HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_BLACK_AGENDA_COVER

 

 

Traffic Subcommittee

 

 

23 June 2020

 

 

 

Order Paper for the meeting to be held in the

Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt,

on:

 

 

 

Tuesday 30 June 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

 

 

 

 

 

Membership

 

Cr L Sutton (Chair)

Cr J Briggs

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer (Deputy Chair)

Cr A Mitchell

Cr N Shaw

 

Cr D Hislop (Alternate)

Deputy Mayor Lewis (Alternate)

Cr S Rasheed (Alternate)

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the dates and times of Council Meetings please visit www.huttcity.govt.nz

 

Have your say

You can speak under public comment to items on the agenda to the Mayor and Councillors at this meeting. Please let us know by noon the working day before the meeting. You can do this by emailing DemocraticServicesTeam@huttcity.govt.nz or calling the Democratic Services Team on

04 570 6666 | 0800 HUTT CITY

 

 

HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_SCREEN_MEDRES

 

TRAFFIC SUBCOMMITTEE
Membership:	6
Alternates:	3
Quorum:	Half of the members
Meeting Cycle:	The Traffic Subcommittee will meet on an eight weekly basis or as required.
Reports to:	Council

 

PURPOSE

The Traffic Subcommittee has primary responsibility for considering and making recommendations to Council on traffic matters and considering any traffic matters referred to it by Council.

For the avoidance of doubt, “traffic” includes parking, and excludes temporary road closures under clause 11(e) of the Tenth Schedule of the LGA 1974 and the Transport (Vehicular Traffic Road Closure) Regulations 1965.

 

TERMS OF REFERENCE:

The Traffic Subcommittee will have authority to:

1.0            Do all things necessary to hear, consider and make recommendations to Council on any traffic related matter.

1.1           Regulate its own processes and proceedings to achieve its purpose and objective.

1.2           Provide options for the consideration of Council.

 

The Chair will have authority to refer any traffic matter to:

1.2.1         A Community Board; or

1.2.2         The Community and Environment Committee; or

1.2.3         Council.

 

DELEGATED AUTHORITY:

The Traffic Subcommittee will have delegated authority to carry out activities within its terms of reference.

 

    


HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Traffic Subcommittee

 

Meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

 Tuesday 30 June 2020 commencing at 2.00pm.

 

ORDER PAPER

 

Public Business

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

2.       PUBLIC COMMENT

Generally up to 30 minutes is set aside for public comment (three minutes per speaker on items appearing on the agenda). Speakers may be asked questions on the matters they raise.       

3.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.        

4.       Recommendations to Council - 28 July 2020

i)     Greater Wellington Regional Council Bus Stop Modifications (20/425)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/129 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations 6

       Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

ii)    Campbell Terrace - Proposed Loading Zone Parking Restriction (20/296)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/130 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations 25

       Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

iii)   Hebden Crescent - Proposed 'No Stopping At All Times' Parking Restriction (20/300)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/131 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations 29

       Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

iv)   Ricoh Sports Centre Carpark - Confirmation of Existing Parking Restrictions (20/470)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/132 by the Traffic Engineer - Network Operations 33

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

v)    London Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions (20/289)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/133 by the Traffic Engineer                                   37

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

vi)   Gracefield Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions   (20/290)

Report No. TSC2020/4/134 by the Traffic Engineer                                   41

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

vii)  William Street, Graham Street and North Street - No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions (20/291)

Report No. TSC2020/4/135 by the Traffic Engineer                                   45

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

viii) Trafalgar Street - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (19/1207)

Report No. TSC2020/2/22 by the Traffic Engineer                                     49

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

ix)   Waddington Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions (20/429)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/136 by the Traffic Engineer                                   53

       Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the “That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

 

x)    Market Grove - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions (20/430)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/137 by the Traffic Engineer                                   57

       Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

xi)   Mills Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions (20/431)

       Report No. TSC2020/4/138 by the Traffic Engineer                                   61

       Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

 

5.       Woburn Road Pedestrian Refuge Island Update (20/331)

Report No. TSC2020/4/139 by the Traffic Asset Manager                                64       

Chair’s Recommendation:

“That the recommendation contained in the report be endorsed.”

6.       QUESTIONS

With reference to section 32 of Standing Orders, before putting a question a member shall endeavour to obtain the information. Questions shall be concise and in writing and handed to the Chair prior to the commencement of the meeting.   

 

 

Rosie Bowman

COMMITTEE ADVISOR

            


                                                                                      13                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

19 May 2020

 

File: (20/425)

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/129

Greater Wellington Regional Council Bus Stop Modifications

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of the report is to seek the Council’s approval for:

(a)     The extension to the length, or relocation of a number of existing bus stops within the Hutt City road network within the suburbs represented by the Petone Community Board;

(b)     The installation of No Stopping At All Time restrictions before and after bus stops on the Hutt City road network to provide sufficient entry and exit tapers.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)         rescinds the current traffic resolutions associated with the following bus stops:

(a)        Cuba Street (#’s 92 – 100) – Bus Stop #8008;

(b)        Cuba Street (outside Weltec) – Bus Stop #9008;

(c)        Jackson Street (#’s 428 – 430) – Bus Stop #8018;

(d)       Jessie Street (outside #446 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop #8019;

(e)        Jessie Street (outside #448 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop # 9019;

(f)        Jessie Street (#’s 7 – 13) – Bus Stoop #8020;

(g)        Gracefield Road (opposite #’s 112 – 118) – Bus Stop #8780;

(h)       Gracefield Road (#’s  112 - 118) – Bus Stop #9780;

(i)         Gracefield Road (opposite # 240) – Bus Stop #8782;

(j)         Gracefield Road (# 240) – Bus Stop #9782; and

(k)        Randwick Road (#’s 25 – 29) – Bus Stop # 9153; and

(ii)        approves the installation of the following bus stop modifications and parking restrictions:

(a)        Cuba Street (#’s 92 – 100) – Bus Stop #8008

(aa)      9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 1;

(b)        Cuba Street (outside Weltec) – Bus Stop #9008;

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ parking restriction as                                       shown in Appendix 2; and

(bb)      5 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper)                                              parking restriction as shown in Appendix 2;

(c)        Jackson Street (#’s 428 – 430) – Bus Stop #8018

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 3; and

(bb)      9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 3; and

(cc)      8 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 3;

(d)       Jessie Street (outside #446 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop #8019

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 4;

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 4; and

(cc)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 4;

(e)        Jessie Street (outside #448 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop #9019

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 5;

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 5; and

(cc)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 5;

(f)        Jessie Street (#’s 7 – 13) – Bus Stop #8020

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 6;

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 6; and

(cc)      13 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 6;

(g)        Gracefield Road (opposite #’s 112 – 118) – Bus Stop #8780

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 7;

(bb)      2 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 7; and

(cc)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 7;

(h)       Gracefield Road (#’s  112 - 118) – Bus Stop #9780

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 8;

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 8; and

(cc)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 8;

(i)         Gracefield Road (opposite #240) – Bus Stop #8782

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 9; and

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 9;

(j)         Gracefield Road (outside # 240  ) – Bus Stop #9782

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 10;

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 10; and

(cc)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 10; and

(k)        Randwick Road (#’s 25 – 29) – Bus Stop # 9153

(aa)      15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’, no parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 11;

(bb)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (entry taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 11; and

(cc)      9 metres of ‘no stopping at all times’ (exit taper) parking restriction as shown in Appendix 11.

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would:

·    reduce the risk of vehicle conflict at the listed on-road bus stop locations;

·    improve visibility and safety for the benefit of all road users;

·    promote compliance with the NZTA’s draft Guidelines for Public Transport Infrastructure and Facilities;

·    reduce the instances of ‘pole strikes’; and

·    meet the requirements as set out in Council’s Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Background

2.    In 2014, the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) provided an interim consultation document on ‘Guidelines for Public Transport Infrastructure and Facilities’. The intention of the guidelines is to encourage best practice, with the aim of improving the effectiveness of public transport across New Zealand, and in time replacing all existing local/regional/city public transport infrastructure and facility guidance.

3.    In mid-2018, the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) awarded new public transport (bus) contracts under the Public Transport Operating Model (PTOM). The new contracts in part looked to provide new, modern, more environmentally friendly buses with improved customer accessibility. As a result, the modernised bus fleet includes both double-decker, and longer wheelbase (length) buses.

4.     Existing bus stop infrastructure has not kept up with changes in existing bus fleets. While new buses are designed to be fully accessible for customers, this is only achievable when the bus can position itself parallel to the kerb, allowing customers step-free access to the bus. This is particularly critical for customers with mobility aids, as well as prams or wheeled luggage, where having to step out onto the roadway and then up into the bus is a significant barrier to access. NZTA Guidelines provide the following guidance in relation to kerbside bus stops.

5.     The NZTA’s core principles underlining its guidelines are those of Accessibility, Safety, Affordability and Operational Efficiency. The proposals contained within this report meet the core principals as follows:

(a)  Accessibility: ‘the vehicle aligns close and parallel with the stop platform’;

(b)  Safety: ‘providing infrastructure that is safe to use’;

(c)   Affordability: ‘improved public transport infrastructure and facilities will unlock economic, social and environmental benefits’;

(d)  Operational Efficiency: ‘efficiency should include the movement of vehicles, loading of vehicles’.

6.     The proposed changes to bus stops contained within this report have been identified by GWRC and Hutt City Officers as not meeting the core principles of the ‘Guidelines for Public Transport Infrastructure and Facilities (draft)’. The main deficiencies relate to:

(a)  insufficient bus stop length;

(b)  lack of required road markings (as a result of increased bus stop length);

(c)   lack of parking restrictions (no stopping) on either side of the bus stop to promote better kerb alignment;

(d)  existing utility poles located close to the kerbline.

resulting in buses being unable to access stops safely, increasing the risk to multiple road users through damage to buses and property due to striking poles and verandas, as well as disadvantaging bus users boarding and alighting from services.

Discussion

7.    The proposed changes will align bus stops within Hutt City’s Network with the NZTA “Guidelines for Public Transport Infrastructure and Facilities”

8.    The proposed bus stop layout changes will ensure that:

(a)   the road markings (bus box) will be of sufficient length to accommodate both existing and planned buses operating on the network;

(b)   ‘no stopping’ restrictions will allow buses to align correctly with the kerb allowing improved access/egress and safety for passengers;

(c)   ‘no stopping’ restrictions will improve the efficient running of the network by minimising the potential for buses to block traffic lanes due to poor alignment to the kerb;

(d)  The likelihood of pole strike will be eliminated or reduced.

9.     Some on-street parking will be affected (relocated or removed) as a result of the proposed changes. The effect on parking is deemed to be minimal given the availability of nearby unrestricted on-road parking, and/ or sufficient off-road parking areas.
Net parking loss;

(a)   Cuba Street (#’s 92 – 100) – Bus Stop #8008 – reduction of 1 unrestricted parking spaces.

(b)   Cuba Street (outside Weltec) – Bus Stop #9008 – reduction of 1 unrestricted parking spaces.

(c)   Jackson Street (#’s 428 – 430) – Bus Stop #8018 – reduction of 2 unrestricted parking spaces.

(d)   Jessie Street (outside #446 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop #8019 – reduction of 2 unrestricted parking spaces.

(e)   Jessie Street (outside #448 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop #9019 – reduction of 3 unrestricted parking spaces.

(f)    Jessie Street (#’s 7 – 13) – Bus Stop #8020 – reduction of 3 unrestricted parking spaces.

(g)   Gracefield Road (opposite #’s 112 – 118) – Bus Stop #8780 – reduction of 3 unrestricted parking spaces.

(h)   Gracefield Road (#’s  112 - 118) – Bus Stop #9780 – reduction of 2 unrestricted parking spaces.

(i)    Gracefield Road (opposite #240) – Bus Stop #8782 – reduction of 2 unrestricted parking spaces.

(j)    Gracefield Road (outside # 240  ) – Bus Stop #9782 – reduction of 2 unrestricted parking spaces.

(k)   Randwick Road (#’s 25 – 29) – Bus Stop # 9153 – reduction of 3 unrestricted parking spaces.

 

Options

10.  The options are to:

(a)  do nothing, leaving the bus stops as they are, accepting that bus and passenger accessibility issues will continue to occur, along with the increased possibility of pole strikes at certain locations given the increased height of buses on some routes and the camber of the existing roadway; or

(b)  approve the proposed changes to ensure that the listed bus stops meet the ‘guidelines’ as set down by NZTA, promoting Accessibility, Safety, Affordability and Operational Efficiency, promoting Public Transport, while aligning the on road infrastructure with Council’s Transport Activity Management Plan 2018 – 28.

11.   Officers recommend Option (b) as this will improve the safety and efficiency of the public transport network.

12.   In making these recommendations, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of Local Government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that these recommendations fall within the purpose of Local Government. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

13.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

14.   A recent press release from GWRC noted that Public Transport vehicle fleet emissions had reduced to at least 50% of 2013 levels.  

Consultation

15.  Consultation was undertaken by Greater Wellington Regional Council, and ran from the 4th to the 20th March 2020:

(a)     Cuba Street (#’s 92 – 100) – Bus Stop #8008

(i)         One submission was received from the owner of flats 1/98 – 4/98 Cuba Street who opposed the proposal due to the loss of the parking space.

(b)     Cuba Street (outside Weltec) – Bus Stop #9008

(i)         No submissions were received from the properties consulted at this stop.

(c)      Jackson Street (#’s 428 – 430) – Bus Stop #8018

(i)         No submissions were received from the properties consulted at this stop.

(d)     Jessie Street (outside #446 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop #8019

(i)         One submission received, in support of the proposal. 

(e)      Jessie Street (outside #448 Jackson Street) – Bus Stop # 9019

(i)         One submission received, in support of the proposal. 

(f)      Jessie Street (#’s 7 – 13) – Bus Stop #8020

(i)         Two submissions were received – one supported the proposal and one opposed the proposal.

“I think the move is foolish, make the changes where the stop is now. Mark in a 15 metre long bus box, and create two longer broken lines on either side as required. Surely less cost by repainting the area into the required sizes and seeing how it works rather than moving the stop. The street light post are there the same distances at either placement? A shelter would be nice.”
Officer’s Response:
“T
he reason behind seeking the shift this bus stop is to ensure buses; particularly Double Decker units can access the stop safely which they are currently unable to do.The issue with the existing stop is the location of an existing utility pole at the rear of the stop being extremely close the kerb and channel - this makes it difficult for buses to line up parallel with kerb properly as they risk striking the pole. When buses exit the bus stop, the rear of bus swings out over the footpath. This rear tail swing results in additional pole strikes.The proposed new location ensures clearance from any poles and makes better use of driveways before and after the stop which helps reduce the effects on parking loss.It is more cost effective to relocate the stop as opposed to relocating the utility pole.” 

(g)     Gracefield Road (opposite #’s 112 – 118) – Bus Stop #8780

(i)      No submissions were received from the properties consulted at this stop.

(h)     Gracefield Road (#’s  112 - 118) – Bus Stop #9780

(i)      No submissions were received from the properties consulted at this stop.

(i)      Gracefield Road (opposite # 240) – Bus Stop #8782

(i)      No submissions were received from the properties consulted at this stop.

(j)      Gracefield Road (# 240) – Bus Stop #9782

(i)      No submissions were received from the properties consulted at this stop.

(k)     Randwick Road (#’s 25 – 29) – Bus Stop # 9153

(i)      Two submissions were received, both in support of the proposal. 

16. At its meeting on 22 June 2020, the Petone Community Board resolved to endorse the recommendations contained in the officer’s report.

Legal Considerations

17.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

18.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/2020 Road Marking Budget along with a contribution from GWRC’s Public Transport team.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 - Stop 8008

14

2

Appendix 2 - Stop 9008

15

3

Appendix 3 - Stop 8018

16

4

Appendix 4 - Stop 8019

17

5

Appendix 5 - Stop 9019

18

6

Appendix 6 - Stop 8020

19

7

Appendix 7 - Stop 8780

20

8

Appendix 8 - Stop 9780

21

9

Appendix 9 - Stop 8782

22

10

Appendix 10 - Stop 9782

23

11

Appendix 11 - Stop 9153

24

Author: Charles Agate

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

Reviewed By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 

Approved By: John Gloag

Head of Transport

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 - Stop 8008

 


Attachment 2

Appendix 2 - Stop 9008

 


Attachment 3

Appendix 3 - Stop 8018

 


Attachment 4

Appendix 4 - Stop 8019

 


Attachment 5

Appendix 5 - Stop 9019

 


Attachment 6

Appendix 6 - Stop 8020

 


Attachment 7

Appendix 7 - Stop 8780

 


Attachment 8

Appendix 8 - Stop 9780

 


Attachment 9

Appendix 9 - Stop 8782

 


Attachment 10

Appendix 10 - Stop 9782

 


Attachment 11

Appendix 11 - Stop 9153

 


                                                                                      27                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

23 March 2020

 

File: (20/296)

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/130

 

Campbell Terrace - Proposed Loading Zone Parking Restriction

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of a ‘Loading Zone – P30, Monday to Sunday 8am to 6pm’ parking restriction on Campbell Terrace, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i)    approves the rescinding (removal) of the existing P120 parking restrictions on Campbell Terrace, as shown in  Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(ii)   approves the rescinding (removal) of a portion of the existing ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restriction, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(iii)  approves the installation of a ‘Loading Zone – P30 , Monday to Sunday 8am to 6pm’ parking restriction on Campbell Terrace, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons that the loading zone is a required condition of Resource Consent RM180417. It is needed for the delivery of goods during construction phase of the development, as well as allowing delivery vehicles, couriers and rubbish trucks to service the building and its new residents once built. The loading zone would also make deliveries to nearby local businesses easier.

Background

2.    A condition of the Resource Consent (RM180417) for the proposed apartment development at 2 Campbell Terrace (old Petone Working Men’s Club building) requires that;

7. Conditions of Resource Consent
7.7 Prior to commencing earthworks or construction, a loading zone must be marked out on a street adjoining the site. The loading zone must be of a sufficient size to accommodate at least a small rigid vehicle. Any subsequent changes required to the road carriageway must be undertaken by the consent holder at the direction of the Council’s Roading and Traffic Team, with all costs being borne by the consent holder.
Notes: Prior to the loading zone being marked out, approval must be obtained from the Council’s Traffic Subcommittee following consultation with occupants in surrounding streets. This condition is imposed to ensure that there is adequate facility for rubbish collection, as well as any vehicles needing to service the building (e.g. moving trucks, courier vehicles etc).

3.    The original Loading Zone was proposed to be located on the eastern side of Petone Avenue 20m south of the intersection with Campbell Terrace.

4.    As a result of consultation with those properties and businesses deemed directly affected, along with comments from the Petone Community Board and Council Officers, it was identified that the location was potentially problematic given existing traffic movements and the volume of larger commercial vehicles having limited room to maneuver.

5.    A revised proposal was offered whereby the Loading Zone was relocated to Campbell Terrace where traffic volumes are significantly lower and approaching vehicle speeds slower given the proximity of the controlled intersection.

6.    The current proposal will result in the loss of two P120 time restricted parking spaces on Campbell Terrace.

Discussion

7.     The practicality of the initial location on Petone Avenue was  assessed, and the following concerns raised through the consultation process:

Positioning  the loading zone on the bend may result in ‘tail out’ for larger vehicles as they cannot align themselves with the kerb line, potentially leading to;
*reduced carriageway width for passing vehicles
* vehicles having to make multiple maneuvers to  align themselves correctly
* potential for damage to building verandahs (if any).

8.     In relation to the revised location on Campbell Terrace, adjacent businesses expressed significant concern around the further erosion of available car parks in an area with already high parking demand.

9.     Concern around the loss of parking spaces as a result of the Loading Zone on Campbell Terrace has been mitigated by proposing a time limit on the parking space. A 30 min time limit between the hours of 8am to 6pm 7 days a week is proposed. This will prevent long term parking in the loading zone and the zone will be available for deliveries for nearby local businesses as well.

10.  The effect of the loading zone near the intersection will be minimal as any traffic turning onto Petone Ave from Campbell Terrace have to look right for oncoming traffic (as Petone Avenue is one way at this location) and not left (where the loading zone will be positioned) therefore there will be no impact on visibility at the intersection.

Options

11.  The options are:

(a)     approve the establishment of the loading zone in its proposed location on Campbell Terrace, resulting in the loss of two P120 time restricted parking spaces.

(b)     approve the establishment of the loading zone in its original position on Petone Avenue, taking into account the concerns raised by surrounding businesses and the Petone Community Board,

(c)      approve the establishment of a loading zone in another location.

12.  Note that the approval of a loading zone is a requirement of the resource consent issued for the property. Failure to agree on a Loading Zone location might require the applicant to resubmit their Resource Consent application.

13.  Council Officers recommend the approval of Option A, as it meets the requirements of the resource consent, and minimises disruption to surrounding businesses.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

14.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

Consultation

15.  Surrounding properties and the Petone Community Board have been consulted with regards the location of the loading zone.

16.  As a result of feedback received, a revised location has been proposed.

17.  Nearby businesses on Campbell Terrace expressed concern regarding the loss of existing on road parking spaces. The effect of the loading has been mitigated by way of time limits so that vehicles are unable to occupy the space for extended periods

18. At its meeting on 22 June 2020, the Petone Community Board resolved to endorse the recommendations contained in the officer’s report.

Legal Considerations

19.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017

Financial Considerations

20.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/2020 road markings budget, along with a contribution form the developer.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Campbell Terrace Proposed Loading Zone and No Stopping at all times

28

Author: Charles Agate

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

Reviewed By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 

Approved By: John Gloag

Head of Transport

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1

 


                                                                                      31                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

23 March 2020

 

File: (20/300)

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/131

 

Hebden Crescent - Proposed 'No Stopping At All Times' Parking Restriction

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Councils approval for the installation of a ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restriction on Hebden Crescent, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a ‘No Stopping At All Times’ stopping restriction on the section of Hebden Crescent, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reason that the proposed restriction will improve the safety of the driveway given the roads posted speed limit, and high proportion of heavy vehicles using this section of Hebden Crescent.

Background

2.    Council Officers were approached by the Greater Wellington Regional Council Park Ranger for Dry Creek (Belmont Regional Park), with concerns around visibility from the driveway when vehicles are parked on the southern side of the entrance. The main concern rose where around the speed and size of the vehicles commonly using this section of Hebden Crescent.

3.    Access to trade related businesses such as Allied Concrete, Belmont Quarry, Fulton Hogan Asphalt, Winstone Aggregates and General Metal Recyclers results in a higher than usual percentage of heavy vehicles travelling along Hebden Crescent and past the entrance to Dry Creek

4.    Hebden Crescent provides a link road for southbound vehicles from Haywards and Upper Hutt to access these businesses without having to navigate (cross) northbound state highway traffic.

5.    Council officers visited the site and watched the interaction between vehicles entering and exiting the regional park, and the visibility issues associated with these manoeuvres.

6.    It was agreed that if vehicles are parked within 50 metres along the southeastern side of the entrance, that vehicles exiting the regional park did experience challenges seeing the oncoming vehicles.

Discussion

7.    Currently there are no restrictions on vehicles parking on either side of the entrance to the regional park.

8.    The available shoulder width in sections provides opportunities for vehicles to park, obscuring the view of drivers exiting the regional park.

9.    Guidance provided by both NZTA’s Road Traffic Standard (RTS) 6, and the Austroads Guide to Road Design outlines the required Clear Site Distance required for driveways/vehicle exits.

10.  The proposal involves the installation of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ stopping restrictions for a length of 38 metres on the southern side of the regional parks entrance, starting from the gates in a southerly direction following the fence line. The restriction will be marked with a combination of ‘broken yellow lines and ‘No Stopping’ signage where it is practical due the quality of the existing sealed shoulder.

Options

11.  The options are:

(a)        to leave the area as it currently is, allowing vehicles to park along the southern shoulder of the northbound lane, causing an obstruction to vehicles exiting the regional park, onto a road with a posted speed limit of 80kmh, and a high percentage of heavy vehicles; or

(b)        improve the visibility from the regional park driveway by installing a ‘No Stopping At All Times’ stopping restriction as shown in the Appendix 1 attached to this report; or

(c)        improve the visibility by a greater or lesser extent by approving a revised length of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ stopping restriction under advice from Council Officers

12.  Council officers recommend option b, as it improves visibility from the driveway in line with industry guidelines from both NZTA Road Traffic Standard 6 and Austroads Guide to Road Design.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

13.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

Consultation

14.  Consultation was limited to the Greater Wellington Regional Council as custodians of the regional park.

Legal Considerations

15.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

16.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2020/2021 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Hebden Crescent Parking Restriction Changes

32

Author: Charles Agate

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1

 


                                                                                      35                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

27 May 2020

 

File: (20/470)

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/132

 

Ricoh Sports Centre Carpark - Confirmation of Existing Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    To seek Council’s retrospective resolution of the existing parking restrictions within the Ricoh Sports Centre Carpark, as shown in the Appendix 1 to this report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that  Council:

(i)    approves the current ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restrictions within the Ricoh Sports Centre Carpark, defined by the broken yellow lines and yellow hatching, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(ii)   approves the current ‘P180 Electric Vehicle – At All Times’ parking restrictions within the Ricoh Sports Centre Carpark, defined by EV Charging Symbol, as shown in the Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(iii)  approves the current ‘mobility’ parking restrictions within the Ricoh Sports Centre Carpark, defined by Mobility Parking Symbol, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reason that the parking restrictions will assist in effectively managing the operation of the facility’s parking resource for users of both the sports centre and the surrounding Fraser Park Sportsville facility, while meeting the requirements of the Council’s Parking Policy 2017.

 

Background

2.    Council officers received a request from the Operations Manager - Ricoh Sports Centre to assist with improving the management of the centres carpark off Taita Drive. Common complaints included double parking along the middle berm, and poor parking practice blocking already parked vehicles, pedestrian paths and emergency access points.

3.    Some markings had previously been installed, but not resolved prior to completion of the facility, resulting in a lack of enforcement, leading to issues during weekends and peak times throughout the week.

Discussion

4.    The ‘No Stopping At All Times’ parking restrictions will help discourage inconsiderate parking behaviour, as well as preserving spaces associated with emergency egress, assembly and vehicle access points.

5.    The ‘P180 Electric Vehicle – At All Times’ parking restrictions will improve parking availability for EV vehicles, and encourage EV vehicle use.

6.    The ‘mobility’ parking restrictions will improve parking availability for mobility impaired users in close proximity to the facility.

7.     The white parking bay markings more clearly demark the parking spaces, discouraging inefficient parking of vehicles, and maximising the utilisation of the available parking space.

8.     The proposal is in keeping with Council’s Parking Policy – 2017, and aligns with its current long-term strategies.

(a)     a liveable and thriving city –supporting place-making, amenity, and economic growth.

(b)     a city that has equity of access – supporting work to create walkable and people-friendly city accessible to all.

(c)     a high level of customer service – delivering a quality experience for residents and visitors.

9.     The current parking layout is supported by the Sport Centres management, and aligns with the parking requirements set out in the Fraser Park – Reserve Management Plan - 2013.

Options

10.  The options are:

(b)   to leave the area as marked without a formal resolution to enforce the current restrictions, and accept the current level of service and poor parking practices; or

(b)   formally resolve the parking restrictions to assist with the efficient and equitable management of the space resulting in an increased level of service for current and future users of the centre and surrounding facilities.

11.   Officers recommend option (b) as it meets the needs of the centre and surrounding facilities as outlined by centre management.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

12.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

Consultation

13.  As the facility is located off-street, and within a General Recreation Area, consultation was limited to the Ricoh Sports Centre Management Team.

Legal Considerations

14.   These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

15.   These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/2020 Road & Traffic budget(s).

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Ricoh Sports Centre Parking Layout

36

 

Author: Charles Agate

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1

 


                                                                                      39                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

20 March 2020

 

File: (20/289)

 

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/133

 

London Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) on London Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report. 

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on London Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve the safety within the street for the benefit of all road users; would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004; support Council’s Parking Policy 2017 and are supported by majority of the local residents who responded to the consultation documents.

Background

2.    Council received a request from a local resident to improve safety at the bend close to the base of the shared access way of numbers 45-61 London Road by installing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines).

3.    The concern expressed is that multiple cars are parked on this bend on a regular basis and those parked too close to the access way restrict manoeuvrability and obstruct sightlines when observing both uphill and downhill traffic.

Discussion

4.    Additional to the request from the resident, previous complaints to Council from residents suggest visibility issues and several near misses when exiting the access way.

5.    The proposal involves the installation of 10 meters (two car lengths) of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) tying in to the existing restriction with 5 metres of the restriction extending into the access way.

6.    The proposed restrictions would prevent vehicles from parking at this location and ensure that sight distances and manoeuvring space is maintained for the residents to exit safely onto London Road.

7.    The proposed restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 clause 6.3(1), which states that “a driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on any part of the roadway close to any corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection as to obstruct or be likely to obstruct other traffic or any corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection unless the stopping, standing, or parking is authorised by signs or markings maintained by the road controlling authority”.

Options

8.    The options are:

(a)   to leave the area as it is and accept the current level of service for road safety; or

(b)   to improve the road safety level by installing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) as shown in Appendix 1  to prevent parked vehicles obstructing sight distance and manoeuvring space; or

(c)   to install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) over some greater or lesser extent to improve road safety.

9.    Officers recommend Option b as it is expected to increase road safety and prevent obstructions to sight lines.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

10.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

11.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.

Consultation

12.  Consultation documents were delivered to nine directly affected residences at nos 45, 47, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59 and 61 London Road.

13.  Four questionnaires and one email response was received, four in favour and one objecting to the proposed changes.

14.  The objecting resident commented that most houses have 0 to 1 park and the roadside is required. He further suggested that if the restrictions were to be implemented, existing restrictions need to be lifted from further downhill to allow parking.

Officer’s response:

The existing restrictions have been put in place for safety reasons and removing any will create a hazardous environment. There is sufficient off street parking provided within the access way and on private property to minimise any convenience.

15.  The original consultation plan only included 5 metres of Broken Yellow Lines on London Road but incorporating residents’ feedback, the restriction has been extended further uphill for another 5m (for a total of 10m) to give better visibility of traffic heading downhill, and into the access way for 5m to prevent vehicles parked here from obstructing the view of traffic heading uphill as shown on Appendix 1.

16.  In response to comments from some of the residents regarding the poor condition of the driveway surfacing at the base, Council plans to resurface a 6 metre section in order for the lines to be painted.

17. At its meeting on 22 June 2020, the Petone Community Board resolved to endorse the recommendation contained in the officer’s report.

Legal Considerations

18.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

19.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/20 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 London Road No Stoppng At All Times restrictions G8.2020

40

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 London Road No Stoppng At All Times restrictions G8.2020

 


                                                                                      43                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

20 March 2020

 

File: (20/290)

 

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/134

 

Gracefield Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on Gracefield Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report. 

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on Gracefield Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons the proposed restrictions would improve the safety within the street for the benefit of all road users and would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

 

Background

2.    There are two median refuge islands located on Gracefield Road in the vicinity of Callahan Innovation. Both islands are used to assist pedestrians and cyclists to cross Gracefield Road.

3.    The northernmost island has been in place for some time, and the southernmost island was added as part of the Wainuiomata Hill Shared Path works in 2018.

4.    The latter island originally included handrails for cyclists which were installed in May 2018 and lasted for approximately 48 hours before being struck by an errant vehicle. The handrails have since been removed from the island.

5.    The incident was reported to be a result of a vehicle mounting the island kerb to avoid striking adjacent parked vehicles.

6.    Due to the carriageway width and the constriction caused by the refuge island, cars parked adjacent to the island create a safety hazard for all road users.

Discussion

7.    Gracefield Road is a busy Primary Collector Road which provides access to the Wainuiomata Hill Road and the Gracefield commercial/industrial area.

8.    The proposal involves the installation No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on Gracefield Road in the vicinity of both islands to ensure the carriageway width is not reduced by parked vehicles.

9.    When vehicles are parked adjacent to the islands, the available lane width (4.2m to 4.5m) can be reduced to around 2.1m to 2.4m, compared to the normally required 3m to 3.5m (the latter preferred for routes with high heavy vehicle volumes). This can result in conflict with parked vehicles or the island kerbs.

10.  NZTA’s Crash Analysis System shows no reported accidents relating to the median islands since they were installed (crashes are not recorded if not reported to the Police – generally when an insurance claim isn’t made).

11.  The proposed restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 clause 6.3 (1), which states ‘A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on any part of a roadway so close to any corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection as to obstruct or be likely to obstruct other traffic or any view of the roadway to the driver of a vehicle approaching that corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection unless the stopping, standing, or parking is authorised by signs or markings maintained by the road controlling authority’.

Options

12.  The options are to:

(a)   leave the area as it is and accept the current level of service for road safety; or

(b)   improve the road safety level of service by installing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as shown in Appendix 1  to prevent parked vehicles reducing the available carriageway width; or

(c)   install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions over some greater or lesser extent to improve road safety.

13.  Officers recommend Option b) as the proposed extent of the restrictions are considered to effectively reduce the road safety risk and minimise the risk of property damage.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

14.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

15.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.

Consultation

16.  No direct consultation has been carried out with the surrounding businesses as these measures are proposed to overcome a safety issue and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

17. At its meeting on 22 June 2020, the Petone Community Board resolved to endorse the recommendation contained in the officer’s report.

Legal Considerations

18.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

19.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/20 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Gracefield Road No Stopping At All Times Restrictions G24.2020

44

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Gracefield Road No Stopping At All Times Restrictions G24.2020

 


                                                                                      47                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

20 March 2020

 

File: (20/291)

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/135

 

William Street, Graham Street and North Street - No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to retain the existing temporary No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on William Street, Graham Street and North Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report. 

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on William Street, Graham Street and North Street, as shown (in yellow) in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons the proposed restrictions would retain the improved safety and accessibility within the street for the benefit of all road users and would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Background

2.    Council installed temporary No Stopping At All Times (NSAAT) Restrictions on William Street, Graham Street and North Street in 2014 to accommodate the high number of heavy vehicles accessing the work site of Bob Scott Retirement Village.

3.    This was done after modelling of heavy vehicle tracking paths showed that there are a number of intersections where it was necessary to restrict kerbside parking to ensure safe access for trucks and local traffic.

4.    These restrictions were intended to be temporary for the duration of construction and were to be removed at the completion of the four year construction period.

5.    A number of these temporary restrictions have now been removed (shown blue in Appendix 1) to return on road parking spaces.

6.    A number of the temporary NSAAT Restrictions (shown yellow in Appendix 1) have proven to be beneficial to road safety and operation and Council now wishes to retain these as permanent restrictions.

Discussion

7.    Now that construction of the Bob Scott Retirement Village is complete, the proportion of heavy vehicles has drastically reduced, with traffic generally comprising normal residential traffic and small to medium sized delivery vehicles.

8.    With the reduction in heavy vehicles, the need to provide additional vehicle tracking space has reduced, however a number of the temporary restrictions have proven to improve the operation and safety of the area.

9.    Officers propose making some temporary restrictions permanent (shown yellow in Appendix 1) to retain the improved operation of the area.

10.  Existing broken yellow line road markings across vehicle crossings remain covered under the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 which prohibits parking obstructing vehicle exits.

11.  The NSAAT restrictions in front of no. 107 William Street are to be retained to ensure sufficient carriageway width is maintained between the kerb and the adjacent throat island for traffic to safely pass.

12.  The NSAAT restrictions in front of no.114 William Street will ensure sufficient carriageway width for vehicles exiting from Bracken Street.

13.  The NSAAT restrictions at the end of North Street will ensure sufficient room is maintained at the turning head of the cul-de-sac.

14.  The NSAAT restrictions at the intersections of William Street/North Street and William Street/Graham Street will promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 Clause 6.3 (1) which states ‘A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on any part of a roadway so close to any corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection as to obstruct or be likely to obstruct other traffic or any view of the roadway to the driver of a vehicle approaching that corner, bend, rise, dip, traffic island, or intersection unless the stopping, standing, or parking is authorised by signs or markings maintained by the road controlling authority’, and Clause 6.3 (2) which states ‘A driver must not stop, stand, or park a vehicle on any part of a road, whether attended or unattended, within an intersection or within 6 metres of an intersection unless the stopping, standing, or parking is authorised by signs or markings maintained by the road controlling authority’.

Options

15.  The options are to:

(a)   remove all remaining temporary NSAAT restrictions; or

(b)   approve the permanent retention of the temporary NSAAT restrictions shown as yellow in Appendix 1; or

(c)   install and/or remove NSAAT restrictions over some greater or lesser extent.

16.  Officers recommend option (b) as it will maintain the improved level of service for road safety and availability but return some road side parking spaces for road users without impeding general traffic.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

17.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

18.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.

Consultation

19.  Consultation documents were delivered to eight directly affected residences at numbers 105, 107, 109, 110, 112, 129, 131 William Street and no. 25 Graham Street.

20.  Residents were specifically consulted on the need to remove the NSAAT restrictions over their respective vehicle crossings.

21.  They were informed on the removal of the temporary restrictions to allow on-street parking and that the restrictions at intersections will remain complying with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

22.  Three questionnaires were returned, two informing they would like the restrictions to remain over the vehicle crossings.

23.  One questionnaire expressed concerns on the island at William Street and Bracken Street intersection which have been addressed by leaving the restrictions in place.

24. At its meeting on 22 June 2020, the Petone Community Board resolved to endorse the recommendation contained in the officer’s report.

Legal Considerations

25.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

26.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2020/21 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 William Street, Graham Street and North Street No Stopping At All Times Restrictions G51.2019

48

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 William Street, Graham Street and North Street No Stopping At All Times Restrictions G51.2019

 


                                                                                      51                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

07 January 2020

 

File: (19/1207)

 

Report no: TSC2020/2/22

 

Trafalgar Street - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of P15 (8.30-9.30am and 2.00-3.30pm Monday-Friday School Days Only) parking restrictions over three currently unrestricted parking spaces near Waterloo Kindergarten on Trafalgar Street, as shown on the plan attached as Appendix 1 to this report.

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of P15 (8.30-9.30am and 2.00-3.30pm Monday-Friday School Days Only) parking restrictions on Trafalgar Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and parking availability within the street for the benefit of all road users; would support Council’s Parking Policy 2017; and are supported by majority of the local residents who chose to respond to the consultation documents.

Background

2.    Council received requests from a parent of Waterloo Kindergarten to improve accessibility and parking availability on Trafalgar Street by installing time-restricted parking.

3.    Trafalgar Street is a Secondary Collector (more than 1,000 vehicles a day) in a mainly residential area in Waterloo in close proximity to Waterloo Rail Station.

4.    The concern expressed is that parking spaces are often fully occupied by commuters, making parking less accessible to parents dropping off and picking up kids at the Kindergarten and to find a park while at the Playcentre.

5.    The proposal was originally presented to the Traffic Subcommittee in February 2020 however the item was deferred to the next cycle to allow further consultation with Waterloo Kindergarten and Playcentre.

6.    Waterloo Kindergarten at no.99 Trafalgar Street operates between 8.30am-2.30pm and Waterloo Playcentre at no.103 Trafalgar Street operates between 9.15am-11.45am. Both facilities only operate during weekdays.

Discussion

7.    The proposal involves establishing a more definitive parking area on Trafalgar Street in front of Waterloo Kindergarten by installing P15 parking restrictions over three currently unrestricted parking spaces.

8.    The proposed P15 parking restrictions would discourage long term parking by commuters and promote a higher turnover of parking spaces on Trafalgar Street during peak times, improving safety and availability of short term car parks for parents picking up and dropping off kids.

9.    The installation of proposed white road marking (T bars and L bars) would more clearly demark the on-street parking spaces and ensure efficient utilisation of the allocated space.

10.  The proposed time period over which the P15 restrictions apply will primarily cater for the parents dropping off and picking up children at Waterloo Kindergarten from where the request originated.

11.  Since the Playcentre is a volunteer/family led programme, parents stay at the Playcentre for the duration of the session rather than drop-off/pick-up.

12.  The P15 parks are unlikely to be used by the parents of the Playcentre due to the above reason, therefore the originally proposed times have not been changed.

13.  The proposal is in keeping with the Council’s Parking Policy 2017 which places a high priority on short term parking in ‘Work and Learn’ areas, while still providing parking for employees, residents, visitors, and commuters to some extent.

Options

14.  The options are:

(a)   to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current level of service for parking availability; or

(b)   improve the parking availability level of service by installing P15 8.30-9.30am and 2.00-3.30pm Monday-Friday School Days Only parking restrictions over three currently unrestricted parking spaces on Trafalgar Street (as shown in Appendix 1); or

(c)   install parking restrictions over some greater or lesser extent within the street.

15.  Officers recommend option b) as this would improve short-term parking availability during busy drop off/ pick up times, while still maintaining adequate unrestricted parking for other users outside those periods.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

16.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

17.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.  

Consultation

18.  Initial consultation documents were delivered to eight directly-affected residences and businesses at No’s 22 and 24 Collingwood Street and No’s 98, 99, 100, 101, 102 and 104 Trafalgar Street.

19.  The initial proposal was for P15 (8.30-9.30am and 2.00-3.30pm Monday-Friday During School Term) and P120 Other Times parking restrictions.

20.  Five questionnaires were returned, four in favour and one opposing to the P15 and P120 parking restrictions.

21.  One supporter of the P15 restrictions objected to P120 Other Times restrictions.

22.  Comments from the opposing residents noted the availability of ample P120 parking on Collingwood St, and the inconvenience caused to staff in finding long term parking due to P120 Other Times restrictions. It was also noted that only three P15 spaces will not be sufficient.

Officer’s response:

-     Limiting the P15 restrictions to three spaces will provide a safe drop off pick up area for parents while leaving ample parking spaces for residents, visitors, and commuters.

-     The newly opened Waterloo Metlink Park & Ride facility with 160 additional car parks is also expected to relieve parking pressure on neighbouring streets.

23.  Waterloo Playcentre expressed concerns that the P120 restrictions would disadvantage their parents, who require parking between 9.15am-11.45am.

24.  In response to the feedback from residents and Waterloo Playcentre the P120 restrictions have now been omitted from the proposal.

Legal Considerations

25.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

26.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2019/2020 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Trafalgar St Parking Restrictions G40.2019

52

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Trafalgar St Parking Restrictions G40.2019

 


                                                                                      55                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

20 May 2020

 

File: (20/429)

 

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/136

 

Waddington Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (broken yellow lines) on Waddington Drive, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions on Waddington Drive, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and safety for local residents; would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, and are supported by the immediately affected residents.

 

Background

2.    Council received a request from the property owners of No.25 Waddington Drive to improve safety and manoeuvrability at their driveway by installing No Stopping At All Times (NSAAT) Restrictions.

3.    The concern expressed is that vehicles parked between the driveways of numbers 25 and 27 restrict manoeuvrability and obstruct sightlines when exiting their property.

4.    Council initially installed NSAAT restrictions over the driveway of No. 25 to deter the vehicles from parking too close, however inconsiderate parking continues to be an issue, and the residents have requested the existing restrictions to be extended over the adjacent berm area between the two driveways, as well as the driveways to 29 and 31 Waddington Drive.

5.    Photographs provided by the complainant show vehicles parked with the rear of the vehicle overhanging the broken yellow lines (refer Photograph 1 overleaf). Parking Services have been called to the location on several occasions to infringe offending vehicles.

Photograph 1. Demonstrates insufficient space to park a vehicle.

Discussion

6.    The current space available for parking between the two driveways is 2.8m as shown on Appendix 1. This is not sufficient for a vehicle to be legally parked (a minimum of 5m is usually required for a parking space). This results in parked vehicles either overhanging the existing broken yellow lines, or restricting driveway access.

7.    The proposal involves the installation of NSAAT restrictions extending the existing broken yellow lines over the driveway of No.25 Waddington Drive over the adjacent driveways to No’s. 27, 29 and 31 Waddington Drive.

8.    The proposed restrictions would discourage parking in the short space between the two driveways and across the driveways, improving safety and accessibility for the residents.

9.    The proposed restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 clause 6.9(1), which states that “a driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle so as to obstruct entry or exit from any driveway.

Options

10.  The options are to:

(a)   leave the area as it is and accept the current level of service; or

(b)   install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) as shown in Appendix 1 to discourage inconsiderate parking; or

(c)   install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) over some greater or lesser extent to improve safety and accessibility.

11.  Officers recommend Option b) as it would increase visibility and manoeuvrability for residents and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

12.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

13.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.  

Consultation

14.  A petition was submitted by the residents of numbers 25, 29, and 31 Waddington Drive requesting the existing restrictions be extended over the berm between No’s 25 and 27.

15.  The developers of No. 27 were informed of the proposal, however no indication of support or objection has been received.

16.  The residents at No’s 29 and 31 have indicated their support to extend the restrictions over their driveways as well; therefore the initial plan was amended as shown in Appendix 1.

Legal Considerations

17.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

18.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2020/21 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Waddington Dr Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Plan

56

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Waddington Dr Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Plan

 


                                                                                      59                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

20 May 2020

 

File: (20/430)

 

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/137

 

Market Grove - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions and ‘No Parking’ marking at the Stop Bank Entrance on Market Grove, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions and ‘No Parking’ marking at the Stop Bank Entrance on Market Grove, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons the proposed restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 and improve accessibility to the stop bank service road.

Background

2.    Council’s Transport Division received a request from Parking Services to investigate parking restrictions at the stop bank entrance from Market Grove to prevent inconsiderately parked vehicles restricting access to the stop bank service road.

3.    The concern expressed is that the stop bank entrance has been frequently blocked by parked vehicles obstructing access to the service road which is used for emergency access and river maintenance (refer Photograph 1 below).

4.    As this is a metered area and the stop bank entrance is being used as free parking, there have been increasing complaints from local businesses to Council’s Parking Services.

Photograph 1. Parked vehicle restricting access to stop bank service road.

Discussion

5.    The proposal involves the installation of No Stopping At All Times (NSAAT) restrictions on either side of the entrance along with a ‘No Parking’ marking, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.

6.    The restrictions would discourage parking, assist enforcement, and ensure the entrance is kept clear at all times.

7.    The proposed restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 clause 6.9(1), which states that “a driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle so as to obstruct entry or exit from any driveway”.

Options

8.    The options are to:

(a)   leave the area as it is and accept the restricted accessibility to the service road; or

(b)   install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) and ‘No Parking’ markings as shown in Appendix 1 to prevent illegal parking; or

(c)   install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Broken Yellow Lines) over some greater or lesser extent.

9.    Officers recommend Option b) as it is expected to deter inconsiderately parked vehicles and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

10.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

11.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.  

Consultation

12.  As the restrictions are proposed to reinforce the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, no direct consultation has been undertaken.

Legal Considerations

13.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

14.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2020/21 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Market Gr Proposed No Stopping At All Time Restrictions - Plan

60

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Market Gr Proposed No Stopping At All Time Restrictions - Plan

 


                                                                                      61                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

20 May 2020

 

File: (20/431)

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/138

 

Mills Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Parking Restrictions

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions at the Stop Bank Entrance on Mills Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.

Recommendation

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions at the Stop Bank Entrance on Mills Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would maintain accessibility to the stop bank entrance and would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Background

2.    Following a request from Council’s Parking Services, No Stopping At All Times (NSAAT) restrictions were installed in February 2020 around the end of the cul-de-sac of Mills Street tying in to the existing restrictions in front of No.56 Mills Street.

3.    This was done in order to overcome the issue of vehicles frequently parking in front of the stop bank access gates.

4.    These restrictions now need to be formalised in order for them to be enforceable.

Discussion

5.    In order to be consistent with the stop bank entrance markings at Whites Line West (existing) and Market Grove (proposed), the initial proposal included a ‘No Parking’ road marking. However, due to the crest on the road at this location, markings will not be effectively visible to motorists.

6.    Therefore the installation of a ‘No Parking’ sign on the entrance gate is proposed as shown in Appendix 1.

7.    The restrictions will discourage vehicles parking across the entrance gates and allow Parking Services to enforce the restriction to improve compliance.

8.    The proposed restrictions would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 clause 6.9(1), which states that “a driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle so as to obstruct entry or exit from any driveway”.

Options

9.    The options are to:

(a)   Remove the existing NSAAT restrictions; or

(b)   Approve the retention of NSAAT restrictions as shown in Appendix 1; or

(c)   Install and/or remove NSAAT restrictions over some greater or lesser extent.

10.  Officers recommend Option (b) as it is expected to deter inconsiderately parked vehicles and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

11.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

12.  The decision will not increase greenhouse gas emissions, and will not be affected by a changing climate. There are no opportunities in this decision to reduce emissions or build resilience.  

Consultation

13.  As the restrictions are proposed to reinforce the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, no direct consultation has been undertaken.

Legal Considerations

14.  These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Financial Considerations

15.  These changes can be funded from Council’s 2020/21 road markings budget.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 Mills St Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Plan

63

Author: Threesa Malki

Traffic Engineer

 

Reviewed By: Marian Radu

Senior Traffic Engineer

 

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Mills St Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Plan

 

 


                                                                                      65                                                            30 June 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

31 March 2020

 

File: (20/331)

 

 

Report no: TSC2020/4/139

 

Woburn Road Pedestrian Refuge Island Update

 

Purpose of Report

1.    The purpose of this report is to report back to the Traffic Subcommittee on progress investigating options for the installation of a median pedestrian refuge island(s) on Woburn Road, in the vicinity of Hutt Recreation Ground.

Recommendation

That the Subcommittee notes and receives the report.

For the reason the Council resolution is not necessary to install the proposed pedestrian refuge islands.

Background

2.    During Public Comment at the Traffic Subcommittee Meeting on 25th February 2020 Mr G Scott tabled a petition requesting that Council install a median pedestrian refuge island on Woburn Road, in the vicinity of the western entrance to the Hutt Recreation Ground.

3.    The issue identified was that, due to the carriageway width and traffic volumes, it was increasingly difficult for pedestrians to cross Woburn Road at this location.

4.    The Traffic Asset Manager had already met on site with Mr Scott prior to the Traffic Subcommittee Meeting to discuss the request.

5.    The Traffic Subcommittee requested “That Officers investigate the installation of a pedestrian island on Woburn Road and report back to the next Subcommittee meeting.”

Discussion

6.    Subsequent to the Traffic Subcommittee meeting on 25 February 2020, officers undertook engineering investigations into whether there was a suitable location for a median pedestrian refuge in the area.

7.    Issues to consider when siting an refuge island include:

(a)   sight distance to the island for approaching motorists, and sight distance available to pedestrians utilising the island;

(b)   street lighting levels;

(c)   crossing distance;

(d)   existing pedestrian desire lines;

(e)   existing driveway and side road locations;

(f)    vehicle tracking (particularly heavy vehicles);

(g)   loss of existing on road parking spaces.

8.    During the investigations it was observed that there are two predominant pedestrian desire lines in the area as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Observed pedestrian desire lines.

9.    Officers therefore identified two locations where separate median refuge islands could be located to cater for both existing desire lines. These locations are shown in Appendix 1 to this report.

10.  The details of the proposed islands at each location are shown in Appendices 2 and 3.

11.  These islands have been located to ensure sight distance standards are satisfied, and the islands do not block access and egress at existing driveways.

12.  It was intended that the Option 1 island (near the western entrance to Hutt Rec) would be installed this financial year however, due to recent lockdown requirements, it has not been possible to undertake the necessary consultation with those residents that would be directly affected by the loss of on street parking.

13.  Officers intend undertaking this consultation prior to the next Traffic Subcommittee Meeting in September 2020 and presenting a paper at that time to resolve the necessary no stopping at all times restrictions that would be required to accommodate the islands.

14.  Budget has been allocated in the next financial year to cover the construction cost of both islands.

Options

15.  This report is for information only. Options for parking restrictions associated with the proposed pedestrian islands will be submitted to a subsequent Traffic Subcommittee meeting.

Climate Change Impact and Considerations

16.  The matters addressed in this report have been considered in accordance with the process set out in Council’s Climate Change Considerations Guide.

Consultation

17.  Consultation in regards to the proposed loss of on road parking spaces will be undertaken prior to the next Traffic Subcommittee meeting.

Legal Considerations                                                                                              

18.  There are no legal considerations at this time.

Financial Considerations

19.  Budget for the installation of the proposed islands has been carried over into the 2020/2021 financial year.

Appendices

No.

Title

Page

1

Appendix 1 G14.2020 Woburn Rd Median Refuge - Overall layout

67

2

Appendix 2 G14.2020 Woburn Rd Median Refuge - Option 1

68

3

Appendix 3 G14.2020 Woburn Rd Median Refuge - Option 2

69

    

Author: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

 

Approved By: John Gloag

Head of Transport

 


Attachment 1

Appendix 1 G14.2020 Woburn Rd Median Refuge - Overall layout

 


Attachment 2

Appendix 2 G14.2020 Woburn Rd Median Refuge - Option 1

 


Attachment 3

Appendix 3 G14.2020 Woburn Rd Median Refuge - Option 2