locations of high pedestrian use, although provision still needs to be given to pedestrians and other users where their needs intersect.

Seeks infrastructure design to take account of Decision 32.3: No change to document. the needs of people who are blind or with low Reasons vision. : While acknowledging the importance of providing for people who are blind or with low vision, the Plan cannot direct infrastructure providers in matters of design. Inclusion of text within the issues and objectives, as recommended above, can highlight the needs of these people and encourage appropriate design responses.

Seeks improvement to the Hub and Spokes Decision 32.4: No change to document. system to provide for blind or vision-impaired Reasons people. This includes both the services and : This matter can be raised with both infrastructure the infrastructure associated with the new providers and those planning public transport within Environment

Environment Canterbury 30 119 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

system taking into account the journey. Canterbury. It is, however, outside the scope of this Plan.

Seeks inclusion of accessibility requirements in Decision 32.5: That further work is undertaken to improve the the objectives, priorities and performance Monitoring and Performance Indicators section of the Plan and this indicators. be included by way of variation or for the next iteration of the Plan.

Reasons: Indicators and targets for those with impaired mobility are not currently included in the Plan. Further analysis is required to enable these to be developed and considered by the RTC.

Ashburton District Pages 13-16 Agree with the issues and challenges. Decision 33.1: No change to document. Council Transport choice outside Christchurch and Reasons Future transport Timaru is limited. Encouraging to see : Support is noted. The issue of funding the rebuild is a Submission #33 challenges for the additional funding for cycling in GPS. national rather than regional issue. The allocation of the NLTF is region undertaken on a national basis and the Government and CCC Freight links to Lyttelton a key challenge. Also funding agreement includes funding outside of this. The rebuild is need to maintain and improve rural areas to not currently limiting funding for other regional projects. ensure resilient and reliable access to ports. As noted, the increasing costs of maintenance, particularly with Safety important priority. increasing traffic on rural roads, are an issue for councils in the region but are outside the scope of this Plan. Support for Christchurch earthquake rebuild but concern that funding of the rebuild may be at the expense of local maintenance and renewal activities.

RTC may wish to identify the challenge of escalating contract costs which are facing all road controlling authorities

Page 17 Support for all objectives but note that Decision 33.2: No change to document. objective 3 (earthquake recovery) should not Reasons Objectives 1-5 be at the expense of maintaining networks : Funding issues noted as above. outside Christchurch. Gravel extraction is beyond the scope of this Plan. Submitter also feels increased gravel take from rivers and less stringent restrictions on land used for gravel extraction need to be

Environment Canterbury 31 120 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

addressed to ensure a sustainable source of material is available.

Page 19 Agree with priorities 1-3 but reservation over Decision 33.3: No change to document. the greater Christchurch influence in priority 3. Priorities Reasons: As noted above, the inclusion of Christchurch projects has not affected funding for any projects from the rest of the region. All projects proposed by Ashburton District Council have been included within the Plan.

Page 30 Project Name should be “Second Ashburton Decision 33.4: Amend wording on Table 4, page 30, from New Urban Bridge” Ashburton urban Bridge to Second Ashburton Urban Bridge. Table 4 Reason: Minor amendment to provide clarity.

Page 35 ONRC will only be implemented post-2018. Decision 33.5: Amend reference to ONRC within the review of the Current service levels are important as districts Monitoring and Performance Indicators section. Proposed wording Table 7 are bound to deliver long-term plan levels of shown in section 3.2 of this report. service under the Local Government Act. Monitoring and Reasons: The ONRC is being implemented from 2015 although performance compliance is not required until 2018. Acknowledgement of this is appropriate, however, the specific measure requires further work.

Activities that Page 37, Appendix 1: Add “LED street light Decisions 33.6: Confirm with Ashburton District Council to ensure should be upgrade” – this is a NZ Transport Agency- this is included in the renewals Table 1 figures, page 20. If not, add removed or driven project that will produce long-term to the table. added savings. Reasons: TOG proposed that this be included within priority 1 as part of renewals. Confirmation to be sought from Ashburton District Council that it has been included within renewals if it is not currently.

Page 37, Appendix 1: Add Ashburton walking Decision 33.7: Incorporate Ashburton walking and cycling strategy and cycling strategy. within planning activities for Ashburton District Council.

Reasons: This project is supported but with a total project cost of $36,317 is not a significant activity for this Plan. It can be included within planning activities for the Council.

Environment Canterbury 32 121 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Additional Possible role of freight hub in Ashburton. Decision 33.8: No change to document. comment Scenic Route 72 (Arundel Rakaia Gorge Road) Reasons: These are matters to address for next iteration of this - Council may approach the NZ Transport Plan. Agency about reinstatement of this route to State Highway classification.

C Gutierrez Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 34.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #34 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

P Gains Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 35.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #35 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

M Newman Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 36.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #36 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

New Zealand Seeks to: Decision 37.1: Add the following paragraph after paragraph five on Horse Network page 13:  Recognise the horse as one of the modes of Submission #37 alternative transport and horse riders as In rural areas, there is evidence of suppressed demand from vulnerable road users. legitimate but vulnerable road users, such as cyclists and horse-  Replace the term walking and cycling to riders. The combination of high speeds, narrow roads and, at times, include all forms of non-motorised transport. dangerous driver behaviour, can make these vulnerable modes  Ensure that “cycleways” description is used unsafe. Measures to address such concerns need to be for urban, on-road cycleways only. investigated further as providing dedicated infrastructure will be cost-  Include a descriptor for greenways. effective in only a limited range of situations. However, consideration of the needs of these users when renewing existing infrastructure, along with education and enforcement to modify driver behaviour, may be more cost-effective.

Environment Canterbury 33 122 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Reasons: Horse riders and their horses are legitimate road users and are often vulnerable due to design of infrastructure and the behaviour of other road users. Acknowledgement of this can be incorporated into the Plan alongside acknowledge of other road users.

Greater provision of infrastructure for horses is not regarded as a priority for this Plan at this time. Where provision is able to be made within the design of proposed projects this is encouraged, but giving greater priority than that is not recommended.

Seeks improved accessibility through design, Decision 37.2: Amend text as outlined in decision 37.1 (above). planning guidelines and implementation of Reasons projects. : It is acknowledged that it is an important aspect of improving accessibility and, as noted in the submission, poor infrastructure can suppress demand, particularly if there are safety issues. It is also accepted that horses are compatible with off-road paths for pedestrians and some other users (such as low speed cycling).

The Plan, however, has a limited role in the provision of infrastructure and cannot require design and planning outcomes.

Seeks removal of barriers to access on Decision 37.3: No change to document. unformed legal roads. Reasons: This is an issue but it is not a priority for this Plan. It is more appropriately raised directly with the local authority concerned.

Seeks inclusion of all road users within road Decisions: safety programmes. 37.4: No change to document.

37.5: Refer matter to Regional Road Safety Working Party.

Reasons: Road safety programmes seek to make roads safer for all users but must also prioritise the resources available to them. In areas where there are particular issues, these should be addressed at the local level through district councils and others involved in preparing and implementing these programmes. Concerns about

Environment Canterbury 34 123 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

policing should be raised directly with the New Zealand Police.

Seeks safe roadsides for all users. Decision 37.6: No change to document.

Reasons: The statement and sentiment in this submission is supported and it is acknowledged that this is frequently not the case at present. Safety improvement, like all other projects in this Plan, is subject to funding availability and must be proposed by an approved authority. Specific local concerns are appropriately raised with district councils or the NZ Transport Agency. These authorities may then put forward projects to address these concerns for inclusion in this Plan.

Christchurch City Seeks inclusion of SCIRT works, second coat Decisions Council seals, central city resurfacing projects and 38.1 replacement of Fitzgerald Avenue and Pages : Include the following text before Table 1 to incorporate the work Submission #38 Road bridges. programmes associated with the cost share agreements between the Crown and CCC and the Waimakariri District Council, respectively:

The post-earthquake transport rebuild programmes agreed in the cost share agreements between the Crown and Christchurch City Council and Waimakariri District Council, respectively, are within priority 1. The projects within these programmes are not shown within Table 1 as they are managed through a separate governance arrangement agreed with Government. These works are expected to be completed by the end of 2017.

CCC and the NZ Transport Agency have agreed to the reinstatement of the Sumner-Evans Pass-Lyttelton route as part of this rebuild programme. The Council is also seeking to include the second coat reseals, central city resurfacing and the repair of the Fitzgerald Avenue and Pages Road bridges. The expected gross cost for the period 2015-2017 is in the range of $220-$260M. The NZ Transport Agency board has a financial assistance rate of 83% for these works.

The cost to complete the Waimakariri District Council transport post- earthquake repairs is estimated at $5.2M. The NZ Transport Agency

Environment Canterbury 35 124 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

board has agreed a financial assistance rate of 65% for these works.

38.2: Include footnotes for the CCC and Waimakariri District Council programmes within Table 1 stating:

Excludes projects that are part of the post-earthquake cost share agreement with the Crown.

38.3: Include figures for second coat seals, resurfacing and Fitzgerald Avenue and Pages Road bridges with CCC priority 1 programme under heading of Earthquake recovery works.

Reasons: The post-earthquake repair programmes are of high regional significance and are required to be included in the Plan if they are to be eligible for funding from the NZ Transport Agency.

Seeks to have the CCC Major Cycleways Decision 38.4: Include CCC Major Cycleways Programme in priority Programme included within priority 2. 2.

Reasons: CCC is committed to and has already started on its Major Cycleways Programme. With cycling being a priority in the GPS it is likely to be funded from the NLTF but this is yet to be confirmed. For CCC, its commitment to the programme is similar to the Government’s commitment to the RONS.

Seeks to retain the 30-year vision of the 2012 Decision 38.5: No change to document. RLTS. Reasons: That the Panel notes CCC’s support for the RLTS vision. While the 2012 RLTS will have no formal legal status once the RLTP is adopted, the vision can remain and be used to provide future direction as suggested in the RLTP.

Seeks to better align the RLTP process with Decision: 38.6: No change to document. the Long-Term Plan (LTP) process for local Reasons government. : The timing of these two processes is poor but determined by legislation and NZ Transport Agency requirements. There may be scope to improve integration in the future but consultation times are unlikely to be aligned.

Environment Canterbury 36 125 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Seeks to update cost estimates for existing Decision 38.7: Incorporate updated cost estimates. programmes with the Draft RLTP. Reasons: Cost estimates within the Draft Plan are as previously provided by CCC. Revision of these figures has subsequently been undertaken as part of the preparation of the Council’s LTP. It is appropriate to include the cost estimates that are consistent with the LTP information.

Seeks greater priority to projects that support Decision 38.8: No change to document. modal shift towards walking, cycling and public Reasons transport. CCC would like the RLTP to reflect : The Plan already highlights that the future strategic a desire for a Rapid Transport system for direction, after the RONS are completed, is for a refocusing of greater Christchurch. investment towards more sustainable modes. The matter of Rapid Transport needs to be subject to a wider discussion and commitment from all parties involved. The RLTP cannot put forward projects that have not been committed to by the relevant authority. It is noted that on page 20 of the CCC submission it sought an amendment to the Plan to reduce its public transport infrastructure budget from $155M to $23M due to light rail being deleted from their ten-year plan.

Page 11 Seeks greater acknowledgement of cycling in Decision 38.9: No change to document. the section on ’Transport demand’. Reasons: The importance of cycling is acknowledged in a number of places elsewhere in the Plan, such as the challenges for the future on page 13.

Page 16 Seeks greater direction with respect to future Decision 38.10: No change to document. technology and its application to Canterbury. Reasons: There has been insufficient analysis to support greater guidance on this matter. Moreover, adoption of technology is unlikely to be determined by inclusion in this Plan unless it is part of infrastructure projects proposed by relevant authorities (which have not been proposed). May be addressed more fully in subsequent reviews.

Pages 13-14 Seeks amendment to reflect the impact that Decision 38.11: No change to document.

Environment Canterbury 37 126 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

heavy freight vehicles have on surrounding Reasons: The freight section does acknowledge this with respect to communities and other modes. the Brougham Street corridor, but the submission seeks wider acknowledgement of this fact, including the impact of freight movement within Lyttelton.

The matter is not one that is able to be addressed within this Plan. It is appropriately addressed through district plans and resource consents. With Christchurch, the responsibility lies with the Council itself.

The movement of freight through Lyttelton has been contentious for many years and various studies have been undertaken. To date relatively little has resulted from these studies due to cost and other factors associated with the operation of the port. Any projects to remedy these impacts must come from either the NZ Transport Agency or CCC.

Page 14 Seeks amendment to words “substandard and, Decision 38.12: No change to document. at times, unsafe access” within third bullet Reasons point of ‘Key issues for freight’. : This description is accurate and some projects were evaluated on the basis that they were required to address the difficulties and safety aspects of heavy vehicle movements.

Seeks support for increasing freight movement Decision 38.13: No change to document. by rail. The modal split between rail and road freight is not directly within the scope of this Plan, as is the provision of rail infrastructure. The modal split may be influenced by the road connections to rail areas to support the inter-connection between these modes. This was raised as an issue within the development of this Plan with regards to road connections around the Matipo Street rail yards but has not been prioritised within the CCC programme.

Page 15 Seeks acknowledgement of peak oil and Decision 18.14: Amend last paragraph, page 15, replace: greater emphasis on reducing reliance on fossil fuels. At a regional level, the infrastructure and services proviced will make relatively little difference to these issues” with: Seeks amendment of the sentence “At a

Environment Canterbury 38 127 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

regional level, the infrastructure and services At a regional level substantial changes are required in infrastructure, provided will make relatively little difference to services and travel behaviour to make a meaningful difference to these issues” (last paragraph, page 15). these issues.

Reasons: The comments are noted. While the statement regarding the impact of the national and international changes and technological changes remains true, the changes included in the above recommendation more accurately reflect the situation. It is noted that the scale of the active travel programme being implemented by CCC will have an impact if it achieves its aims.

Page 13 Seeks to have the impact of earthquake Decisions: repairs acknowledged as contributing to the 38.15 travel times and travel reliability within : Amend wording on page 13 to acknowledge the effect Christchurch. earthquake repairs are having on travel around greater Christchurch, through the following sentences: Also seeks to have improvements to network efficiency acknowledged as a means of Add to end of paragraph two, page 17: Within greater Christchurch improving efficiency of travel. earthquake damage and the subsequent repairs have increased travel times and reduced travel time reliability.

Amendment to first key challenge on page 17: This has been compounded by changing travel patterns and infrastructure repairs following the Canterbury earthquakes.

38.16: No further change to document.

Reasons: Earthquake repairs are compounding congestion within Christchurch and reducing travel time reliability.

The Plan states that network efficiency improvements are part of the future strategic direction for the Plan under objective 1 on page 17 and it is not necessary to repeat this on page 13.

Seeks to have the role of walking and the need Decision 38.17: Amend text under objective 1 to acknowledge to improve walking facilities included, walking and include increasing pedestrian trips within outcomes for particularly for greater Christchurch. greater Christchurch through inclusion of the following text:

Seeks to have an increase in pedestrian trips

Environment Canterbury 39 128 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

as an outcome under objective 1. Final sentence, paragraph three, page 17:

Enhancing transport choice for the movement of people through greater investment in walking, cycling and public transport infrastructure is a priority to address future travel demand.

Second last key outcome under objective 1, page 17:

Within greater Christchurch:

The percentage of peak trips made on foot, by cycle and bus are increased…

Reasons: Travel by foot is a component of almost all trips and is consistent with the urban environments being sought within the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Plans, particularly in central Christchurch.

Seeks to have the CCC Major Cycleways Decision 38.18: No change to document. Programme acknowledged as of equal Reasons importance as the Christchurch-Waimakariri : The CCC Major Cycleways Programme has been moved cycle project. to priority 2. Within priority 3 the Christchurch-Waimakariri link remains of greatest regional importance, reflecting the absence of a safe crossing for cycles over the Waimakariri River.

Seeks amendment to the Monitoring and Decisions: Performance Indicators section including 38.19 removal of reference to the ONRC, use of fuel : That minor amendments are made to the Plan as outlined in data and amendment to other indicators. section 3.2 of this report. 38.20: That further work is undertaken to improve the Monitoring and Performance Indicators section of the Plan and this be included by way of variation or for the next iteration of the Plan.

Reasons: Many of the indicators and targets were derived from the 2012-2015 RLTS, including indicators “to be developed”. However, no further work appears to have been done over the intervening years.

This is an area requiring considerable further analysis, drawing on a

Environment Canterbury 40 129 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

number of agencies and using data sources that were not previously available, such as Bluetooth data. While minor changes can be made for this iteration, a far more rigorous analysis is required.

Seeks inclusion of map of Christchurch to Decision 38.21: No change to document. better show the regionally significant roads Reasons within the city. : A map showing state highways and the RONS projects is already included. Further analysis would be required to define regionally significant roads. This is not able to be completed within the time available but may be considered for future iterations.

J Kenix Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 39.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #39 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

L Furneaux Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision: 40.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #40 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Dr M McKellar Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision: 41.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #41 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

No submission #42

Aoraki Pages 13-16 Supports, but encourage further consideration Decision 43.1: No change to document. Development being given to the forecast increase in freight Reasons Business and Future transport and the corresponding need for increased : Support noted. Tourism challenges for the investment. region Submission #43

Environment Canterbury 41 130 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Page 17 Agrees with the objectives. Note funding is a Decision 43.2: no change to document. key issue for the district and “improving roads Reasons to meet and promote smart growth and land : Transport and land use should be considered together. use change”. Effective transport policies should not be reactive to land use change but should be considered together at the time of potential change. Comments noted.

Page 19 Supports maintenance and renewals as priority Decision 43.3: No change to document. 1. Submitter notes support for Timaru port Reasons Priorities access and Factory Road bridge. : Support noted.

Activities that Seeks addition of: Decision 43.4: No change to document. However, refer to proposed should be changes to the NZ Transport Agency four-to-six-year programme. removed or  Timaru State Highway 1 four-laning from Reasons added Washdyke to State Highway 78. : Projects submitted by the NZ Transport Agency for  Rakaia Bridge strengthening. inclusion in their four-to-six-year programme address these at least  Orari Bridge State highway 79 double-laning. in part.

South Canterbury Pages 13-16 Supports, but encourages further consideration Decision 44.1: No change to document. Chamber of being given to the forecast increase in freight Reason Commerce Future transport and the corresponding need for increased : None required. challenges for the investment. Submission #44 region

Page 17 Agrees with the objectives. Notes funding is a Decision 44.2: No change to document. key issue for the district and “improving roads Reasons to meet and promote smart growth and land : Transport and land use should be considered together. use change” Effective transport policies should not be reactive to land use change but should be considered together at the time of potential change. Comments noted.

Page 19 Supports maintenance and renewals as priority Decision 44.3: No change to document. 1. Submitter notes support for Timaru port Reason Priorities access and Factory Road bridge. : Support noted.

Activities that Seeks addition of: Decision 44.4: No change to document. However, refer to proposed should be changes to the NZ Transport Agency four-to-six-year programme. removed or  Timaru State Highway 1 four-laning from Washdyke to State Highway 78. Reasons: Projects submitted by the NZ Transport Agency for

Environment Canterbury 42 131 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

added  Rakaia Bridge strengthening. inclusion in their four-to-six-year programme address these at least  Orari Bridge State highway 79 double-laning. in part.

NZ Transport Pages 14, 45 Seeks that the role of the New Zealand Police Decision 45.1: No change to document. Agency focusses on positive role it plays in road Reasons safety. : The text regarding safety acknowledges the positive role Submission #45 the NZ Police plays and this is further expanded in Appendix 4. The exclusion of a summary of police activities and regional expenditure is regarded as a gap in the Plan, as noted by other submitters. The inclusion of a single sentence on page 45 makes it clear this information was requested from and declined by the New Zealand Police, rather than being an oversight in the preparation of the Plan.

Seeks inclusion of the Investment Logic Decision 45.2: Amend second last paragraph on page 5 to read: Mapping (ILM) outputs undertaken as part of the process. The development of the Plan included an NZ Transport Agency- sponsored Investment Logic Mapping process (ILM) workshop which involved a small group of staff and councillors. The ILM was used to collectively identify the key transport problems for Canterbury and forms as part of the business case approach required by the NZ Transport Agency. The ILM problem statements and benefits sought were presented to the RTC in September 2014. The problem statements included:

 Changing demand and declining network efficiency due to changes in urban land use, including impacts from the Christchurch earthquake.

 Increasing freight volumes and issues of network efficiency due to rural land use change and wider economic growth.

 Issues of affordability and funding availability to address increasing demand and related maintenance and improvement costs.

 The benefits included increased network efficiency, fewer deaths and injuries, increased accessibility and connectivity, and maintaining in an affordable condition.

Environment Canterbury 43 132 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

New paragraph: These statements, along with feedback from the RTC and consideration of the contents of the GPS, NEECS, RPS and the 2012 RLTS, formed the basis of the key challenges and objectives of the Plan.

Reasons: The role and contribution of ILM is important as part of the overall process. The changes above provide a connection between the ILM process and the issues and objectives outlined in this Plan.

Support for several CCC projects that link to Decision 45.3: No change to document. State Highway Programme. Reason: Support noted.

Notes that some major projects still need to go Decision 45.4: No change to document. through the business case process. Reasons: While funding is still subject to NZ Transport Agency processes these projects need to be included in order to be considered for the funding. Inclusion requires a financial commitment from the approved authority proposing the project. It does not require final funding approval from the NZ Transport Agency.

Seeks clarification of reporting requirements Decision 45.5: No change to document. for the NZ Transport Agency under objective 5 Reasons: Page 18 of the Plan includes “The NZ Transport Agency (page 18). will monitor and report on the efficiency of NLTF expenditure in Canterbury.” This reflects the GPS which has a focus on improving value for money from the investment in land transport. Page 36 of the GPS includes the expectation: “The Agency will monitor and report on the investment efficiency, productivity changes and results expected under the GPS”.

The inclusion of the reporting requirement for the NZ Transport Agency within this Plan seeks similar reporting to the RTC, preferably at a regional level. As the Agency oversees all the funding related to the National Land Transport Programme it is best placed to report on this, particularly when it is required to also report to Government on the same matters. It is acknowledged that the

Environment Canterbury 44 133 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

GPS requirements are new and present some challenges for the Agency to develop appropriate indicators in some areas. It is, however, noted that inclusion in the Plan does not mean the Agency is legally compelled to report as requested, merely to take account of this request. If the Government’s agent is unwilling or unable to support such a request, it is unreasonable to expect other agencies, such as local councils, to measure and report on efficiency of expenditure or value for money. It is recommended that this text remain and specific measures be included in a wider analysis of performance indicators for the Plan over the next 12 months.

Seeks correction of timing of projects Decision 45.6: Amend as required to accurately reflect proposed contained within the Plan. timing within the NZ Transport Agency submission.

Reason: None required.

Seeks inclusion of additional projects as part of Decision 45.7: Include projects to reflect the State Highway the Agency’s State Highway Programme in Programme for years four-to-six. years four-to-six. Reasons: This information was not made available by the NZ Transport Agency in time for inclusion within the Draft Plan. The inclusion of this information through submission will ensure the final Plan has a full picture of the programme over the next six years. It is also noted that another iteration of this Plan, with consequent consultation, will be required prior to these projects commencing, providing adequate opportunity for public input at that time.

Seeks addition of Walnut Avenue project within Decision 45.8: Include the Walnut Avenue project in the Ashburton the Ashburton District Council programme of District Council programme. works. Reasons: This project supports a corresponding state highway project and its omission appears to be an oversight by the Council. Submissions from both the Agency and the Council support its inclusion.

Environment Canterbury 45 134 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Seeks inclusion of the CCC Major Cycleways Decision 45.9: No change to document. Programme as the highest priority under Reasons priority 3d. : The CCC Major Cycleways Programme has been moved to priority 2. Within priority 3 the Christchurch–Waimakariri link remains of greatest regional importance, reflecting the absence of a safe crossing for cycles over the Waimakariri River.

Page 31 Seeks correction on page 31: Replace $4M Decision 45.10: Accept and replace $4M with $4B. with $4B. Reason: Correction of error.

Seeks a number of amendments to the Decisions: monitoring table, details of which are outlined 18.8 in pages 5 to 8 of the submission. : That minor amendments are made to the Plan as outlined in section 3.2 of this report.

18.9: That further work is undertaken to improve the Monitoring and Performance Indicators section of the Plan and this be included by way of variation or for the next iteration of the Plan.

Reasons: Many of the indicators and targets were derived from the 2012-2015 RLTS, including indicators “to be developed”. However, no further work appears to have been done over the intervening years.

This is an area requiring considerable further analysis, drawing on a number of agencies and using data sources that were not previously available, such as Bluetooth data. While minor changes can be made for this iteration, a far more rigorous analysis is required.

Timaru District Pages 13-16 Support. Decision 46.1: No change to document. Council Future transport Reason: Support noted. Submission #46 challenges for the region

Page 17 This objective should be recognized as the Decision 46.2: No change to document. highest priority for the region. Objective 1 Reasons: All the objectives are regarded as equal. No priority has

Environment Canterbury 46 135 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Endorse the statement that funding is a key been assigned among them. issue for the region. Support for funding issue is noted.

Page 17 Add reference to four-laning of State Highway Decision 46.3: No change to document. However, refer to proposed 1 through Timaru from Washdyke to State changes to the NZ Transport Agency four-to-six-year programme. Objective 1 Highway 78, a key access corridor for the port Reasons of Timaru. : Projects submitted by the NZ Transport Agency for inclusion in their four-to-six-year programme address these at least in part.

Page 17 Local Government Act requires councils to Decision 46.4: No change to document. meet community outcomes. Submitter Reason Objective 1 suggests reference to ONRC be deleted and : Removal of reference to ONRC not supported as the replaced with as defined by “our communities”. ONRC will be the national benchmark.

Page 17 Add further key outcome “improving roads to Decision 46.5: No change to document. meet and promote smart growth and land use Reasons Objective 1 change”. : Transport and land use should be considered together. Effective transport policies should not be reactive to land use change but should be considered together at the time of potential change. Comments noted.

Page 17 Supports, but objective only seeks reduction in Decision 46.6: No change to document. death and serious injury by 2021. Submitter Reason Objective 2 believes there should be a defined target : Specific targets are included in the outcomes sought quantifying the reduction sought. underneath the overall objective.

R Verity Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 47.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #47 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

R Henderson Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 48.1: No change to document. Next Bike Ltd should be Christchurch. Reasons removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot Submission #48 added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed

Environment Canterbury 47 136 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

C Dodds Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 49.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #49 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Warren Suckling Concerns that Plan should draw traffic away Decision 50.1: No change to document. from Christchurch to surrounding areas. Submission #50 Reasons: Land use patterns are determined through other Does the road programme look far enough processes and the RLTP is integrated with these. ahead? The assertion that cycleways are not practical is not supported either Cycleways a lifestyle choice not a practical locally or by overseas experience. alternative.

Chanelle Smith Seeks recognition of horses as legitimate and Decision 37.1: Add the following paragraph after paragraph five on vulnerable road users. page 13. Submission #51 In rural areas, there is evidence of suppressed demand from legitimate but vulnerable road users, such as cyclists and horse- riders. The combination of high speeds, narrow roads and, at times, dangerous driver behaviour, can make these vulnerable modes unsafe. Measures to address such concerns need to be investigated further as providing dedicated infrastructure will be cost-effective in only a limited range of situations. However, consideration of the needs of these users when renewing existing infrastructure, along with education and enforcement to modify driver behaviour, may be more cost-effective.”

Reasons: Horse riders and their horses are legitimate road users and are often vulnerable due to design of infrastructure and the behaviour of other road users. Acknowledgement of this can be incorporated into the Plan alongside acknowledge of other road users.

Greater provision of infrastructure for horses is not regarded as a

Environment Canterbury 48 137 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

priority for this Plan at this time. Where provision is able to be made within the design of proposed projects this is encouraged, but giving greater priority than that is not recommended.

Seeks greater focus on the safety of horses Decisions: and horse riders, including driver education, 51.1 signage and enforcement. : No change to document. 51.2: Refer matter to Regional Road Safety Working Group.

Reasons: The submission provides extensive evidence and suggestions regarding road safety for horses and riders. As this has not been identified as a priority issue by the Regional Road Safety Working Party at this point, it is not recommended for inclusion as a specific programme or priority within this Plan. Referring the matter to the Working Group will allow them to give consideration of the matter.

It is acknowledged that safety is likely to be a factor in suppressing horse riding on the road, as it is with other vulnerable users.

Lyttelton Port of Pages 13-16 Support. Decision 52.1: No change to document. Christchurch Reasons (LPC) Future transport Submitter is concerned that the impact of : There is a separate South Island Freight Study being challenges for the increased freight volumes may be understated. currently undertaken. Results from this and ongoing agency Submission #52 region monitoring should inform the freight status. Amendments to Question over the validity of the freight growth programme of works are possible through variation or subsequent statistics in the National Freight Demand iterations of the RLTP as this picture is clarified. Study.

While the higher growth projections will not alter the challenges and objectives stated in the Draft Plan, they will likely impact on the necessary timing of infrastructure investment required over the next ten years.

Submitter regards the closure of the Sumner– Decision 52.2: Include Evans Pass route within the Plan. Lyttelton/Evans Pass Road as a significant risk Reasons: Sumner-Lyttelton route via Evans Pass has been agreed

Environment Canterbury 49 138 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

to the regional economy. as part of the emergency works between the Crown and CCC.

Pages 19-30 Submitter generally agrees with the priorities Decision 52.3: No change to document. identified. Priorities Reasons: The proposed improvements to the Brougham/Burlington Submitter disagrees with the assessment intersection are to enhance safety rather than improve freight criteria of ‘benefits for the movement of freight’ movement. It is recognised that it is a major freight route but will not for two projects identified in priority 3. These enhance the movement of freight. include: Tunnel safety retrofit has been scored as a safety project (high) and  Brougham/Burlington intersection (page 28). from a resilience perspective (high). There are no direct  Lyttelton tunnel safety retrofit (deluge) improvements for freight other than enhancing safety and resilience. system (page 29). This matter was discussed at length among officers involved in the preparation of the Plan and it was agreed that inclusion of freight would be double counting the benefits.

Activities that Submitter requests that upgrading the Port Decision 52.4: No change to document. should be Hills Road/Chapmans Road intersection is Reasons removed or included as a priority 3f project within the ten- : These projects cannot be included as they have not been added year life of the RLTP. put forward for inclusion by the NZ Transport Agency or CCC.

Submitter requests that upgrading Norwich Quay is included as a priority 3f project within the ten-year life of the RLTP.

Additional Submitter acknowledges the rail network is Decision 52.5: No change to document. comment specifically excluded from the Draft RLTP, Reasons because investment is subject to commercial : Agree with comments but outside scope of Plan. criteria of KiwiRail New Zealand and the Government and is not part of the NLTF. However, the movement of freight and passenger trains does impact on the road network through delays caused as a result of level crossings. Level crossings have the potential to cause significant issues with the forecast growth in rail movements.

Environment Canterbury 50 139 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

I Barker/C Shaw Activities that Seeks inclusion of a bike share network for Decision 53.1: No change to document. should be Christchurch. Reasons Submission #53 removed or : The bike share network has considerable merit but cannot added be included in the Plan as it has not been proposed and committed to by an approved authority, as required by the Act.

Canterbury Seeks Phase 2 of AAC programme of works Decision 54.1: All phase 2 works scheduled for the first three years Earthquake be included in priority 3. The submission notes of the Plan be included in priority 3. All remaining AAC works that Recovery that some may not be eligible for funding from are scheduled for years four-to-ten of the Plan be included as priority Authority the NLTF. 4 and reviewed in the next iteration of the Plan.

Submission #54 Reasons: Phase 2 projects of the AAC programme in the first three years were intended to be priority 3. The list of projects shown was from CCC and confirmation will be sought to ensure the list is complete. Discussions around funding of these projects were ongoing at the time of preparing the Draft RLTP.

Strongly supports objective 3 and priority 3. Decision 54.2: No change to document.

Reason: Support noted.

Seeks inclusion of Phase 3 and Phase 4 Decision 54.3: That all projects scheduled to be undertaken within projects. the life of this Plan be included in the Plan, regardless of phase.

Reasons: The inclusion of these projects in the Christchurch Central Recovery Plan indicates the commitment from the Crown and CCC to deliver this programme, noting that there are ongoing discussions regarding funding.

For projects beyond the first three years, there will be an opportunity to review the programme in the next iteration to reflect any amendments to the timing, costs or funding of the projects.

Environment Canterbury 51 140 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

4. Summary of additional amendments to Draft RLTP

4.1 Proposed changes to monitoring table

Environment Canterbury 52 141 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Environment Canterbury 53 142 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Environment Canterbury 54 143 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

Environment Canterbury 55 144 Canterbury Regional Land Transport Programme 2015-2025 Hearing Decisions

4.2 Other changes required

 Removal of submission pages  Amendment to reference of GPS being draft.  Delete the following sentence from para 6, page 5: “Although it has only been released as a consultation draft at the time of writing, the strategic direction of the GPS is reflected in this Plan.”

 Removal of reference to “draft” and “consultation draft” as appropriate through the document.  Updating of Appendix 5: Summary of consultation

Amend Appendix 5 (page 45) as follows: “The draft RLTP was developed with input from district council staff, the NZ Transport Agency and the New Zealand Police. It took into account relevant existing public documents as required by the LTMA. Where appropriate, the aspirations and targets of the existing 2012 Canterbury RLTS have been incorporated. The Plan was approved for consultation by the RTC on 23 December 2014 and will be available for the public to make sunm,isisons from Wednesay, 21 January 2015.was open for submissions from 21 January to 20 February 2015. A total of 53 submissions were received. Hearings were held at Rolleston on 4 March 2015 to hear the 10 submitters who wished to be heard. The Hearing Panel consisted of Commissioner Mr Rex Williams (Chair), Mayor David Ayers, Cr Kerry Stevens, Cr Phil Clearwater, Mr Jim Harland and Cr Derek Milton. The Hearing Panel decisions were recommended to the RTC on 30 March 2015 and approved by Environment Canterbury in April 2015. The Hearing Panel’s report is available on the Environment Canterbury website. Submissions on the draft RLTP must be delivered by 4.00pm on Friday, 20 February 2015 to: Free Post 1201 Email: [email protected] RLTP Submissions Fax: (03) 365 3194 Environment Canterbury PO Box 345 CHRISTCHURCH”

Environment Canterbury 56 145 AGENDA ITEM NO: 7 SUBJECT MATTER: REPORT OF THE ACTIVE AND PASSENGER TRANSPORT WORKING GROUP

RLTP MATTER: NO Report: Regional Transport Committee DATE OF MEETING: 30 March 2015

REPORT BY: Kate Sanders, Administrator to the Active and Passenger Transport Working Group

ENDORSED BY: Steve Gibling, Programme Manager Transport, Environment Canterbury

PURPOSE

For the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee to receive a report on the recent meeting and work carried out by the Active and Passenger Transport Working Group (A&PTWG).

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee receives the report.

ATTACHMENTS

- Minutes of the A&PTWG held Wednesday 4 February 2015.

A&PTWG MEETING

Full details of the meeting are outlined in the minutes.

The A&PTWG has been focused on cycle facilities and infrastructure, and identifying who is responsible for funding these. Larger projects in big cities are well funded, but it is difficult to identify who is responsible for smaller facilities, one off events, or for workplace travel planning intiatives.

Smaller district councils around the region are also struggling to put forward cycle facility projects. Basically if projects are not put forward by local councils they don’t end up in the RLTP. It is important that TA’s know if or where they can access funding for walking and cycling, as some smaller councils are just not putting things forward as they can’t see how they can be funded. More information needs to be made available about how local share can be funded or calculated.

The A&PTWG also discussed a great community intiative in Waikuku. The community is looking to carry out some ‘placemaking’ work on their local streets to encourage the community to make better use of the street environment. The local council is supportive, and the University of Canterbury is also involved.

At the A&PTWG meeting it was noted that a recent Pledge Me campaign raised over $40,000 to bring a bike share project to Christchurch. While it is very positive to see public support for this, there were also a number of submissions to the RLTP regarding bike share, which were unable to be adequately addressed at the hearings. It is concerning that there is not an appropriate mechanism for these queries to be followed up because there appears to be community support, but it is difficult to identify political support.

146 Additionally, it has been identified by A&PTWG that there are a number of new buildings being constructed that do not provide access for disabled people. There are significant efforts being made to ensure public space is accessible, but the whole journey needs to be considered including getting into and around buildings. Is this an issue that can be addressed as part of building consents or changes to the District Plan?

Another issue that has been discussed by A&PTWG at recent meetings is the matter of Travel Planning as part of the recovery of the wider Christchurch area. Further detail will be provided at the RTC meeting.

The next meeting of the A&PTWG is scheduled for Wednesday 22 April 2015.

PASSENGER TRANSPORT

The A&PTWG monitor Passenger transport (PT) patronage peripherally, because Environment Canterbury monitor this closely. Changes were made to the Christchurch Metro bus network in December 2014 following adoption of the new Regional Public Transport Plan. Environment Canterbury are currently working on developing a new PT monitoring report which will help to analyse the impact of the new route changes.

Bus Users in Christchurch: 6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

Bikes on buses Wheelchairs on buses

The number of bicycles carried on buses in Canterbury is steady increasing, but the number of wheelchair users travelling by bus are is down compared to the same quarter in 2014. There is a regular dip in bikes on buses over the month of December.

Bus Users in Timaru:

147 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Bicycles Wheelchairs

Patronage numbers and so bicycle and wheelchair numbers are lower in Timaru compared to Christchurch, but there is demand for buses services to provide for wheelchair users and bicycles in Timaru.

CAT FORUM

On Monday 2 February the 24th CAT Forum was held, with local cantabrians who presented to the October 2014 2 walk and cycle conference in Nelson. Around 80 people attended the free lunchtime CAT Forum, with lunch provided by Abley Transportation Group.

Jeanette Ward from Abley Transportation provided a brief summary highlighting some of the key themes/ messages from the conference including: - Political support for cycling initiatives is critical in order to get funding - Cycling inititives need more funding - The removal of on-street parking is often a concern, but evidence has shown that the impact on local businesses is negligible, and benefits are great - A lot of work being done on seperated facilities - Demand and network planning issues - Excitement about NZTA’s dedicated national cycling team led by Dougal List - Place making and valuing the journey

The following 7 speakers provided a range of presentations: - Jeanette Ward – Abley transportation consultants - Glen Koorey – Canterbury University - Michael Ferigo – Christchurch City Council - Courtenay Groundwater – Abley - Jillian Frater – University of Canterbury - Meg Christie – Living Streets - George Williams – University of Canterbury

Copies of the presentations are available on the ECan CAT Forum webpage.

Feedback to date is that the CAT Forum was useful and relevant. Specifically, it was good to see the evidence in the research presented by George Williams showing that schools with good access to segregated cycleways have a much higher prevalence of students cycling to school.

RESEARCH

148 The following pieces of research may be of interest to RTC members:

A statistic NZ report on the travel patterns of Cantabrians on census day http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary- reports/commutingpatternschch.aspx

This report includes a number of interesting figures reinforcing detail we are already aware of such as evidence that proximity to workplace is more likely to result in people choosing to commute using active modes. Active commutes are common for people living in the central city, with almost 1 in 3 people who lived in the central city area units of Cathedral Square and Hagley Park walking or jogging to work in 2013.

149 Item 7 Attachment 1

Minutes of the Canterbury Active and Passenger Transport Working Group (A&PTWG) meeting Wednesday 4 February 2015 – 12 noon Canterbury Public Health Office

Present: Anna Canterbury District Health Len Fleete NZTA Stevenson Board/ Christchurch City (Chair) Council (CCC) Ben Wong Selwyn District Council Chris Neason Waimakariri District Council Road Safety Coordinator Meg Christie Living Streets Canterbury Kate Cardno (Environment Mackenzie Canterbury) (minutes)

Dirk De Lu Spokes Ngaire Tinning Selwyn District Council

1. Welcome to everyone Apologies from Phillip Basher, Ruth Hudson, Greg Bassam, Angus Bargh, Natasha Sitarz, Simon Kingham, Rob Kerr, David Corlett, Tony Francis and Andrew Dixon.

CERA were unable to attend (David Corlett and Angus Bargh), Kate will follow up for an update.

Natasha and CCC sent email updates before the meeting.

2. Actions from the previous meeting a. and b. CERA not in attendance, so no further information on actions a and b. These will be followed up by email.

 Angus to provide email update on AAC consultation, cycle parking at the hospital and CERA mode share and trip targets. (see attached). c. 5 racks have been provided by the front entrance to the hospital. These are always full. The fences around the front of the hospital are also full of bikes. Hospital are looking at providing a new parking areawhich will be secure, but expect it will only be for staff. The site managers still don’t appreciate the demand for cycling to work. Go By Bike day is on 11 feb, and CDHB will have a breakfast event – still working out details of food etc.

At a lot of events there are no cycle parking facilities. CCC events team need to provide information to the organisers of any events to ensure bikes can be secured near events (trees in Hagley Park are always chocka). Anna brought a photo of this at a recent event. This should be shared on facebook and by email.

 Anna to share photos of bikes chained to trees  Kate to talk to Minn about events team providing detail of where to get bike racks.

CCC’s email noted that the Metro Sports facility is seeking to have a number of cycle parks available to the public that may be useful for CDHB staff working in the health precinct. This may not be so useful to hospital staff. d. Go By Bike Day on 11 Feb. CCC organising a breakfast event in Hagley Park!! e. CAT Forums – a mini conference was held on Monday with some of the locals who presented to the 2 walk and cycle conference in Nelson in October. Around 80 people in attendance. Good feedback, but not a lot of discussion following the meeting.

Page 1 of 4 Louise Feathers Planning Minutes of the Active & Passenger Transport Working Group Kate Mackenzie

150 f. Walking and Cycling Strategy review – Natasha indicated by email that there has been no progress on this project, but its not forgotten. g. Central City Parking Plan. CCC commented that the central city vehicle parking plan is progressing, but that there is some difficulty including cycle parking in this plan, and finding time and resources to progress this aspect. h. Northern Arterial – Natashas email commented that there is nothing new to report on this. Dirk has a meeting scheduled with the economic business case people to discuss 3 options including clip-on’s or not; along the motorway or not; and details about the Waimak bridge. Chris noted that there have been washout/ scouring issues with the bridge in the past, so clip-ons could be tricky. Need to make sure the facility is well connected in all areas (Hillmorton cycleway leaves people in the middle of Lincoln Rd, with no safe way to get across).

3. RTC Meeting update RTC met on 1 December in Timaru. A&PTWG report was up first. Not much discussion. Agenda can be found at http://ecan.govt.nz/news-and-notices/minutes/pages/rtc-meeting-011214.aspx

4. GPS Update Also at RTC we heard from the MoT about the GPS which was adopted by the minister just before Christmas. This focussed on Regional Improvements – including roading projects outside of cities, and Woodend to Rangiora.

5. RLTP Update RLTP is out for consultation. Please prepare a submission, even if its in support. Submissions close on 20 February.

Anna expressed her concern about how A&PTWG has not been involved with developing the RLTP in the same way as we were in developing the RLTS. This has been dicussed with the project manager Richard Ball. The RLTP process was very descriptive, and difficult for working groups to comment/ be involved with discussion about what is included.

There were no workshops in developing the RLTP – the only workshops were with the TA engineers/ TOG.

Anna spoke to the RLTP sub-committee as they were finalising the document. She was asked to give a 10 min presentation, but was talking with them for around 45mins.

Basically if projects aren’t put forward by TA’s they don’t end up in the RLTP. Need to ensure TA’s know if or where they can access funding for walking and cycling, as some smaller councils are just not putting things forward as they can’t see how they can be funded (local share also a concern).

There are lots of proposed activities for urban cycleways etc., for CCC and Selwyn.

The Tekapo bridge was discussed as an example of infrastructure being established. What can we learn from this? Local share was fundraised by community. Links to regional parks, Safety and regional economic development.

Is it simply that central govt shows a disinterest in walking and cyling projects or is the issue around local share and FAR rates, councils not seeing this as a priority?

There is some difficulty in seeing how transport planning and policy aligns (RLTP’s, LTP’s Asset management etc.). May be worth doing a transport planning 101 to the next CAT Forum to explain to people where they can have their say, how to respond to consultation etc.

 Consider doing a Transport Planning 101 presentation to the next CAT Forum.

Page 2 of 4 Louise Feathers Planning Minutes of the Active & Passenger Transport Working Group Kate Mackenzie

151 The RLTP is trying to be a basic strategy whilst also being a bottom up programme of works – hard to balance the two. Focus needs to be on providing more choice. CCC has done well including a number of infrastructure projects. There do not appear to be many rural walking and cycling infrastructure projects put forward. Is this a matter of no funding, or no demand?

Hastings has had a lot of success with mode share by building infrastructure. Population of Hastings is 75,000, Timaru is 43,000.

Cycling infrastructure is also about equity of access – time and distance to services, cost can be reduced by cycling, but if no facilities are provided people have no realistic choice and drive.

Funding of cycling promotion – is this something councils see value in funding?

6. NZTA Update Natasha sent an email update. There is a new position currently being established. This Community Advisor will report straight to the regional director. This is currently being advertised, and expect someone to be in the role by mid March.

Natasha also sent a link to the Investing in Cycling newsletter which includes details of funding. The minister has also released a funding announcement. Applications for investment in cycling will go to a panel. Talk to Natasha for more detail.

NZTA working on developing a safety fact sheet.

 Kate to circulate Natashas email.

7. Ecan update Vanessa will be on parental leave from 20 March. Other matters – RLTP etc all discussed earlier.

8. CERA update CERA not in attendance, Kate to circulate email update.

9. CCC update CCC not in attendance, Kate to circulate email update.

10. Recent relevant research Really interested in Courtnay Groundwaters research project as touched on at the CAT Forum.

 Kate to circulate Courtnays research. http://www.2walkandcycle.org.nz/images/2014_Conference/Groundwater%20Courtney%20- %20Valuing%20Citywide%20Walking%20and%20Cycling.pdf

Also good to see George Williams research about how cycle facilities affect the number of students cycling to schools. Very good correlation where there is a safe facility provided.

Wellington research about on street parking, and who is actually using it

Good to hear about NextBike raising enough money to have public rental bikes in Christchurch. Good support from the business community as well as the public.

11. Any other business.

Chris spoke about Waikuku community who want to do some placemaking in their local rural streets. Glen Koorey is keen to get involved, and has two of his students involved. 50 km/hr zone, with wide streets. Meg can help with place making. May be worth them attending the Milenko Placemaking event.

 Kate to forward details to Chris.

Page 3 of 4 Louise Feathers Planning Minutes of the Active & Passenger Transport Working Group Kate Mackenzie

152 Meg also mentioned a couple of girls who have been on TV talking about how their horse was injured by a car. Education and publicity.

The road safety coordinators are doing a campaign about safe speeds around pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. We had a look at some of the draft designs.

Are there any cycle parking facilities at Hagley Cricket? Cyclists now will have right of way over cars on the hagley park cycle ways – but this will be closely monitored to ensure cars arent backing up over the intersection.

Ashley bridge will open a month earlier than it was scheduled to.

Next meeting – proposed date Wednesday 22 April 12 noon

CPH – 310 Manchester St BYO lunch.

Page 4 of 4 Louise Feathers Planning Minutes of the Active & Passenger Transport Working Group Kate Mackenzie

153 AGENDA ITEM NO: 8 SUBJECT MATTER: REPORT OF THE REGIONAL ROAD SAFETY WORKING GROUP

RLTP MATTER: NO Report: Regional Transport Committee DATE OF MEETING: 30 March 2015

REPORT BY: Kate Sanders, Administrator to the Regional Road Safety Working Group

ENDORSED BY: Steve Gibling, Programme Manager Transport, Environment Canterbury

PURPOSE

For the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee to receive a report on the recent meeting and work carried out by the Regional Road Safety Working Group (RRSWG).

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee receives the report.

ATTACHMENTS

- Minutes of the RRSWG held Thursday 5 February 2015.

RRSWG MEETING

Full details of the meeting are outlined in the minutes.

The RRSWG has had some discussion about the RLTP, but is generally focussed on following up on actions from previous meetings, and monitoring the crash data.

The following issue has been brought to the RRSWG, who consider that it should be brought to the attention of the RTC as the matter has wider implications than just road safety:

The establishment of new schools in Canterbury is having an affect on road safety. More detail is required on how the location of new schools is identified, as school locations can impact on traffic movements, pedestrian movements, and has a flow on impact on housing demand etc. There needs to be an integrated planning approach taken to choosing the location of new schools. District Councils are able to provide for new schools as part of their District Plan, but the Ministry of Education is not bound to the designations and does not always consider the detail in the District Plan, or the wider impact of the location of schools. Due to the significant movement of population around Canterbury this is becoming an increasing issue, in a number of districts, and impacting on how towns are growing.

The next meeting of the RRSWG is scheduled for Thursday 25 April 2015.

THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

The RRSWG have recently reviewed the work plan. At each meeting the actions are followed up on to ensure we are working towards the agreed policy actions.

ROAD SAFETY STATISTICS

The RRSWG monitor regional road crash statistics for fatal and serious crashes.

154 The Q2 report (1 October 2014 to 31 December 2014) included a break down of statistics by local government regions. The obvious outliers for Canterbury were that we had: - the second highest percentage of vehicles exceeding 100km/hr limits (at 35%) - the second highest number of 75+ year olds killed or seriously injured, per 100,000 pop over a 3 year average.

SAFE ROADS AND ROADSIDES

Significant work is being undertaken across the region to improve roads and roadsides as part of ongoing maintenance budgets. Of particular note, Selwyn and Waimakariri are making improvements to rural intersections.

Selwyn District Council has also obtained funding for a dedicated cycleway linking Rolleston to Lincoln.

SAFE SPEEDS

A variable speed limit sign has been established at an intersection in Canterbury, which is lit up when there are vehicles approaching the intersection from a side road. This is a trial, but is a method to encourage drivers to slow down on the main road if vehicles are approaching from side roads.

While police have indicated that these very short speed zones are difficult to enforce, they do make drivers more aware of the increased risk.

Territorial Authorities have been working woth NZTA to identify areas where speed zones could be changed as part of the Safe Speed Review led by NZTA. However it appears that the speed management draft document is currently being consulted internally at NZTA, prior to external consultation, and TA’s are awaiting further information about how this project is progressing before changes are able to be made to speed zones.

SAFE ROAD USE

A topic of particular media interest over the past few months has been the number and severity of crashes involving foreign drivers. In Canterbury we have had some particularly horrific crashes, and further investigation is yet to be carried out to identify whether there is a statistically significant issue in Canterbury and if this is a regional risk area.

A simple analysis of crashes between 2009-2013 involving overseas drivers indicates that Christchurch had the second highest number of fatal and injury crashes involving overseas drivers (186), and Selwyn was also in the top 20 (with 43 crashes). However 5 of the 8 Canterbury Districts were in the top 20 by proportion of crashes involving overseas drivers (Mackenzie 27%, Kaikoura 22%, Ashburton 13%, Hurunui 12%, Selwyn 8%).

LEADERSHIP, COLLABORATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

The RRSWG are working closely with the NZ Police and NZTA to help them develop a new programme known as the District Road Risk Programme. This programme is currently in its infancy, and further detail will be available at the next meeting.

Canterbury has been chosen to be involved with this pilot programme due to the strong relationship between the RTC and the RRSWG. More detil will be available following the next RRSWG on 25 April 2015.

155 Item 8 Attachment 1

Minutes of the Regional Road Safety Working Group Meeting 10am Thursday 13 February 2014 Selwyn District Council - Meeting Room 1

Mayor David Ayers opened the meeting.

1. Welcome, Introductions and Apologies

Those in attendance:

 Mayor David Ayers (Waimakariri District Council) – Chair  Kate Mackenzie (Cardno /ECan)  Kimberley Freeman (Cardno)  Phil Newton (Police)  Alisa Davies (ACC)  Daniel Naude (Timaru/representing South Canterbury)  Chris Neason representing Ken Stevenson (Waimakariri District Council)  Ngaire Tinning representing Andrew Mazey (Selwyn District Council)  Jeff Roy (NZTA)  Geoff Rhodes (Ashburton District Council)

Apologies:

 Andrew Dixon, Andrew Mazey, Anne-Marie Kite, Brian Fauth, David Edge, Al Stewart, Jim Harland, Ken Stevenson, Kieran Turner, Robert Woods.  Of note: Robyn Gardner is moving to ACC, and Robert Woods is moving to CERA.

2. Actions Sheet

There was not one from the last meeting; the main action was to work on the Action Plan.

3. Regional Transport Committee Feedback (Kate and David)

 Kate did a presentation explaining to the Regional Transport Committee (RTC) about the role of the Regional Road Safety Working Group (RRSWG) as it was the first meeting with the newly appointed councillors and mayors. The presentation outlined who the RRSWG are; what the RRSWG do and where the RRSWG fit into Canterbury Transport. The general consensus was that the RRSWG is an important group to have and the RTC is supportive of it.  RTC approved to advertise and appoint a representative for the following sectors: o Economic; o Public Health; o Environmental sustainability; and o Safety.

It was also agreed to approach Ngai Tahu and potentially appoint a ‘cultural’ representative through this. The contribution of speciality groups is very useful to the RTC. It is expected that the appointments will be announced at the next RTC meeting (17th February 2014).

4. NZTA Statistics

No fatalities to date on Canterbury Roads (thankfully). The one fatality that did occur was a medical event.

156 5. Implementation Plan (Kate)

RRSWG Action Plan PowerPoint:

 Setting the Scene and Data Sources: o What was trending in 2008-2012 will still be the same trends going into 2013 so should just use the 2008-2012 data and add in the 2013 data when it comes to hand. o Alisa to get the costing of the crashes to add to the stats – social cost etc. Jeff and Alisa agreed to organize this. This data will also be over the same 5 year period of 2008-2012. o Jeff to provide Alisa with the number of crashes, and this can be used to identify the social cost. o The downside of social cost modelling is that it includes figures such as the ‘cost on the community’ which is hard to put a figure to. The ACC data is only the cost to date and is not a prediction model. An up-to-date actual figure is more powerful than a number through predictive modelling. o Currently the action plan excludes the data for minor injury crashes. It was pointed out that a number of these crashes were only an inch away from being a serious or fatal, or if the occupant was an older person it could have been a serious or fatal. Some smaller districts need to include minor injury crashes to get a large enough sample size to draw trends from. Would it be valuable to have a look at the data for minor crashes to determine any trends and to see if the trends correlate with trends shown in fatal and serious crash data? If minor crashes provide additional information on emerging trend this could be useful. If minor crashes correspond with serious and fatals then it is not worth including them as there is a larger margin of error in this data set. The group agreed to look at the data trends and then determine if it is used and how much/in depth it is used. o There was brief discussion about how we determine if the people in crashes were just passing through or were residents of the region/district – was concluded that the location of the crash is more important to the RRSWG. o It is important to have a link between a graph/table in the Action Plan and the numbers behind it – Jeff responsible for this. This is to ensure accuracy and can be reviewed and repeated in the future as required. o Need to state the limitations to the data – there will always be some gaps in the data. This gap is more so in minor injuries as people tend not to report crashes if they can walk away from it/not go to hospital. o Some data from the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy has been used (for Journey to work etc.) this is only useful if trends can be identified, but does relate to urban growth so is relevant to some of the key challenges. o It is important to keep in mind that the Action Plan is a regional document, and that more specific information at a more local level should be looked at by the relevant TA and not so much by the RRSWG.

 Key Challenges: State highways and Key Strategic routes o Generally State highways and key strategic routes are the same. The Action Plan will use the Strategic Transport Network as stated in the Regional Land Transport Strategy (not all are State Highways). http://ecan.govt.nz/publications/Plans/rlts-2012.pdf pp.20-22. o Some local routes are not state highways such as Governors Bay Road, which is currently used as access to Lyttleton Port. o There was discussion surrounding key strategic routes at a local/regional level and that we should be drilling down to these and incorporating these. It was concluded that there are roads of local significance but these should be dealt with at local level and we should leave it at that point and focus on regionally strategic roads.

157 o Jeff will pull out some data on crashes that occur on the strategic routes – a map of these strategic routes will be obtained from ECan by Kate and then passed onto Jeff so he can get the data.

Communities using the road environment: o Work is being done to look at a one network approach when it comes to roads. o Consistency across the region – District Plan involvement. Funding and Prioritising o Mechanism at looking for funding. o Maintenance engineers replace the road to as it was beforehand. o Each TA has different FAR rates and put together budgets and plans differently. o Statistics on the different level of services by each TA – NZTA have these stats? o Include Road Safety Promotion Activity Class – RSC’s education and behaviour change. Active Modes of Transport o Look more in depth at the statistics o Pull out regional issues o Focus on walking and cycling – not on bus. Ageing population and changing demographics o Urban people in rural area do not really know/understand the ‘rural way’. o Horse riders – too dangerous for them to ride on rural roads around their homes now. o An increase in the number urban subdivisions and ten acre blocks in rural areas. o Changes to household income levels has an impact on the modes of transport that people choose to use etc.

Kate to make changes to the first half of the Action Plan that has been covered today and then send it out to the RRSWG (bearing in mind that it is still a working document) and agree to start halfway through (discussing Issues and policies) at the next meeting.

6. Safe Speeds on Rural Roads update

Chris (Waimakariri) was out with a photographer earlier this week taking photos of rural activities on rural roads such as moving stock, horse riders etc. to be used as part of the campaign.

7. Brief round table

Police

o Reduce the speeding allowance by 5km/h has had a good affect in Canterbury. o Emphasis in rural areas patrolling the area – e.g. Twizel. o Supportive of the RRSWG.

Road Safety Coordinators’

o Focus on the drink driving campaign o Speed campaign o Will put together a calendar of the campaigns across Canterbury and when they get run (including the Police ones).

NZTA

o Safer Speeds for Safer Journeys.

8. Other business

No other business.

158 9. Next meeting dates

All agree on the next meeting dates. If Kate has not already she will send an invite out to the RRSWG group for each of these dates. The dates are: Thursday 8th March; Thursday 10th April and Thursday 8th May.

Meeting Closed.

159 Canterbury Regional Transport Committee – 30 March 2015

AGENDA ITEM NO: 9 SUBJECT MATTER: REPORT OF THE REGIONAL LAND TRANSPORT OFFICERS GROUP

RLTP MATTER: NO REPORT BY: Len Fleete, Strategy Advisor, Environment Canterbury

ENDORSED BY: Shannon Boorer, Senior Strategy Advisor, Environment Canterbury

PURPOSE

For the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee to receive a report on the recent meeting of the Regional Land Transport Officers Group

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee:

a) Receives the report.

ATTACHMENTS

Notes from TOG meeting held on 11 March 2014.

160 Item 9 Attachment 1

Canterbury Regional Transport Officers Group Minutes

Date: Wednesday 11 March 2015 Venue: Lincoln Event Centre, Lincoln Present: Mackenzie DC Suzy Ratahi (SR) Selwyn DC Ben Wong (BW) pm only Waimakariri DC Ken Stevenson (KS) ECan Shannon Boorer (SB) Len Fleete (LF) Hafsa Ahmed (HA) David Bromell (DB) item 1 Richard Ball (RB) NZTA Stuart Woods (SW) Ian McCabe (IM) Michael Blyeven (MB) Janice Brass (JB) Steve Higgs (SH) Hurunui DC David Edge (DE) Timaru DC Andrew Dixon (AD) Christchurch CC Richard Holland (RH) Ashburton DC Brian Fauth (BF) Geoff Rhodes (GR)

AGENDA ITEMS 1. Apologies

Andrew Mazey SDC (AM) 2. Canterbury Mayoral Forum Update DB/HA

David Bromell Prinicpal Strategy Advisor with Environment Canterbury attended the meeting and updated the group on the interest in regional transport being shown from the Mayoral forum.

Attached notes and powerpoint presentation RTC Charir Rex Williams

had presented to the Mayoral forum 2 weeks previously were circulated and discussed.

Of note for the ToG is the greater level of interest being shown by regional mayors (transport is one of the priority work streams they have identified). Also the linkages beyond land transport to ports and airports. Comment was made that ToG and RTC are somewhat restricted by the LTMA but have endeavoured to develop closer links

with the likes of Kiwirail.

Hafsa Ahmed introduced a draft Joint Work Programme (copy attached). Discussion also centred on relationship between a ToG

161 1 work programme prepared for the Mayoral Forum next meeting and what was missing off the draft. Keith Tallentire has produced a similar work programme for Christchurch UDS Transport Group and

consistency between the two is important.

Work programme should be grouped by strategic outcomes. ALL

Any comments should be sent to [email protected] by end of March with suggestions of additional workstreams in particular. This will form the work programme for mayoral forum consideration in May 2015. 3. Monitoring and reporting requirements

General discussion on monitoring and reporting requirements to service the RTC and other regional groups.

RLTP process has raised issue of where monitoring and reporting sits and how it should work, including the role of Regional Road Safety Wiorking Group and Freight Network Efficiency Working Group.

The key connection should be on research and analysis behind papers going up to the RTC. Some confusion exists in the variety of groups that seem interested in this area (eg CEAG and Chief Executives Forum), who is reporting to them and particularly what should be

reported.

Monitoring and reporting conversation needs to be on ‘outcomes’ not ‘outputs’.

There is also the need for a conversation outsidethe regional plan

between local and national agencies to ensure we monitor and report on the right things and that there is consistency in what is being monitored. This will have to be resolved in the next 12 months as RLTP monitoring section needs work. ALL to note 4. Regional Land Transport Plan RB

RB presented a verbal report detailing RLTP draft and submissions process. As noted above performance measurement is a piece of work that will involve considerable input in the next 12 months.

Priority 3 groupings in draft have gone.

EQR/RoNS/Christchurch Urban Cycleways skew the funding picture.

Process has also highlighted that we need to start facilitating discussions at a regional level and broaden the scope of the ToG group. Example was Inland Kaikoura Road discussion – is it strategically important to have a workable backup to SH1 and what happens to deliver that if the diecision is ‘yes’? These conversations are not happening because the RLTP is restricted to projects that are

1622 financially supported by a RCA. What happens if the RCA can’t fund it but there may be a wider regional need for the link to be maintained/improved?

Noted. 5. Stock Truck Effluent LF

General discussion was held about whether there were issues over stock truck effluent in the region.

Concensus was that no issues were particularly arising although Timaru has an ongoing concern about effluent on the northern

approach to Timaru.

Noted ECan’s efforts to get Waimate and Mackenzie on board the STE clearinghouse agreement.

The 5 TA’s with disposal sites need to send in their invoices by the end of April to ensure corresponding invoices can be prepared and sent from the clearinghouse to all TA’s. Selwyn, Timaru, Also may be timely to again remind truck operators and fed farmers Hurunui, of the practice regarding standing stock prior to transport. Ashburton, Kaikoura to action 6. Collaboration RO

Mid/South Running a combined maintenance contract will mean 1 project manager (sourced in house) coordinating the 4 contracts. Effective collaboration at officer level has assisted process, mayors are driving the collaboration. Memeorandum of Understanding between councils.

North Canterbury

SDC/WDC/HDC/ doing separate contracts (KDC may collarborate with NZTA to get economies of scale). All looking at similar levels of service though.

2 different approaches will give good lessons.

7. ONRC

SH facilitated a discussion of ONRC roll out. It was noted that transition plans were the piece of work that NZTA keen to see (even if only in draft. Where districts are now, where they need to be and how they propose to get there). Qualitative not quantitative.

163 3 Identify the gaps in the draft transition plan.

TA’s were concerned regarding reporting requirement that was taking considerable effort and potentially cost.

NZTA staff acknowledged there was confusion over data requirements but suggested that it should just involve a page from AMP’s and horses for courses approach.

JB noted the comments from TA’s around RAMM phase 2. Some RCA’s are involved in this discussion group and she will pass Suzy’s name on to that group.

8. South Island Freight Plan

Driven by SI mayoral Alliance and includes key ports and airports and Kiwirail (not just land or road transport). High level document .

Plan is to look at links and where stresses and strains exist and an estimate of where future demand will be happening.

Near final draft is going to the governance group soon.

Information should go out through the RTC.

9. Strategic Network Plan

LF sought any information regarding the SNP process undertaken in Southland. General concensus was that this is something that could be useful as it is about assigning value (economic throughput) on the

network but that the MWH approach is not the only one and is more expensive (other versions have been used by other districts such as Central Otago and Waitaki so MWH not the only option – Rational has model at about half the price).

Maps the network as fit for purpose. A tool to clarify how the network is used. Opens up conversation at a political level as to how money is to be spent. Works well in rural network but not so well in

urban.

Discussion that this could be done without the model especially as districts go down the ONRC track.

District ToG Officers to suggest that it gets placed on the agenda for District discussion at the South Island Roading Managers Forum meeting ToG Officers

Meeting closed at 1.58pm

1644

TOG presentation – background and context  The Mayoral Forum is focused on growing Canterbury’s economy over the next 20 years and positioning this for when the earthquake rebuild peaks.  Two workshops – Dec 2014 and Feb 2015 – to develop a strategy.  Seven work programmes have emerged from those workshops – the top 3 are the CWMS and irrigation infrastructure, fast broadband in rural areas, and the regional transport network.  Transport is seen as critical to the movement of both people and goods: o the overarching vision is a region making the most of its natural advantages to build a strong, innovative economy with resilient, connected communities and a better quality of life for all o the Mayoral Forum’s objective is to maximise the economic growth of Canterbury by ensuring the region makes co-ordinated, optimal investment and development decisions that position it for long-term, sustainable growth.  Rex Williams as chair of RTC presented at the Feb workshop. We’ve circulated his slides. You’ll see that he talked about: o the draft Regional Land Transport Plan o the RTC and whether we’ve got optimal institutional arrangements for governance of regional transport networks o the RTC and its relationship with NZTA o integrated transport strategy and planning – across rail, airports, sea ports, inland ports and land transport.  The Chief Executives Forum is commissioning a report from Winder & Associates on pros and cons of an integrated transport network – and options to improve communication and connection across transport modes.  The Mayoral Forum’s work programme will be led by Mayor Winton Dalley (Hurunui), with Mayors Kelvin Coe and David Ayers and Rex Williams as chair of RTC.  The Forum met with Hon Simon Bridges, Minister of Transport, on 27 February to discuss the Forum’s request for a review of public transport governance in the Canterbury region. That work is being progressed by a working group led by Mike James from MoT.  To sum up, what Mayors want to achieve is the efficient transport of people and goods – a growing economy, with connected, resilient communities. That’s the background and context for the proposal that the Canterbury Policy Forum and the Transport Officers Group develop a joint work programme.

165 5

1666

167 7

1688 2015 2016 2017 2018

3/03/2015 Mar Jun Sep Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec Staff Lead Current Deadline Milestone Milestone Responsible organisation ▼ Qtr Milestones ▼ Qtr Milestones ▼ Projects ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ Cycling and

Active Transport The new Transport Minister is keen to make use of more NZTA funding for CAT. We Transport - need to agree our regional Len Fleete direction by working with our partners. Supply chain/freight studies Coordination of Greater Complete review of Christchurch and South Island the various freight. Study results to key freight Policy - journey based analysis to studies Hafsa Ahmed conducted ensure transport investment by NZTA & targeted to right places and MoT. supports future growth. Ministry of Transport -

Strategic Policy Programme In March 2014, the Ministry Complete initiated its Strategic Policy review of Programme. The aim of the the programme is to help the various Ministry to better understand projects critical long term challenges to facing New Zealand’s transport Policy - identify system, and the possible key implications for policy. In the first Hafsa Ahmed insights

year of the programme, the obtained. Ministry has explored three key questions and each question was studied through a project. Outcomes/key insights from the projects are now available

1699 Stock Effluent

Review Currently only five effluent Environment 2016/17 Complete Prepare Implement Canterbury 2014/15 RTC change to disposals sites in region. A invoicing for update on formula and clearing house agreement through Transport Stock truck progress review of exists between seven of the Officers Group effluent sites. of TOG clearinghouse Prepare review of by 1 July nine TLA roading authorities in paper to Stock 2016 the region to co-fund TOG/RTC on Truck maintenance of sites. This Transport - proposal to effluent update disposal needs to be expanded to get Len Fleete funding formula, agreement from all TLA’s and formula split and and process to update the co-funding clearinghouse for formula. operation operating (paper to go clearing to RTC May house 2015 meeting) 1- TLAs paying - chasing for invoices; (2) update the co- funding formula; (3) strategic steps at Mayoral Forum Dec'15 Mobility

Impaired (Definition) The hearing panel for the Introduce this Policy to Policy write work to the review the report with Regional Public Transport Plan Regional terminology recommended review requested that the Policy Forum used in definitions to definitions used across to start existing take to discussions plans and Regional regional plans to describe Policy - with TA's. LGA Policy Forum definitions. for adoption - mobility impaired/ transport 2016/2017 Hafsa Ahmed Transport ready for new disadvantaged/ disabled will discuss RLTP and people are reviewed so we can definitions RPTP agree on consistent with mobility terminology for all plans in the reps. region.

Review GPS This sets out the government’s funding priorities for transport every three years. ECan and the region make submissions on Transport - the draft. Len Fleete

17010 Regional Land

Transport Plan Environment 2014/15 Final RLTP First Report to Report to Second Report to Report to RTC Canterbury to 30 report RTC on RTC on report RTC on on progress March RTC monitoring progress progress monitoring progress on on delivering Reviewed and adopted: This through Transport (adopted by 2015 RLTP on on 2015 RLTP delivering RLTP projects plan must be reviewed every Officers Group Ecan and measures delivering delivering measures RLTP (dependent submitted August RLTP RLTP (dependent projects on RLT three years to meet legislative Transport - to NZTA RTC projects projects on RLT (dependent committee requirements. board by 30 meeting December (dependent committee on RLT meeting Review is undertaken by Len Fleete April 2015) (provides RTC on RLT meeting committee schedule for base line meeting committee schedule for meeting 2016) Regional Transport Committee and meeting 2016) schedule on ECan’s behalf. indication schedule for 2016) of for 2016) monitoring gaps). Regional Public

Transport Plan Environment Dec-17 Enact and monitor 2014 RPTP policies Policy to prepare a Present report Review and adopt RPTP Reviewed and adopted: This Transport - Canterbury demographic paper to to Joint PT by December 2017. plan must be reviewed every identify issues to consider in Working Shannon RPTP. E.g. impact of ageing Group to three years to meet legislative population on Total Mobility inform RPTP requirements. Boorer or vehicle trusts review in 2017. Vehicle fuels/technologies research Research is required with UDS partners Shannon to Transport to through UDS scope this discuss UDS partners to understand work with options with Transport Group the latest types of fuels and Transport - UDSTG operators technologies that are available and Joint PT and partners. Shannon Working Group Jul-15 Policy to for public transport vehicles conduct and the environmental Boorer literature review and impacts and potential costs of draft report. each. Future public transport options Research is required with UDS partners Draft scope Prepare CEAG ?? through UDS and budget report for UDS partners to investigate for this July 2015. long term public transport Transport Group work to They will future mode options, such as and Joint PT include in then decide Transport - LTPs. when to rail, and confirm the key Working Group Shannon TBC proceed with corridors, preferred mode and this study. potential timeline for Boorer implementation.

17111 Metro Strategy

Reviews Christchurch: The Metro UDS partners TBC Scope Transport to review Metro Strategy to feed review into RPTP review in 2017? Strategy is a joint UDS through Joint PT document which sets Transport - Working Group community-driven targets for Shannon improvements to public Boorer transport. This needs updating post-quake. Timaru: The Metro Strategy ECan and TDC TBC PT Scope review Transport to review Metro Strategy to Operations feed into RPTP review in 2017? is a joint document with TDC to conduct which sets community-driven Transport - review of targets for improvements to Shannon existing services to public transport. This needs Boorer shape updating before 2020 as many strategy of the targets are out of date. review.

Step

Complete

Monitoring

Annual monitoring report

17212