Agenda of Regional Transport Committee

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

SUBJECT: Short Term Replacements for the 7 September 2018 Regional Transport Committee Meeting

Reason for Report

1. Council has made allowance in the Terms of Reference for the Committee for short term replacements of alternates to be appointed to the Committee where the usual member/s cannot attend.

Committee Membership

Committee Members (Voting)
Councillor Alan Dick	Member and Chairman	HBRC
Councillor Fenton Wilson	Member and Deputy Chairman	HBRC
Councillor Keith Price Alternate Mayor Bill Dalton	Member	NCC
Mayor Alex Walker Alternate Cr David Tennent	Member	CHBDC
Mayor Craig Little Alternate not appointed	Member	WDC
Councillor Ann Redstone Alternate Tania Kerr	Member	HDC
Ms Emma Speight	Member	NZ Transport Agency
Advisory Members (Non-voting)
Brian Gregory	Cultural Interests and Environment	HBRC Maori Committee
Paul Michaelsen	Private motorists, Public Transport users, Walking and Cycling	Automobile Association
Matt Broderick	NZ Police	NZ Police
Steve Young	Port and Coastal Shipping	Port of Napier Limited
Ian Emmerson	Road Transport industry	Road Transport Association
Anthony Mills	Rail	KiwiRail
Lisa Malde	Health	HB District Health Board
Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
Anne Redgrave	Transport Manager	HBRC
Megan Welsby	Sustainable Transport Officer	HBRC
Robin Malley	Transportation Team Leader	NCC
Shawn McKinley	Roading Manager	CHBDC
Libby Young	Transport Asset Manager	WDC
Mark Clews	Strategic Planning Manager	HDC
Jag Pannu	Transportation Manager	HDC
Paul Murphy	Senior Investment Adviser	NZ Transport Agency
Simon Barnett	Principal Transport Planner	NZ Transport Agency
Oliver Postings	Journey Manager	NZ Transport Agency
Wayne Wallace	Principal Investment Adviser	NZ Transport Agency

Recommendation

That __________________________ be appointed as member/s of the Regional Transport Committee of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for the meeting of Friday, 07 December 2018 as short term replacement(s) on the Committee for _______________________.

Authored by:

Anne Redgrave

Transport Manager

Approved by:

Tom Skerman

Group Manager Strategic Planning

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

Subject: Call for Items of Business Not on the Agenda

Reason for Report

1. Standing order 9.12 states:

“A meeting may deal with an item of business that is not on the agenda where the meeting resolves to deal with that item and the Chairperson provides the following information during the public part of the meeting:

(a) the reason the item is not on the agenda; and

(b) the reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.

Items not on the agenda may be brought before the meeting through a report from either the Chief Executive or the Chairperson.

Please note that nothing in this standing order removes the requirement to meet the provisions of Part 6, LGA 2002 with regard to consultation and decision making.”

2. In addition, standing order 9.13 allows “A meeting may discuss an item that is not on the agenda only if it is a minor matter relating to the general business of the meeting and the Chairperson explains at the beginning of the public part of the meeting that the item will be discussed. However, the meeting may not make a resolution, decision or recommendation about the item, except to refer it to a subsequent meeting for further discussion.”

Recommendations

1. That the Regional Transport Committee accepts the following “Items of Business Not on the Agenda” for discussion as Item 14:

1.1. Urgent items of Business

Item Name

Reason not on Agenda

Reason discussion cannot be delayed

1.2. Minor items for discussion

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.

Annelie Roets

GOVERNANCE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

James Palmer

CHIEF EXECUTIVE

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

Subject: Provincial Growth Fund Opportunities

Reason for Report

1. To determine what role the Committee can or should play in the development of the Region’s transport-related Provincial Growth Fund applications. Through the PGF, the Government seeks to ensure that people living all over New Zealand can reach their full potential by helping build a regional economy that is sustainable, inclusive and productive. The PGF is administered by the Provincial Development Unit, part of the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment.

The Provincial Growth Fund

2. The New Zealand Government has allocated three billion dollars over a three-year term to invest in regional economic development through the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF).

3. The PGF invites applications for funding that fall into three main areas, or tiers: regionally-focused projects, sector-focused projects, and infrastructure-based projects. The PGF’s objectives are:

3.1. Creating jobs, leading to sustainable economic growth

3.2. Increasing social inclusion and participation

3.3. Enabling Māori to realise aspirations in all aspects of the economy

3.4. Encouraging environmental sustainability and helping New Zealand meet climate change commitments alongside productive use of land, water and other resources

3.5. Improving resilience, particularly of critical infrastructure, and by diversifying our economy

4. Transport projects fall under the PGF’s Tier 3 Infrastructure programme.

5. While the PGF note that road transport investment is already covered by the National Land Transport Programme and Regional Land Transport Plans (and that the National Land Transport Fund is the primary funding source for land transport initiatives), if a project can generate additional benefits for regional development, the Provincial Growth Fund can also be involved. The PGF can:

5.1. provide a source of funding for local authorities that face significant difficulty in meeting local share requirements

5.2. bring projects forward where they may not be prioritised under the NLTP but are strategically important to a region

5.3. provide a source of funding for projects that cannot secure funding through the National Land Transport Fund, but which otherwise meet the government’s criteria and objectives for the PGF.

To receive funding for any of these purposes, a project must be closely aligned with the PGF's purpose (paragraph 3 above), more than just the priorities of current programmes of land transport investment. Projects should also be included in Regional Land Transport Plans and other regional strategic planning documents. This will ensure that:

5.4. integrated regional transport planning continues

5.5. proposed projects fit in with regional transport priorities

5.6. the process for regions to access PGF funding is streamlined

5.7. funding for projects comes from the most appropriate source.

6. The Region and this Committee in particular has recently achieved significant progress towards improvements of the roading networks, particularly on the Heretaunga Plains and linkages to the Port. NZTA normally would advise that sufficient time be given to the analysis and assessment of the impact of many projects recently completed (or to be completed) before embarking on another major investment programme. The PGF, however, provides the Region with an opportunity to investigate ways to bring forward certain existing RLTP projects, or promote the investigation of new strategic initiatives for our transport networks.

Current PGF Applications being promoted by RTC Members

7. A number of TLA’s have been actively developing PGF applications for transport related projects within their respective districts. These have not, however, been developed in isolation. Hastings District Council has led and coordinated the region’s local government agencies in the development of a cohesive package of applications which include the following projects:

Entity	Application	RLTP status	Comment
CHBDC			Verbal update at meeting
HDC	50 Max Bridge strengthening	Included in current RLTP – high priority	PGF funding is proposed to bring forward the completion of this programme.
	North Eastern Connector	Investigation funding is included in current RLTP
WDC	Connecting Mahia	Included in current RLTP as a low cost/low risk improvement	A feasibility study undertaken to showcase all issues, needed adjustments etc. on all roads under WDC which are connecting our peninsula to main land and enable our industries to operate. Focus on dealing with erosion issues along the main road. Application potentially in before Christmas).
	Linking Market to Port	Not included in RLTP	Assessing rural roads will be undertaken in the next year in our district to ensure they are suitable for our industry to operate and get their goods to their market
	Bridge Strengthening	Included in current RLTP as a low cost/low risk improvement	WDC is in the process to get an application for 1st Stage capacity analysis and 2nd Stage strengthening work linking into NZTA’s bridge strengthening projects under the PGF.
Other	SH38 Sealing	Funding for a business case for SH38 was included in RLTP, but not construction. RLTP describes level of service on this route as a significant issue.	WDC indicated that NZTA confirmed they will submit a SH 38 application, strongly endorsed by the WDC.
HBRC	Napier to Wairoa rail reinstatement	N/A	KiwiRail secured funding

8. Note: While NCC does not have any transport-related PGF applications, its projects are being seen as enablers of infrastructure which enhances access to the Port. NCC offers the following observations:

8.1. An unencumbered Port is a major employment opportunity for the region. Alternatively a Port that is struggling to get its freight in and out is a major drag on the economy and employment.

8.2. Napier’s inner harbour has already been transformed from an underutilised area focussed on port access, to a mixed urban area with restaurants, bars etc. However, a comprehensive condition assessment of the council-owned Inner Harbour assets was recently completed and found that a number of these assets require urgent attention, while others require significant redevelopment within a short to medium time period. Given that this area provides the main access to the port and will continue to do so into the future, urgent action is required to prevent productivity losses caused by this port access and to open up new opportunities that leverage the inbound/outbound capability of the port. The Inner Harbour PGF application aims to enhance rail/road transport connection to the port and unlock the productivity potential of this strategic asset and associated industry.

8.3. The Airport is also looking to expand into air freight. NCC’s advocacy for an Ahuriri Estuary Regional Park will allow the Airport to protect its flight paths and enable expansion in a way that is sustainable for the environment and the city. NCC holds the view that clarifying the needs of the airport in terms of surrounding land use not only allows tourism to increase through passenger numbers, but also business people to travel and enable the airport to enter the freight market with confidence.

Candidate projects

9. In addition to the TLA projects in the pipeline, the following potential projects could have strong alignment with the PGF objectives. The Committee might also consider these worthy of a formal PGF application. These projects have been discussed with the NZTA.

9.1. Integrated Transport Priority Plan (including a transport model update). Funding to deliver an updated prioritized and programmed investment plan was included in the RLTP by the way of an update of the Heretaunga Plains transport model, in light of the completion of major works – Pakowhai/Links intersection, Whakatu Arterial Link etc., as well as land use and demographic changes. Scope would now be widened to all Hawke’s Bay and to ensure a multi-modal, mode neutral approach is taken.

9.2. Ahuriri Detailed Business Case – the investment case to improve safety, efficiency and community cohesion outcomes for State Highway 50 through Ahuriri. Based on the growing pressure on SH50, rail, community severance and modal conflict leading to inefficient freight journeys as well as increasing safety risk.

9.3. HPMV Capability through to Palmerston North freight hub access.

10. There has been some discussion and advocacy for NZTA to progress an initiative that would see the capacity of the HB Expressway increased to four lanes. A scaled-down version of this project would involve four-laning and bridge duplication of the section between the new Pakowhai Road roundabout and the Taradale/Meeanee exits. There is a concern that both the current and projected traffic volumes, and consequential journey time delays, are not sufficiently high enough to elevate the project to the priority level necessary to garner support through the PGF evaluation process. An integrated plan would determine the priority and programming of this investment whilst considering the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport, a mode neutral approach and maximizing the efficiency of existing infrastructure.

Decisions for the Committee

11. In relation to the current TLA-led applications, the Committee is likely to receive requests for statements of support when each application is ready for submission to the Provincial Development Unit. The Committee may wish to provide the respective TLAs with its in principle support at the meeting in lieu of providing formal support subsequently.

12. In relation to the listed candidate projects in para 9 above, the following feedback or guidance is sought from the Committee:

12.1. Does the Committee wish to advance further applications in its own name?

12.2. If so,

12.2.1. Which projects should be progressed?

12.2.2. Who is to manage the application process?

12.2.3. How does the Committee propose that the application process should be resourced?

13. In relation to para 12.2.3, as a note of caution, staff wish ensure that committee members do not underestimate the time and resource requirements of developing and submitting an application, especially if the funding implications exceed $1m. Note also that the applications are likely to require co-funding depending on how they are pitched.

Decision Making Process

14. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

14.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

14.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

14.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

14.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

14.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That the Regional Transport Committee:

1. Receives the “Provincial Growth Fund Opportunities” report

2. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

3. Endorses those transport related PGF applications currently in progress and agrees to provide letters in support of each application signed by the Chairperson when requested to do so.

4. Agrees that the following transport related PGF applications be developed and submitted in the name of the Regional Transport Committee:

4.1 ….

4.2 ....

4.3 ….

4.4 ….

5. Agrees EITHER:

That [x] be charged with the development of the applications in recommendation 3 and that the following organisations agree to provide the following resources:

5.1 Organisation Name [x%]

5.2 Organisation Name [x%]

5.3 Organisation Name [x%]

6. That staff report back on estimated funding costs and timeframes for the development of the applications in recommendation 3 together with recommendations for the resourcing of same.

Authored by:

Anne Redgrave

Transport Manager

Approved by:

Tom Skerman

Group Manager Strategic Planning

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

Subject: Regional Public Transport Plan Review

Reason for Report

1. To review the draft Regional Public Transport Plan 2019 and provide feedback to the Regional Council.

Background

2. Under the Land Transport Management Act 2003, every Regional Council must adopt a regional public transport plan unless it does not intend to enter into any contracts for the supply of public transport services or provide any financial assistance to any operator or user of a taxi or shuttle service.

3. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council’s Regional Public Transport Plan was adopted in April 2015. The Regional Transport Committee assisted with the preparation of the plan but the legislation prohibits the delegation of responsibility for adopting or varying a plan to any committee. This must be undertaken by the council.

4. The Act states that an RPTP must be reviewed and if necessary, renewed or varied at the same time as, or as soon as practicable after, the public transport components of a regional land transport plan are approved or varied. As the Regional Land Transport Plan has recently been reviewed and varied, the council is undertaking a review of the RPTP.

5. The purpose of an RPTP is to provide a public statement of:

5.1. the public transport services that the Council considers integral to the network

5.2. the policies and procedures, information and infrastructure that apply to those services

6. Development and review of an RPTP also provides an opportunity for public input into the design and operation of the public transport network.

7. The current RPTP was adopted in 2015 and was the first plan developed under the new LTMA requirements, incorporating the principles of the Public Transport Operating Model.

Review Progress to date

8. Passengers, user groups and organisations, including councils, have been contacted in order to seek their ideas for improving the public transport services in Hawke’s Bay. We received around 20 responses, with a range of suggestions for improvements.

9. We have also conducted an investment logic mapping session with a varied group of stakeholders, in order to identify key issues or opportunities to be addressed by the public transport system in Hawke’s Bay, the benefits of resolving these, strategic responses and specific actions. The outcomes of this workshop and public feedback have been distilled into a plan for service improvements and investigations over the next three years (Section 5, draft RPTP, Attached). The Committee’s feedback is sought on these. A copy of the RPTP is available for Committee Members only and a copy is available on request.

10. We have also reviewed and updated the policies under which HBRC manages its public transport services. These were mainly minor wording changes and updates, although two new policies have been added to cement informal arrangements, for special event services and bus advertising in place.

Next Steps

11. The Committee is asked to provide any comment on the draft RPTP, before it is submitted for consideration by the regional council. Once approved it will be released for a full public consultation process in early 2019.

Decision Making Process

12. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Regional Transport Committee receives and notes the “Regional Public Transport Plan Review” staff report.

Authored by:

Anne Redgrave

Transport Manager

Approved by:

Tom Skerman

Group Manager Strategic Planning

Attachment/s

⇨1

Draft Regional Public Transport Plan

Under Separate Cover

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

Subject: December 2018 Transport Manager's Report

Reason for Report

1. This regular report provides the Committee with a snapshot of relevant transport matters, provides updates from the Transport Advisory Group (TAG) on issues raised at their regular meetings and outlines what is coming up within the transport sector.

Transport Advisory Group meetings

2. The TAG group has met to:

2.1. Discuss the possibilities for provincial growth applications related to transport in Hawke’s Bay.

2.2. Review strategic responses and actions to be included in the Regional Public Transport Plan review.

2.3. Discuss outcomes of the NZTA future transport presentation, outlined below.

NZTA Presentation on the future of transport in NZ and opportunities for innovation in Hawke’s Bay

3. On 29 October, Martin McMullan of NZ Transport Agency gave a very interesting presentation to committee and TAG members on the future of transport, particularly with regard to how technological innovation will change the way the transport system is operated in the future and how these innovations might be applied in Hawke’s Bay in the short term. Mr McMullan is Director, Connected Journey Solutions, for the Agency.

4. The Agency is actively involved in developing technological solutions to a range of transport issues. In other areas it is keeping a watch on technological advances taking place overseas. These include

4.1. the use of drones to carry people; there are currently 22 different companies working on this, aiming to carry passengers up to 300 km

4.2. kerbside charging. Charging micro transit services at an extended number of pick up and drop off points, as the demand for fixed-period parking drops.

4.3. Hydrogen cell technology for heavy vehicles, including buses and coastal shipping. This is seen as having more potential than electric heavy vehicles, which will have limitations

5. There has been much discussion about driverless vehicle pilots, which are taking place in a number of cities overseas. In Phoenix Arizona, Waymo (a subsidiary of Google) is partnering with the local transit agency to explore how driverless vehicles can fill transit gaps. Waymo states that it wants to be an enabler, not a disruptor and work with the transit systems that already exist, by filling gaps in the network, for example, on first mile/last mile solutions. However, because of the detailed route mapping that has to take place for a driverless vehicle to operate, such technology is unlikely to be found outside of urban centres within 20 years.

6. However, Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is already making inroads in New Zealand. NZTA has developed The Mobility Marketplace which is powered by a real-time data processing platform. It does not store data from each transaction, meaning that it is not slowed down by data storage and can process all of NZ’s transport data in real time.

7. The Agency has now developed two apps, Choice (Queenstown) and RideMate (Auckland) to operate from this platform and has opened them up to all compliant transport providers. The next step is to add payments to this system, so that the app serves as a journey planner, booking and payments tool, for a range of different transport providers, including ride-sharing. The app will next be trialled in Taranaki.

8. Micro-transit is another service that is making use of technology to provide more specialised but efficient services. On-demand technology enables customers to book a seat in a shared vehicle through an app, online or by phoning a call centre. The service's dynamic routing technology will, in real-time, match multiple passengers heading in the same direction along the most efficient route. The area that such services operate in can be geo-fenced, so that they can supplement traditional bus services, rather than competing with them. Environment Canterbury is considering how such services could work in Timaru, as a replacement to some or all of the traditional bus services, which are losing patronage. Further trials are underway in Auckland to replace the ‘first or last mile’ of a journey, by providing a micro transit service as a way to reduce the demand on ‘park and ride’ facilities.

9. Sophisticated ridesharing apps are becoming more widespread in NZ. Chariot allows drivers and ride-seekers to connect for either one-off or regular rides, with cost-sharing built in to the technology.

10. Technology is also helping to improve traffic monitoring in real time in congested areas, through cellphone data. This technology is already being used in Hawke’s Bay to monitor traffic flows on the region’s strategic routes.

11. Mr McMullan considered that the most applicable innovations to Hawke’s Bay at present include

11.1. Micro-transit in locations where traditional public transport may not be sustainable.

11.2. Improved ridesharing

11.3. Journey planning “Mobility as a Service” applications such as Choice.

12. NZTA is keen to facilitate the uptake of these services and has staff available to assist local councils. The TAG group has resolved to invite a member of Mr McMullan’s team to commence these discussions in early 2019.

Te Ahu A Turanga – Manawatu Tararua Highway Notice of Requirement.

13. Following the permanent closure of the Manawatu Gorge, and after a compressed consultation process, a route for a replacement of the SH3 Manawatu Gorge route was announced in early 2018. The alignment of the new route is shown below.

14. A Notice of Requirement has now been lodged with the appropriate councils for the new route. The NoR is a critical step to obtain Resource Management Act approvals to authorise the proposed new road across the Ruahine Ranges.

Te Ahu a Turanga: Manawatū Tararua Highway map

15. NZTA has now decided that it will not build a bypass of Ashhurst as an intermediate step, prior to the new highway being completed. While a temporary bypass had been considered as an option for Ashhurst, further investigations on the cost and time to construct have resulted in a decision not to proceed, with resources being prioritised to a full package of mitigation measures, now under construction.

Stock Truck Effluent Facility Wairoa

16. A working group, chaired by Cr Fenton Wilson, has met in Wairoa to discuss next steps and possible sites. A verbal update will be given during the meeting.

Regional Cycling Governance Group

17. Hastings District Council is still working on resolving the Craggy Range trail and possible future options include potentially having walkers using the proposed Hawke’s Bay Trails section. This has led to a total review of the existing implementation plan, in order to accommodate safety issues with widening for two way traffic. The new plan will take into consideration the whole section of trail, from Te Mata Road to Craggy Range. This has funding implications.

18. Hastings District Council and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council will combine both sections (see map) and work together to build this whole section in keeping with NZCT Design Guidelines. This means revising the Project Implementation Plan and requesting more financial support from MBIE/HBRC/HDC.

19. A group of cycling stakeholders met recently to undertake the first steps of a business case for improving commuter cycling between Napier and Hastings. The session identified three key issues which inhibit greater commuter cycling between the two cities. The next step in the process will be to identify the benefits of addressing these, and possible interventions.

20. Minutes from the November 2018 meeting of the Regional Cycling Governance group are attached.

Approved Organisations – Significant issues or Works

NZTA Highway Network and Operations

21. An update on work by NZTA Highway Network and Operations Group forms part of the Regional Director’s report.

Hastings District Council

22. The Whakatu Arterial Link is nearly complete, with the first section of the new route now open but giving access onto Ruahapia Road. During December the Ruahāpia railway crossing will be permanently closed to traffic (although still open to cyclists and pedestrians) and the Whakatū Arterial Link road will fully open to traffic from SH2 and Pākōwhai Rd.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

23. Reports on the public transport operations and road safety education outputs managed by Hawke’s Bay Regional Council are the subjects of separate items in this agenda.

Decision Making Process

24. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Regional Transport Committee receives and notes the “December 2018 Transport Manager's report”.

Authored by:

Anne Redgrave

Transport Manager

Approved by:

Tom Skerman

Group Manager Strategic Planning

Attachment/s

⇩1

6 Nov 2018 Minutes Regional Cycling Governance Group meeting

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

Subject: RoadSafe Hawke's Bay September 2018 Updatep

Reason for Report

1. This regular report provides the Committee with a snapshot of road safety activities undertaken under the Road Safety Action Plans and, as necessary, will brief the Committee on any current or upcoming issues relevant to road safety.

Background

2. There are a number of strategic documents that provide the direction for the road safety activities, including:

2.1. Government Policy Statement for Land Transport (GPS)

2.2. Safer Journeys 2020

2.3. Communities at Risk Register

3. Road safety incorporates a range of elements including network improvement, road policing, and education and awareness. RoadSafe Hawke’s Bay (RSHB) and the road safety action plans focus on education and awareness programmes in collaboration with road policing activities and proposed network improvements.

4. Road deaths in Hawke’s Bay - year to date

4. Road deaths by district for the year to date:

*Territorial Authority*	*Road deaths 1 Jan to 25 Nov 2018*
Wairoa	4
Hastings	4
Napier	5
Central Hawke’s Bay	1

5. The graph below shows the factors contributing to road deaths in Hawke’s Bay

The Communities at Risk Register (2017) sets out the personal and collective risk of being involved in a crash caused by one of a range of factors, compared with other territorial authorities. Personal risk reflects the distance travelled and is measured by the number of deaths and serious injuries per 100 million vehicle kilometres travelled^{^[1]}. The table below sets out the factors for which Hawke’s Bay district residents are at high or medium personal risk.^{^[2]}

District

Overall

Young Drivers

Alcohol and Drugs

Speed

Rural Intersections

Urban Intersections

All Intersections

Loss of Control Rural Roads

Motorcyclist involved

Cyclist Involved

Pedestrian Involved

Distraction

Fatigue

Older Road Users

Restraints

Wairoa DC

Hastings DC

Napier CC

Central Hawke’s Bay DC

Key:

High personal risk

Medium personal risk

Funding

6. The road safety programme is funded from three sources:

6.1. The NZ Transport Agency

6.2. Territorial Authorities contribution (Wairoa District Council, Hastings District Council, Napier City Council, Central Hawke’s Bay District Council)

6.3. HBRC rates

RoadSafe Hawke’s Bay Recent Activities

7. We are working with Hastings District Council on an Intersection Use campaign. This will include a series of education opportunities including newspaper articles, flyers etc. and social media on RoadSafe and Police Facebook and website (Eastern Police)

8. We are working on a campaign series on high risk road safety issues to be developed for use on social media, this is in partnership with Police and Higgins roading contractors.

9. We will be attending a number of alcohol checkpoints throughout December in partnership with Police

10. We are working with Hastings District Council to increase safety for motorcyclists. This will include road treatments, billboards (on motorcycling preferred routes), motorcycle training opportunities, media, subsidies for Hi Viz gear, and education d share the road

11. The research project is going well, the first lot of data is being analysed. The surveys will continue over the next year

12. Beach safety signage: We are working with Police/HDC on placing signage around beach entrances focusing on reducing speed etc. This will also include billboards in popular beach areas, media and social media campaigns etc

13. Linda Anderson, Manager RoadSafe HB, has been invited by the NZTA and Local Government NZ chief executives to sit on a national road safety steering group to oversee the distribution of increased road safety funding announced by the government in August this year. She will be attending meetings over the next few months.

Decision Making Process

14. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Regional Transport Committee receives and notes the “RoadSafe Hawke's Bay December 2017 Update” staff report.

Authored by:

Linda Anderson

Regional Manager RoadSafe Hawke's Bay

Approved by:

Tom Skerman

Group Manager Strategic Planning

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Friday 07 December 2018

Subject: December 2018 Public Transport Update

Reason for Report

1. To provide the Committee with an update on Council’s public transport operations.

goBay Passenger Survey Results

2. The 2018 goBay Passenger Survey was conducted between 1-24 August, with a total of 635 people taking part (78% paper based, 22% on-line):

2.1 90% satisfaction with the overall trip

2.2 88% satisfaction with the public transport system

2.3 77% satisfied with service frequency

2.4 80% considered the service good value for money

2.5 90% satisfaction with personal safety

2.6 91% satisfaction with the ease of getting on/off the bus

2.7 90% satisfaction with the helpfulness and attitude of bus drivers

2.8 the top two main reasons for travel were ‘work’ and ‘school”.

3. Although these results are very good, there is still some room for improvement, particularly around service frequency and services running to time. The biggest decline in satisfaction since the 2016 survey related to information about service delays. HBRC is working to improve delays through some service and timetable adjustments, and information about service delays should be improved once the new goBay website goes live in early December.

4. Service features that mattered most to the community for them to recommend using goBay public transport were: ‘The bus being on time and keeping to timetable’, ‘How convenient it is to pay for public transport’ and ‘The travel time’.

5. Payment systems will be much improved once the new ticketing system is in place, and we are also working to improve travel times wherever possible, including with faster passenger loading once many passengers are using the tag-on, tag-off system.

Bus Ticketing System

6. The project to implement a new bus ticketing and smartcard system for nine regional councils across New Zealand is now well into the implementation phase. The provider is INIT, a company based in Germany but which has built such systems all over the world.

7. The system will allow all participating regional councils to continue with their own timetables and fares structures but the bus card will be able to be used in all nine regions. A clearing-house system will allocate fares to the correct region.

8. Passengers will be able to top up their cards with money on line (currently this is only possible with cash on the bus), which will speed up bus loading times. However, cards can still be topped up with cash on the bus or at selected retail outlets by cash or EFTPOS.

9. Entry to the bus is via a tag-on system (the card is passed over an electronic reader) and passengers will be required to tag off when they leave the bus also. This will provide councils with detailed information (not currently available) about where people are getting on and off the bus and how far they travel.

10. All nine regions will have the new system in place by June 2018.

Bus Passenger Trips

Diagram 1 – Monthly Passenger Trips 2012-13 to 2017-18 for the year to date

11. Diagram 1 shows the monthly passenger trips and the monthly average, July to October from 2012-13 to 2018-19.

Diagram 1 – Year to date monthly passenger trips, July to October.

12. During this period most of the services between Napier and Hastings showed increases, while most of the suburban services showed decreases, including Route 14 Napier-Maraenui and Route 20 Hastings-Flaxmere.

13. Although we can’t be sure of the reasons for this, we think that the recent increases in petrol prices have had an influence on the longer services. We have also assumed that as the HB unemployment figures are down to 4.5%, more people may have access to a private vehicle, or may be travelling on Napier-Hastings/Hastings-Napier trips to workplaces.

14. While the overall YTD patronage is still slightly down on last year, the total passenger-kilometres travelled has increased by 8% This is a reflection of passenger increases on the longer services.

Bus Service Costs

15. Diagram 2 shows the annual net cost (after fares and excluding GST) of operating the goBay bus service for the year to date from 2012-13 to 2018-19.

Diagram 2 – Year to date net cost, July to October.

51% of this cost is met by the New Zealand Transport Agency)

16. Recent cost increases are largely due to inflationary pressure, as our bus contract is adjusted by an NZTA index reflecting fuel, labour and infrastructure prices. However, lower fare revenues have also played a part.

Total Mobility

17. The following tables compare the number of Total Mobility trips made for the year to date over the last five years, and the corresponding costs (excluding GST).

18. Diagram 3 shows the number of Total Mobility trips made for the year to date from 2012 -2013 to 2018-2019.

Diagram 3 – Year to date Total Mobility trips, July to October

19. Diagram 4 shows the cost of the Total Mobility Scheme (excl GST) for the year to date from 2012-13 to 2018-19

Diagram 4 – Year to date Total Mobility cost, July to October

(60% of this cost is met by the New Zealand Transport Agency

20. The number of Total Mobility trips for the year to date is lower than last year, while the cost of those trips is higher. This is most likely a reflection of higher fuel prices.

Decision Making Process

21. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendation

That the Regional Transport Committee receives and notes the “December 2018 Public Transport Update” report.

Authored by:

Anne Redgrave

Transport Manager

Approved by:

Tom Skerman

Group Manager Strategic Planning

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

[1] High Personal Risk – 1 standard deviation above the mean, Medium Personal Risk – 0.5 standard deviation above the mean

[2] Communities at Risk Register, NZ Transport Agency website, 2017