Agenda of Regional Transport Committee

Action Items from Regional Transport Committee Meetings

Attachment 1

Actions from Regional Transport Committee Meetings

The following is a list of items raised at the Regional Transport Committee meetings that require actions or follow-ups. All action items indicate who is responsible for each action, when it is expected to be completed and a brief status comment for each action. Once the items have been completed and reported back to the Committee they will be removed from the list.

Agenda Item	Action	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
State Highway 38 – Request for Sealing	To be left on the list for regular follow-ups		ongoing
Wider Region Transportation Study – M Tonks	Send final report to NZTA for endorsement	C Gilbertson	Immed	Copies of final Stage One and Two reports have been sent to NZTA for endorsement. Update on changes included in Transport Manager’s Agenda item for this meeting.
Presentation by Mr Martin Matthews CEO, Ministry of Transport	Address RTC meeting	C Gilbertson	February 2012	Presentation to be given in February 2012
Verbal Reports from Objective Representatives	Consideration to erect a BMS sign on the Chesterhope Bridge	Cr T Kerr (HDC)	Report back to 20 Dec meeting	See attached response from Jag Paanu
Draft RLTP Programme	Chesterhope Bridge	J Paanu	20 Dec	See attached response from Jag Paanu
General Business – Agenda Item Request	An Item on “The Place of Rail in the Region” be included on future RTC agenda	C Gilbertson, K Santer, C Bain	20 Dec	Included on agenda for 20 December.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Tuesday 20 December 2011

SUBJECT: Meeting Dates for 2012

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This agenda item presents the proposed meeting dates for the Regional Transport Committee for 2012 for the Committee’s approval.

2. The Terms of Reference for the Regional Transport Committee states a meeting frequency of a least six monthly. It is proposed to schedule five meetings during 2012.

3. The key logistical issue is that the NZTA Regional Director and associated staff are also required to attend other Regional Transport Committee meetings in the Central Region.

4. The proposed dates are:

4.1. Friday 17^th February 2012

4.2. Friday 27^th April 2012

4.3. Friday 25^th May 2012

4.4. Friday 22^nd June 2012

4.5. Friday 17^th August 2012

4.6. Friday 26^th October 2012

4.7. Friday 14^th December 2012

5. Further information may be available at the meeting with regard to potential conflicts with other Regional Transport Committee’s and Council meetings.

6. It is also proposed to schedule TAG meetings on the first Friday of every month as follows:

6.1. Friday 3^rd February 2012

6.2. Friday 2^nd March 2012

6.3. Thursday 5^th April 2012 (to allow for Good Friday)

6.4. Friday 4^th May 2012

6.5. Friday 8^th June 2012

6.6. Friday 6^th July 2012

6.7. Friday 3^rd August 2012

6.8. Friday 7^th September 2012

6.9. Friday 5^th October 2012

6.10. Friday 2^nd November 2012

6.11. Friday 7^th December 2012

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

7. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

7.1. Sections 97 and 98 of the Act do not apply as these relate to decisions that significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

7.2. Sections 83 and 84 covering special consultative procedure do not apply.

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

7.4. Section 80 of the Act covering decisions that are inconsistent with an existing policy or plan does not apply.

7.5. Council can exercise its discretion under Section 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Act and make a decision on this issue without conferring directly with the community or others having given due consideration to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be effected by or have an interest in the decisions to be made.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That the Committee approves the number of meetings and the proposed meeting dates for 2012 subject to any amendments required to avoid critical meeting conflicts.

Esther-Amy Bate

Planner

Carol Gilbertson

Transport Manager

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Tuesday 20 December 2011

SUBJECT: Update on Regional Land Transport Programme

Reason for Report

1. This report provides an update to the Committee on the status of the Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP), which was originally submitted to NZTA on 1 December 2011. A revised spreadsheet of projects is attached for the Committee to discuss. This spreadsheet firstly identifies the project profiles that were previously presented and endorsed by the RTC at their November meeting (titled Previous RTC Endorsed Profile), based on the information provided at the time; and a revised set of profiles (titled Draft RLTP Profile & Recommended Revised RTC Profile) which have been modified for the reasons outlined below.

2. Following the submission of the draft RLTP programme on 1 December 2011 it was noticed that some of the agreed RTC profiles had not been used by either NZTA or the requisite local authority in their draft programmes. A meeting of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) was held to discuss this, along with increases in requested funding levels in projects. At the TAG meeting agreement was reached to accept the local authority profiles and to recommend these adjusted profiles to the RTC for adoption as the agreed regional priority. Following the TAG’s decision further talks have been held with NZTA about why the NZTA projects were not able to be altered to the agreed profiles and priority. Below are the comments from NZTA on why this is the case:

2.1. In August 2011 NZTA moderated the profiles of all State Highway projects to align with the new Investment and Revenue Strategy. These profiles were presented to TAG who considered NZTA’s assessment of state highway projects before assessing and profiling all projects across the region to deliver a prioritised program. The profiles agreed between the parties were a consensus view of a programme of projects that achieve economic growth and productivity for Hawke’s Bay.

2.2. TAG chose to vary some of NZTA’s original profiles because of the contrasting views of individual project owners and a desire to better align with the regions focus on economic growth. Profiles from other Road Controlling Authorities (RCAs) projects were also amended during this process. The TAG felt that the amended profile allowed for a clearer priority of works to be set that better aligns with the outputs of the strategic modelling carried out in the HPTS.

2.3. Bearing in mind that the NZTA online programme for entering all projects - Transport Investment On-Line (TIO) calls for the project owner's profile, the profiles in the submitted programmes differed from what had been agreed. In order to show the variances in project profiling a new field has now been added to TIO to give a clearer picture of variances between the regional view (the priority agreed by TAG) and the individual view of project owners. In essence this gives a both a regional and project owner view of projects for the draft regional programme and an indication of the regions priorities to the moderation board.

3. NZTA have in fact subsequently undertaken a national moderation of the local NZTA projects (along with other NZTA projects nationally) so these must now stand, but it has resulted in a different programme to that approved by the RTC, at their November meeting. It has however, has given the TAG an insight into NZTA’s application of the profiling criteria. It is now recommended that the Local Authority project profiles be adjusted by the RTC and re-submitted accordingly, so projects can be assessed for prioritisation on a like for like basis.

4. This has resulted in the strategic projects previously prioritised by the RTC retaining their priority ranking with the exception of the Prebensen Drive/Hyderabad Roundabouts project. The NZTA moderation has raised NZTA projects previously sitting at and above priority 15 (and couple of new ones) above the profile for the roundabouts. Strictly speaking, applying the profile rankings, the effect of the moderation is to shift the roundabouts to priority 15, which is not what the RTC intended. The attached spreadsheet however, retains the roundabouts at number 6 on the regional prioritisation to keep faith with the RTC intent, but the profile inconsistency should be noted.

5. Another result of the NZTA moderation and re-profiling of the strategic projects is that safety and investigation projects now have the same profile ranking as the strategic projects. As noted above, the TAG has prioritised these below the strategic projects as that was, and has always been, the RTC’s intent.

6. The RTC should also note that the revised project cost estimates mean only the top five prioritised strategic projects can be funded from the “R” Funds (previously all six, and some investigation and design for later safety projects, could be funded), so unless the costs trend down sufficiently the roundabout upgrade cannot be fully funded at even priority six. Accordingly some of the lower priority investigation and safety projects may attract the balance of the fund, possibly to get as far as to include HNO Seismic Retrofit, despite being below the estimated cut off line.

7. Finally the HDC’s Major Safety projects have similarly been re-profiled due to the higher BCRs they attract and raised to priority 11, just below the NZTA Seismic Safety projects, but ahead of the HNO Safety projects (with less well defined BCR estimates). Arguably they could be prioritized above the Seismic Safety projects as they have the same profile, but that has not been debated by TAG or the RTC.

8. The latter part of this discussion indicated why a governance and management process separately reported on this agenda is required to manage future shifts in estimates and extracting best value from the total funds available.

9. Once the region has submitted its draft program NZTA will undertake a moderation process that will review all the regions project profiles against the IRS to provide the final National Land Transport Programme. The region's TAG group will be represented during the moderation process by Murray Buchanan and Shawn McKinley, as requested by the RTC.

10. The RTC now need to discuss the revised profiles and approval is sought to submit the revised RLTP.

Decision Making Process

11. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

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

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

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

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

11.5. 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. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance 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 due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2. Note the revised Regional Land Transport Programme priorities as presented;

3. And adopt the revised Regional Land Transport Programme, for resubmission to NZTA, as presented at the meeting.

Carol Gilbertson

Transport Manager

Attachment/s

Attachment 1 Revised Regional Land Transport Programme (Under Separate Cover)

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Tuesday 20 December 2011

SUBJECT: Regional Land Transport Programme Management and Monitoring Process

Reason for Report

1. This report provides a suggested process for monitoring and managing Hawke’s Bay’s Regional Land Transport Programme.

Background

2. The Technical Advisory Group (TAG) discussed the need to have a process in place to monitor and manage projects within the Regional Land Transport Programme and this is presented to the Committee for discussion and approval. The draft document is shown at Attachment 1.

Decision Making Process

3. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

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

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

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

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

3.5. 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:

2. Adopt, following any amendment, the process outlined by the Technical Advisory Group for the management and monitoring of the 2012-22 Regional Land Transport Programme.

Carol Gilbertson

Transport Manager

Attachment/s

1 View

RLTP Management and Monitoring Process

RLTP Management and Monitoring Process

Attachment 1

2012-22 Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP)

Management and Monitoring Process

The 2012-2022 RLTP is oversubscribed in relation to the available “R” Funds for the next 3-4 years. This was a deliberate decision made in order to:

1. Advance lower priority “unfunded” projects to meet the Governments “commitment date” for utilising any available “R” funds (a tender commitment by 31 March 2015) in the event that higher ranked projects are unable to meet that commitment date;

2. Advance lower priority “unfunded” projects where the investigation and design phases for higher ranked projects result in a lower projected capital cost and therefore releasing funds for other projects;

3. Allow consideration for “N” funding for the lower ranked projects, if these become available.

The ‘provisionally’ funded projects are also at varying degrees of investigation and design, so the capital costs estimates for some projects are subject to uncertainty. Some of these projects are ready to be committed, but are prioritised lower than other projects which have caveats that need to be resolved before they can be committed.

It will be important therefore that the Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) is carefully managed to ensure individual Approved Organisation (AO) applications for funding do not affect the integrity of the prioritisation process. Specifically it is important that that lower ranked projects within the programme, either above or below the funding cut-off line, do not proceed ahead of higher ranked projects where that project is as a result unable to be funded. It is also important that, where there can be confidence that this will not be the case, that projects can proceed without unnecessary delay, and the construction industry is not “overloaded” by end loading the programme, which could result in higher tendering rates and potentially reduced contractor performance. The programme will also be affected by NZTA’s ability to cash flow a project.

These programme and prioritisation risks will require careful monitoring and input from the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to the Regional Transport Committee (RTC) to ensure there is informed decision making and appropriate governance oversight.

The following arrangements are suggested to help do this and ensure there is transparency and accountability in the process:

1. Projects will be classed as:

a) Committed Projects (for which funding may be applied for as per the approved programme)

b) Planned Projects (Projects which will proceed to ‘Committed’ status, in line with the approved programme; but subject to the removal of the risk caveats e.g. designations/land purchases by the assigned trigger date)

c) Reserve Projects (which may be advanced to Planned status if funding allows).

The programme will maintain a floating “R” Funding Cut-Off Line that reflects those projects that are expected to be funded within the available “R” funds (after deducting committed projects). This will be updated every time a Planned project becomes ‘Committed’ and advised to TAG.

Each project owner will be required to submit a progress chart of their project’s proposed programme to the TAG at the beginning of July 2012. This is critical for those projects above the “R” funding cut-off line. The TAG, at their monthly meeting, will have a standard item to review progress against the proposed programme. The Chairperson of the TAG (HBRC’s Transport Manager) will be the holder of the programmes. Any requested changes to the programmes will be submitted to the TAG for discussion and agreement prior to acceptance, to ensure a ‘no surprises’ approach. Expenditure for each of the projects using “R” funds will also be reported to the TAG on a monthly basis and to the RTC at their regular meetings.

2. Any Committed project may advance to NZTA for funding approval. Committed projects are initially only those investigation and design phases outlined in years I and 2 of the approved programme, sitting above the cut-off line and approved by TAG, (generally those required for Planned Projects to be advanced to construction start within the first three to six years of the programme – the latter to allow projects to brought forwards if circumstances allow).

3. A ‘Planned’ project may be approved by TAG to submit to the RTC for commitment if:

a) Any caveats have been resolved and,

b) The estimated capital cost is not substantially higher than the programme estimate, and,

c) All higher ranked Planned Projects have been advanced to committed status, but,

d) The RTC, on the advice of TAG, may advance a Planned project to Committed status if with the exception of a), these conditions are not met and there is confidence that in doing so that the higher ranked projects will not fall below the R Funding Cut Off Line.

4. Reserve projects may be advanced to Planned status if:

a) “R” funds become available due to Planned projects being unable to meet their assigned trigger date for caveat removal and commitment.

b) “R” funds become available due to reduced projected capital cost in higher ranked projects.

c) “N” funding becomes available for the lower ranked projects

d) Except where there is a specific NZTA “N funds” allocation, reserve projects will be advanced by the RTC on the advice of TAG with the following considerations:

· Generally they will be the next highest ranked project, unless the amount of funding available is insufficient to complete the project.

· The number and nature of lower ranked projects that can be completed within the funding made available.

· Demonstrated wider network staging, or future proofing opportunities/benefits are apparent.

· There is the opportunity to enhance a Committed or Planned project to achieve greater benefits.

· The availability of “Local Share” to leverage increase overall investment in transport infrastructure.

· The readiness of the reserve project; due to the deadline to commit the “R” funds.

· Any other consideration the RTC considers relevant.

These arrangements will be reviewed and come into force once the NLTP and RLTP have been approved. TAG will hold regular monthly meetings over the course of the programme.

The need for and nature of these arrangements will need to be reviewed for the 2015-2018 RLTP.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Regional Transport Committee

Tuesday 20 December 2011

SUBJECT: Transport Manager's Report

REASON FOR REPORT

1. This regular report provides the Committee with a snapshot of relevant transport matters; comments on issues that have been actioned since the last Regional Transport Committee (RTC); provides an update on progress on studies and plans underway; and outlines what is coming up within the transport sector.

Actions Since Last RTC Meetings

2. Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP)

2.1. Since the last RTC meeting the TAG (Technical Advisory Group) held regular meetings to discuss prioritising projects for the Regional Land Transport Programme on a regional basis. This is covered more extensively in a separate agenda item.

3. Model Communities Funding

3.1. The RTC Chairman has received verbal confirmation from Jenny Chetwynd that funding for the 2012-2015 model communities would come from N funding and not utilise any of the regions R funds.

4. Request to Attend Moderation Process

4.1. As requested at the November RTC meeting a letter was sent to Jenny Chetwynd on 21 November 2011 requesting regional representation in the Regional Land Transport Programme moderation discussions. The request was for Mr Murray Buchanan to be part of this, but following the RTC meeting a recommendation was made by the Technical Advisory Group (TAG), which was subsequently supported by the RTC Chairman, that Mr Shawn McKinley also be included in the moderation discussions because of his extensive knowledge of the regional projects and his experience within the roading sector. The request made to Ms Chetwynd reflected this.

4.2. At the time of writing this report no response had been received to this request.

5. Wider Region Transportation Study (WRTS)

5.1. A copy of the completed WRTS study report (both stage 1 and 2) was sent to Delaney Myers, NZTA, on 18 November 2011 for endorsement, at the time of writing this report no response has been received.

5.2. At the presentation of the WRTS report on 22 September comments were made about the accuracy of the information in the report in relation to Rail. Mr Murray Tonks subsequently met with Kim Santer from KiwiRail, where it was identified that some of the information earlier supplied by KiwiRail was inaccurate, particularly with regard to the towing capacity of trains on the Napier to Gisborne line. The information received previously from Kiwirail indicated that all trains on the Gisborne line are limited to a gross pulling capacity of 480 tonnes (due to a combination of line gradients and draw-bar strength). Mr Santer advised that the 480 tonne limit applies only to DC locomotives. With a DX locomotive the gross towing capacity is 840 tonnes. There are also DXB locomotives (not currently used on the Gisborne line) that have a capacity for pulling up to 940 tonnes.

5.3. The greater towing capacity of the DX (and DXB) locomotives means that they compare more favourably with road trucks than the DC locomotive. Whereas a fully-laden train pulled by a DC locomotive would be able to carry the equivalent of just 10 road-trucks, and use approximately the same amount of fuel as those trucks, the DX, fully-laden, can pull the equivalent freight of 18 road-trucks and will use an estimated 52% of the amount of fuel as those 18 trucks.

5.4. The report has been updated to reflect this new information. A copy of the revised section 6 - Rail Transport Issues is attached – see Attachment 1. The specific changes are:

5.4.1. In comparison with the September Report: Most of sub-section 6.1.3 has been re-written. The amendments relating to towing capacities (and consequential effect on fuel efficiency) have been included.

5.4.2. Other consequential changes are in section 6.1.4 (specifying DC locomotive); section 6.1.5, last paragraph (numbers amended to reflect increased towing capacities); and section 6.1.7, (numbers amended to reflect increased towing capacities).

5.5. The effect of the update to the report is that rail comes out more favourably than previously in terms of the amount of freight that a train can pull (compared with road trucks) and in terms of comparative fuel efficiency. This improves the picture for the potential future viability of the line.

5.6. The overall conclusions to this section of the report are not, however, materially changed by the amendments.

Current Issues

6. Transport Planning Review and Change to Work Category 001 (W/C 001)

6.1. In July the Committee were informed of a review being undertaken by NZTA of changes to Funding Assistant Rates (FAR) and the impact of these financially. In particular around the regional land transport planning management grant (the original proposal was the grant to regional councils would be removed completely from 0.15% of relevant RLTP to zero).

6.2. NZTA undertook further investigation and consultation and have decided that W/C 001 will be retained in a modified form, with the grant of 0.15% of the RLTP being removed but any funding under W/C001 will now be for actual costs relating to:

6.2.1. Regional land transport programme (RLTP) preparation, including consultation, approval, variation and management; and

6.2.2. Regional land transport strategy (RLTS) preparation and management, including consultation, approval, variations, monitoring and reporting.

6.2.3. The costs not eligible in this work category include those for expenses associated with members of the Regional Transport Committee (each party to bear its own costs), preparation of regional public transport plans or planning and modelling for strategies or studies.

6.3. NZTA are undertaking a Transport Planning review to look at the efficiency and effectiveness of transport planning, specifically to look at delivering better outcomes, transport solutions and more targeted planning work. NZTA have issued a draft project brief and will undertake further consultation with Councils in early 2012 on this.

7. Public Transport

7.1. Council’s service improvements on Route 12 (the main route between Napier and Hastings) commenced on 12 September, with four extra new buses commencing services on this route. The services for Route 12 now start earlier and finish later and all services on this route now operate on a 15 minute frequency during peak times.

7.2. A trial bus service to Ahuriri and Westshore started in mid October and is so far proving very successful. Patronage has been very good with 1267 people travelling during November. Council staff and Council’s bus contractor have been receiving very positive feedback on the service.

7.3. The yearly bus services passenger survey was undertaken in November, with an excellent response – over 600 surveys were completed, compared to only 200 last year. Survey results are being compiled and will be presented to Go Bus management and relevant staff in February.

7.4. Overall patronage numbers on Council’s contracted bus services are continuing to increase. In 2009 there were a total of 434,231 passenger trips, 512,657 in 2010, and 572,645 to date in 2011. This is a pleasing significant increase.

8. Current Studies and Planning Documents Underway

8.1. Heretaunga Plains Transportation Study (HPTS)

8.1.1. The committee received a comprehensive update on the status of the Heretaunga Plains Transportation study at its meeting on 22 September 2011. The study at that time had advanced to the point where draft benefit cost assessments for individual project options had been produced, along with initial staging analysis for options and commensurate benefit cost ratios for these “packages”. It was expected that the study would be completed by mid November.

8.1.2. As noted at that time however, the Study Management and Technical Group (SMTG) had commissioned a review by an expert from NZTA Wellington, Mr Tony Brennand. This was done in consequence of questions raised by one of the study partners about a number of technical components of the model and the SMTG’s concern that the technical basis of the model met NZTA requirements and acceptance of the model outputs.

8.1.3. This review was expected to take 2/3 weeks, but unfortunately stretched out for 5/6 weeks. This was not due to any problems with the HPTS itself, it simply reflected the logistical difficulties of co-ordinating all the parties so that proper involvement took place.

8.1.4. The outcome of this review was positive in that Mr Brennand has confirmed that the model is fit for purpose. His conclusions were essentially the same as that given by the independent Peer Reviewer engaged by SMTG earlier on in the process. The SMTG is now fully confident that the findings of the study will provide the necessary evidence base for national and local (regional) investment in the long term development of the transport network on the Heretaunga Plains.

8.1.5. Because the review was being carried out, and it had the potential to require some reworking of earlier work, the consultants (GHD Limited) could make only limited progress in the meantime. The SMTG has recognised this and after liaising with the Chairman of the RTC, has agreed to a new timeline for the completion of the study. This is set out below:

· Wednesday 7 December 2011 – SMTG to meet with consultant to sign off final individual project BCR and the staging work so far completed (status complete).

· Thursday 15 December 2011 – Final Draft HPTS report completed and circulated to SMTG for review/comment (status pending).

· Wednesday 22 December 2011 – SMTG meeting to consider feedback and give final directions for completion of HPTS document (status pending).

· Thursday 2 February 2012 – SMTG meet to approve final document (status pending).

· Friday 10 February 2012 – Cover report agreed by SMTG and available for RTC meeting (status pending).

· Friday 17 February 2012 – RTC consider and as appropriate adopt study, forward to study partners for consideration and adoption (status pending).

Looking Ahead

9. The development of the RLTP and RLTS is ongoing in order to achieve a draft document for public consultation in early 2012.

10. Review and changes in policy and legislation will continue to be an ongoing focus over the next few months.

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

11. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act 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

1. That the Committee receives the Transport Manager’s report.

Carol Gilbertson

Transport Manager

Attachment/s

1 View

WRTS - Revised Section 6 - Rail Transport Issues

Regional Directors Report - December

Attachment 1

To:

Hawke’s Bay Regional Transport Committee

From:

Jenny Chetwynd – NZTA Regional Director Central

Date:

13 December 2011

The purpose of this report is:

· to provide an update on NZTA’s role in the delivery of the Regional Land Transport Strategy and the National Land Transport Programme in the Hawke’s Bay Region

· to provide an update on key initiatives that may impact the strategic development of the regional transport network

1.0 2009-2012 NLTP IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE

1.1 Update on State Highway and Network Ops Activities in the NLTP

We are making good progress on the Mohaka Bridge deck maintenance project, with the contract due to be advertised in mid December. We are currently finalising complex technical details and liaising with the industry on the project, as the maintenance works will impact the passage of very heavy loads on State Highway 5.

Progress is also being made to stabilise the rock face at the Nunneries on State Highway 5, which was damaged by storm events in February this year. Unfortunately the mixture of very loose pumice and very hard but significantly shattered rock is proving extremely difficult to stabilise. Traffic is not currently disrupted at the site but we do expect that it will be several months before we have the traffic moved to the new alignment and the site secured.

The resealing and pavement renewals programme is underway across the region. We have carried out an extensive consultation programme to inform road users of our upcoming works that has extended to a half page advert in Hawke’s Bay Today and will soon be supplemented by a series of radio spots.

Details on the 2009-2012 National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) construction programme are provided in Appendix 1. While good progress has been made overall a number of project phases have been deferred due to a fall in funding priority. This table will be updated following the adoption of the 2012-15 NLTP.

1.2 Update on Recent NLTP Funding Approvals by the NZTA

Due to the acceleration of a number of projects, (as part of the economic stimulus package), faster than anticipated progress on the Roads of National Significance, and the spend on emergency works as a result of the Canterbury Earthquake and a number of other storm events, the demand on the National Land Transport Fund has exceeded income. This had lead to the need to manage our cash flow over the balance of the current 2009-2012 NLTP period. As part of this we have put in place a moratorium on starting new infrastructure improvement projects for the remainder of the 2009-12 NLTP period. This moratorium and the cash flow situation will not affect local road maintenance and operations programmes, public transport or any activity classes other than those associated with new infrastructure. In addition, projects under contract with approved funding will start will proceed as planned.

The NZTA has provided advice to all Councils that any projects that they had intended to commence in the 2011/12 year should be included in their 2012/15 programmes.

2.0 OTHER NZTA & MOT INITIATIVES OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

2.1 2012-15 RLTP and NLTP Development

Significance to RTC

Future RLTP and NLTP development

Details

Funding of Infrastructure Improvements – General Update

Following the submission of the draft RLTPs a regional moderation process will take place, lead by the NZTA’s Regional Planning and Investment Manager. The moderation is to ensure that the indicative profiles applied by the project owner are fair and appropriate. As requested by the RTC, the NZTA would welcome the input of Mr Buchanan and Mr McKinley during the regional moderation process.

Following these regional processes, a national moderation will be undertaken. The moderation will be internal to the NZTA and led by the National Manager Investment, with support and involvement from national and regional office staff, including Strategy & Performance. This is to ensure national consistency in profiling so that the projects demonstrating the best value for money and closest alignment with the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport Funding (GPS) proceed; taking into account regional priorities and the available sources of funding. However, in the event of any issues arising which may contradict the outcomes of the regional moderation, your representatives will be contacted for comment.

As Hawke’s Bay has Regionally distributed (R) funds available, they will be applied to the highest profiled projects, even if those projects have a profile which is lower than that which would have qualified for National (N) funds. As a general rule of thumb, all infrastructure improvement projects with a value over $250,000 will attract R funds. Specific items that R funds would be applied to include:

· Local Road and State Highway infrastructure improvement projects with an expected cost of over $250,000. This includes what are commonly known as "Block projects", small improvements with a value of between $250,000 and $5M, all of which are individually listed on the HNO programme.

· HPMV packages

· Safety and Seismic Retrofit projects over $250,000. All other seismic and safety retrofit projects are done out of Minor Improvements and will not attract R funds. The safety and seismic retrofit programmes do not "ring fence" the amount listed against R funds, instead R funds would be applied if and when each improvement was done. Refer below for further details on these programmes.

· Property Acquisition Block and Fees, but only if a specific purchase was for an R funded project, i.e., block projects but not minor works. Note that the block projects as in the programme do not have a land purchase component included. This item would not "ring fence" the amount listed against R funds, but R funds would be applied if and when each improvement was done.

· PT infrastructure over $250,000.

Minor improvements (individual projects under $250,000, funded via each AOs "minor improvements" programme), will not attract R funds, unless there are insufficient quality infrastructure improvement projects available in a region to consume R funds within the required timeframes.

Equally, if the R funds are exhausted, the remaining projects will be considered for available N funding.

Model Communities Update

The NZTA has recently confirmed that the Hasting District Council and New Plymouth District Council Model Communities programmes will continue to be funded in the 2012-15 NLTP from National (N) funds. This decision acknowledges that these two model communities are a trial of a new funding approach where a comprehensive, integrated package of walking and cycling measures are implemented in a community in order to make these modes an easy choice. While this approach varies from our standard funding policy for utilising Regional (R) funding first for improvements projects it is important that we continue our commitment to enabling the projects to proceed and realise their full potential; and for the trial to be completed and assessed.

Safety Retrofit Programme - Update

The NZTA has a national programme to deliver small scale, value for money safety improvements across the country as part of our wider commitment to safe systems and Safer Journeys.

It is largely a reactive programme of works, developed in response to crash risks and/or events as and when they arise. Individual projects are then subject to an annual national moderation process to ensure alignment with national priorities.

The Hawke’s Bay region’s safety retrofit program has previously involved projects that help to reduce risks to motorists on the network and increase the safety for users. These projects have included clear zoning, guard railing and minor curve alignments. Continuing this funding enables NZTA to advance and deliver safety projects as the programme is refined and/or safety issues emerge.

The current draft 2012-15 State Highway programme shows a regional ‘allocation’ of $2.2m for safety retrofit works, which will be available to fund projects if and when they are developed over the next three year period. The NZTA will ensure the RTC are kept informed of any safety retrofit projects to be progressed under the safety retrofit work programme over the term of the 2012-15 NLTP.

As noted above, any safety retrofit project over $250,000 will attract R funds if these funds are available at the time the project is progressed.

Seismic Retrofit Programme - Update

The NZTA has an ongoing project across the country to retrofit bridges that are deemed to be ‘at risk’ during a seismic event.

Two seismic retrofit projects have been identified in the Hawke’s Bay region, following a national assessment of all state highway bridges: Tuki Tuki River Bridge (north of Waipukurau SH2) and Frasertown Bridge (Frasertown SH 38).

While it is unlikely that the Frasertown bridge would be a priority, it is possible that the Tuki Tuki River Bridge could proceed over the next 3 years. The draft 2012-15 State Highway programme currently includes a regional pro-rata allocation of $509,000 for seismic retrofit work in the Hawke’s Bay. This is a provisional ‘allocation’ and may be subject to review as seismic projects are progressed over the three year 2012-15 NLTP period. The NZTA will ensure the RTC are kept informed of any changes to the seismic retrofit programme if and when they arise over the term of the 2012-15 NLTP.

As noted above any seismic retrofit project over $250,000 will attract R funds, if these funds are available at the time the project is progressed.

2.2 High Productivity Motor Vehicle (HPMV) routes

Significance to RTC

Supporting the provision of effective connections for economic growth and productivity

Details

Maintenance work is continuing on SH5 to ensure the route can be used for HPMV up to 62 tonnes by the end of this financial year.

The future programme for HPMV implementation across the Hawke’s Bay region will be determined through the 2012-15 RLTP and NLTP processes.

2.3 Regional State Highway Bridging Issues

Significance to RTC

Possible impacts on the RLTP and supporting the provision of effective connections for economic growth and productivity

Details

Investigation work on the Waione Bridge (SH5) has identified minimal low cost work only is needed.

The Waitangi-Tutaekuri bridge maintenance work that will be carried out in lieu of the now deferred renewal will proceed in 2012/13.

2.4 Give Way Rule Changes

Significance to RTC

Key national safety initiative

Details

At 5am on Sunday 25 March 2012, two give-way rules are changing. They are the left-turn versus right-turn rule and the uncontrolled T-intersection rule.

Changing the give-way rules is part of the Government's Safer Journeys strategy to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on our roads. These changes will help reduce confusion on our roads by removing some of the demands currently placed on a driver’s decision-making at intersections. This initiative is one of many actions underway to help create a safe road system in New Zealand.

The NZTA has circulated information sheets to all councils detailing our plans for communicating these changes to the public and how road controlling authorities can plan for these changes. Information is also available on our website http://www.nzta.govt.nz/traffic/around-nz/road-user-rule.html

We will be providing the RTC with more information on these changes as we get closer to March 2012.

2.5 Changes to driver licence testing services

Significance to RTC

Key national safety initiative

Details

The NZTA has been working for much of this year to develop a longer and tougher restricted driving practical test to improve the safety of young and novice drivers, as part of the government’s Safer Journeys road safety strategy.

Young and novice drivers are most at risk during the restricted licence phase, when they start to drive alone, and are four times more likely to crash than learner drivers. Research shows that young drivers who complete 120 hours of supervised practice on their learner licence have a solo-driving crash rate 40% lower than those who only complete 50 hours.

The new test will come into effect from 27 February 2012 and is specifically designed to encourage learner drivers to clock up 120 hours of supervised practice before they sit the test. The new restricted test also requires a more complex driving environment, including minimum levels of traffic, multiple lanes and merge lanes with 60-80km/hr speed zones.

The nature of the tougher test means that several test locations across the country will no longer be suitable and practical tests will be discontinued at these sites. We are very aware that these changes will make it less convenient for some people to sit their practical test. However these hard decisions have been made to improve the safety of young drivers and reduce the number of young people killed and injured on our roads every year.

NZ has the highest road death rate in the OECD for 15-17 year olds, and the fourth highest road death rate for 18-20 year olds.

Regional Directors Report - December

Attachment 1

Appendix 1: Hawke’s Bay Regional State Highway and Network Operations Activities in the 2009-12 NLTP

The following table provides an update on state highway activities in the 2009-12 National Land Transport Programme.

NLTP Activity - (Committed, probable and possible phases only)	Phase	Comment
Renewals
Operation and Maintenance
New and Improved infrastructure
Matahorua Gorge Realignment	Construction	Complete.
SH50 Southern Extension (HB Expressway)	Construction	Complete.
Waipukurau Overbridge Realignment	Construction	Complete
Dillons Hill Realignment	Construction	Complete
Dillons Hill Realignment Stage 2	Construction	Complete
Mohaka Seismic Retrofit	Construction	Complete
SH5 Glengarry Hill North & Southbound Stock Effluent	Construction	Complete
Te Mahanga Nth - Passing Lane	Construction	Complete.
SH2 South of SH50 Passing Lane	Construction	Complete.
Mangakino Stream Bridge Replacement	Construction	Programmed for completion June 2012.
SH2 Poukawa Swamp Southbound Passing Lane	Construction	Construction re-programmed for next construction season
SH2 /50 Intersection Improvements	Construction	Construction deferred – subject to regional re-prioritising
Napier Airport to Bay View Passing Lanes	Construction	Construction deferred – subject to regional re-prioritising
Te Mahanga Sth - Passing Lane	Design	Design completed.
College Rd to Silverstream	Design	Design to be complete 2011/12 - property purchase is unlikely to be funded.
Gisborne - Napier Passing Opportunities HB	Design	4 practically complete, 8 being designed, 4 subject to availability of design funding.
Corkscrew Gully Northbound Passing Lane	Design	Design phase completion - property purchase is unlikely to be funded
Corkscrew Gully Southbound Passing Lane	Design	Design phase completion - subject to funding of property purchase.
Waikaremoana Seal Extension SH38	Design	Project unlikely to proceed due to low funding priority
Prebensen Drive/Hyderabad Road Interchange	Investigation	Complete. Design stage for cost effective at-grade solution initiated.
SH2 Kennals Corner and Curve South	Investigation	Investigation to be complete June 2012
SH2/50A Paki Paki Intersection with SH50A	Investigation	Investigation to be complete June 2012
SH2 Napier Rd Intersection	Investigation	Design phase completion, subject to funding of property purchase.
SH2 Pilcher Rd Intersection	Investigation	Complete. Outcome being delivered through the Napier Road Intersection project
Tarawera Hill Realignment and PL	Investigation	Continuing to progress scoping stage & Iwi liaison
HB Expressway Kennedy to Ngaruroro Improvements	Investigation	Scoping of options to improve efficiency and safety. Due to be complete end of 2011
Mohaka Bridge Deck Repairs	Investigation	Intensive high-tech maintenance option proposed to extend life of existing deck.
HB Expressway Meeanee Quay Intersection	Investigation	Cost effective minor safety works implemented allowing us to lower the capital priority.
SH2/SH5 Intersection Improvements	Investigation	Scheme Assessment programmed to be complete by June 2012.
Waitangi Washout Bridge Replacement	Investigation	Investigation concluded that intensive maintenance to extend life is more cost effective
SH2 Wairoa Stock Effluent Facility	Investigation	Project put forward for reprogramming in 2012/13 – 2014/15.
Tahaenui Bridge Replacement and Realignment	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority, local liaison ongoing.
Bay View - 70kph Zone Traffic Management	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
Bay View to SH2/SH5 Intersection Seal Widening	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
North of Tunanui Rd Realignment	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
Whakaki Rd Curves Improvements	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
Glencoe Gorge Realignment	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
SH2 Poukawa Swamp Northbound Passing Lane	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
Tutira section corridor mass action	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
Manga-o-Nuku Bridges	Investigation	Project to be deferred due to higher regional priorities
Tangoio Straight Seal Widening	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority.
SH2 Opapa Passing Lane Northbound	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority and safety issues
SH2 Opapa Passing Lane Southbound	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority and safety issues
SH5 Turangakumu to Windy Gap mass Action	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
Tuiroa Cutting Realignment and Seal Widening	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority
SH5 Te Pohue golf course to Mistletoe mass action	Investigation	Project suspended due to fall in funding priority

Walking and cycling facilities
Omahu Rd/Expressway Pedestrian Crossing	Investigation	Currently working with HDC on options for York Rd and Omahu Rd.

1 View	Action Items from Regional Transport Committee Meetings
2 View	Memo from Jag Paanu, Hastings District Council

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.