Minutes of Traffic Subcommittee

2 10 November 2020

Traffic Subcommittee

Minutes of a meeting held in the
Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

Tuesday 10 November 2020 commencing at 2.00pm

PRESENT:	Cr L Sutton (Chair)	Cr J Briggs
	Cr K Brown	Cr B Dyer (Deputy Chair) (from 2.02pm)
	Cr A Mitchell	Cr N Shaw

IN ATTENDANCE: Mr D Simmons, Traffic Asset Manager

Mr M Radu, Senior Traffic Engineer (part meeting)

Mr C Agate, Traffic Engineer – Network Operations

Ms T Malki, Traffic Engineer (part meeting)

Ms K Glanville, Senior Democracy Advisor

PUBLIC BUSINESS

1. APOLOGIES

RESOLVED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Briggs) Minute No. TSC20601

“That the apology for lateness received from Cr Dyer be accepted.”

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.

3. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS

Crs Briggs, Brown and Shaw noted that they were members of the Hutt Valley District Health Board. They did not consider there was any conflict in relation to Item 4i) Manor Park: Proposed Speed Limit, Parking Restrictions, Road Marking and Signage Changes.

4. Recommendations to Council - 8 December 2020

Manor Park: Proposed Speed Limit, Parking Restrictions, Road Marking and Signage Changes. (20/1208)

Speaking under public comment, Ms Alison Thwaite, a resident of Manor Park, spoke in support of the proposal. She noted the objection received from the Rehabilitation Hospital (the Hospital) and the new development of 29 houses which would introduce further vehicles to the area. She added that attendance at the Manor Park Golf Club increased over the summer months.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Thwaite advised that Manor Park residents had considered that the introduction of traffic calming measures could increase speed in the area. She added there was concern that boy racers might enter the area. She said it was important for residents to reduce the neighbourhood speed and the Police could be asked to monitor any ongoing speed issues.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Grant Scarlett, a resident of Manor Park, opposed the proposal. He said the speed limit should not be changed and considered the introduction of no stopping restrictions would only cause issues. He believed most of the neighbourhood kept to the current speed limit.

In response to questions from members, Mr Scarlett confirmed he opposed the proposed change to the speed limit and no stopping restrictions. He said there was no need to change the speed limit and it was an unnecessary cost to ratepayers. He advised he was not aware of the tally highlighting that more than 200 vehicles were recorded speeding past the Hospital. He said this was unacceptable. He believed the hospital did not provide enough on-site carparks.

The Traffic Asset Manager elaborated on the report. He advised there was a possibility that the proposed parking restrictions could increase the speed limit in the area, however considered it unlikely. He stated the main concern of the Hospital was parking. He added the grass area was owned by Greater Wellington Regional Council and was required for flood protection. He further added that if approved officers would monitor the traffic calming measures and install a temporary electronic feedback speed sign if required.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Asset Manager advised officers could investigate placing a ‘slow down’ sign outside the Hospital and have discussions with the Golf Club. He said there was sufficient parking within a short distance on the street for the Hospital’s staff. He added the street lighting in the area had recently been upgraded and that the Hopsital could create more off-street parking if required. He confirmed that the budget for traffic calming measures was $200,000 and spending had to be prioritised based on a risk assessment.

In response to further questions from members, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that previously speed limits in the city had only been reduced around schools and on a temporary basis for road works. He agreed the Manor Park proposal could provide a useful case study for any future consideration of traffic calming measures. He confirmed that officers would collect and review data if the proposal was approved. He said that a review of the measures could be undertaken at a six and 12 month period. He considered there was sufficient carparking on the road for the Hospital’s requirements.

Cr Briggs expressed support for the recommendations. He suggested an additional recommendation that officers would undertake a review of the traffic calming measures in six and 12 months’ time to collect data.

Cr Dyer expressed support for the recommendations including the additional recommendation. He asked that a review be undertaken in three months time.

Cr Brown expressed support for the recommendations and a review to be undertaken in six and 12 months time.

Cr Briggs said officers had advised the timeframe for a review was six and 12 months’ time. He added that any issues would be identified prior to the six month review. He noted education of the traffic calming measures was required.

The Traffic Asset Manager advised that the temporary speed signs could collect data for the first three months as part of an informal review.

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Mitchell) Minute No. TSC 20602

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) approves the reduction of the permanent speed limit from 50 km/h to 40 km/h over the areas of Manor Park shown in Figure 2 in the report;

(ii) approves the installation of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ restrictions as shown in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 attached to the report;

(iii) approves the installation of ‘No Stopping On Grass’ restrictions as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(iv) asks officers to undertake a six and 12 month review, following the introduction of the traffic calming measures.”

For the reason that the proposed speed limit reduction would encourage lower vehicle operating speeds, the proposed ‘No Stopping At All Times’ restrictions would reduce the likelihood of vehicle conflict and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, and the proposed ‘No Stopping On Grass’ restrictions would reduce the likelihood of damage to the grass berm/ stop bank.

ii)

Jackson Street, Petone - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/1270)

The Senior Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Asset Manager advised a traffic impact assessment was undertaken for a new development. He said issues often arise once the development was completed and vehicles started travelling around the area. He confirmed the developer had asked for the no stopping restrictions.

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Dyer) Minute No. TSC 20603

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a No Stopping At All Times restriction on Jackson Street, Petone, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and safety for local residents and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

PRECEDENCE OF BUSINESS

In accordance with Standing Order 10.4, the Chair accorded precedence to items 4vi) Cedar Street, Maungaraki – Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions and vii) Kamahi Street, Stokes Valley – Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions.

The items are recorded in the order in which they are listed on the order paper.

iii) iii)

Buick Street, Petone - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/1263)

recommended: (Cr Sutton/Cr Shaw) Minute No. TSC 20604

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a No Stopping At All Times restriction on Buick Street, as shown in the Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

For the reasons that the proposed restriction would improve accessibility for local residents and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

iv)

Eastbourne and Days Bay - Proposed P180 Electric Vehicle Parking Restrictions (20/1264)

Mr Sigurd Magnasson, Consultant was in attendance for the item.

Mr Magnasson elaborated on the report. He advised that the aim of the proposal was to encourage an uptake of electric vehicles. He advised that officers were investigating the possibility of a faster charging device with Meridian Energy.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that no review of the parking issues raised by the Van Helden Gallery was planned unless a specific request was received.

In response to questions from a member, Mr Magnasson confirmed that charging guidance information would be attached to the charging device. He said that all vehicles would be able to use the charging device and could be used by four vehicles at the same time.

Cr Brown left the meeting at 3.31pm.

In response to further questions from a member, Mr Magnasson advised that Meridian Energy had not determined a fee for charging, however there would be a time based cost applied. He said the electric vehicle restriction would be permanent.

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 3.32pm.

Members noted that the Eastbourne Community Board had endorsed the recommendations contained in the report and asked that officers liaise with Meridian Energy for a fast charger. Members were supportive of this additional recommendation.

Cr Briggs thanked officers for the work undertaken to date. He said it was important to encourage the use of electric vehicles.

Cr Dyer expressed support for the recommendations. He agreed it was important to enourage the uptake of electric vehicles.

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Briggs) Minute No. TSC 20605

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) approves the installation of a P180 EV Parking Restriction on Oroua Street, Eastbourne, ‘Reserved for Electric Vehicles on charge only, for a maximum of 180 minutes (8.00am to 6.00pm, Monday to Sunday other than public holidays)’ as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(ii) approves the installation of a P180 EV Parking Restriction in Pavilion Carpark, Days Bay, ‘Reserved for Electric Vehicles on charge only, for a maximum of 180 minutes at all times’ as shown in Appendix 2 attached to the report; and

(iii) asks officers to liaise with Meridian Energy to install at least one fast charger.”

For the reason that the proposed restrictions would facilitate the installation, effective operation of the proposed EV charging stations, improve parking turnover and availability of the EV parks, benefitting both local businesses and their customers. The proposed changes have garnered support from the community, and would support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

Ropata Crescent, Boulcott - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/1088)

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Dyer) Minute No. TSC 20606

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of a No Stopping At All Times parking restriction on Ropata Crescent, as shown in the Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

For the reasons that the proposed restriction would improve accessibility and safety for local residents and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

vi)

Cedar Street, Maungaraki - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/1090)

Speaking under public comment, Mr Kevin King, a resident of Cedar Street, Maungaraki supported the proposed no stopping restrictions outlined in the officer’s report. He said sight lines were hindered when exiting his driveway and there was reduced space when vehicles were parked on both sides of the section of the street. He advised he was not part of the original consultation process.

In response to questions from members, Mr King advised that four houses shared the driveway of 27-37 Cedar Street.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Max Shierlaw opposed the proposed no stopping restrictions outlined in the officer’s report. He highlighted that vehicles were required to drive at a slower speed due to the vehicles parked on both sides of the road. He believed the speed on that section of the street would increase if the proposed restrictions were installed. He asked that officers withdraw the report and undertake further evidence based investigation into the matter. He noted that the Maungaraki Residents Association had not been consulted about the matter.

In response to questions from members, Mr Shierlaw advised he had no need to exit a driveway on Cedar Street. He considered it was not a busy street and had seldom encountered a vehicle exiting a driveway. He agreed with the no stopping lines outside 27-37 Cedar Street, however did not support the no stopping lines outside 36 Cedar Street.

A written statement from Ms Katrina Te Punga was tabled (attached as page 17 to the minutes) and was read out by Cr Dyer.

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Asset Manager advised consultation had only been undertaken with directly affected residents. He confirmed that the Maungaraki Residents Association had not been consulted and officers would review this process in future. He said there was a possibility that restricting vehicles parking on the side of the road might lead to a minor increase in vehicle operating speed. He added that a standard vehicle lane was typically between 3m and 3.5m wide and the current carriageway width effectively allowed only a single lane when vehicles were parked on both sides of the carriageway.

recommended: (Cr Sutton/Cr Mitchell) Minute No. TSC 20607

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the proposed No Stopping At All Times restrictions on Cedar Street, Maungaraki, as shown in Appendix 2 attached to the report.”

For the reasons that either of 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 the majority of the local residents who responded to the consultation documents.

vii)

Kamahi Street, Stokes Valley - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (20/1141)

Speaking under public comment, Mr Ken Dingle a resident of Kamahi Street, Stokes Valley supported the proposed no stopping restrictions outlined in the officer’s report.

recommended: (Cr Sutton/Cr Briggs) Minute No. TSC 20608

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the proposed No Stopping At All Times restriction on Kamahi Street, Stokes Valley, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would:

a) improve the safety within the street for the benefit of all road users;

b) promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004;

c) support Council’s Parking Policy 2017; and

d) are supported by majority of the local residents who responded to the consultation documents.

viii)

Waterloo Road, Hutt Central - Proposed Changes to School Bus Stop Times (20/1143)

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Dyer/Cr Shaw) Minute No. TSC 20609

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) rescinds the existing ‘School Bus Stop 8.15am-8.45am and 3.00pm-3.30pm School Days Only, P10 Other Times’ restrictions on Waterloo Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report;

(ii) approves the proposed ‘School Bus Stop 8.15am-8.45am and 3.15pm-3.45pm School Days’ restriction on Waterloo Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report; and

(iii) approves the proposed P10 Other Times’ restriction on Waterloo Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to this report.”

For the reason that the proposed restrictions would reduce the risk of vehicle conflict at the school bus stop and improve the level of service for school buses.

ix)

Victoria Street, Alicetown - Proposed P60 Time Restriction and Bus Stop Modification (20/1225)

Speaking under public comment, Ms Tania Jorgensen from Alicetown Playcentre (the Playcentre) spoke in support of the installation of time restricted parking within the Victoria Street Reserve Carpark. She asked that the parking time be extended to either P180 or P240 to provide parking spaces for parents attending the Playcentre’s sessions. She said the Playcentre had not been consulted.

In response to questions from members, Ms Jorgensen advised that the Playcentre’s sessions ran for two and four hours. She said some families walked or parked on the road for the sessions. She added that most parents stayed for the sessions with only a handful leaving and returning for pick up. She stated the families attending the sessions would use as many carparks as were available.

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report. He advised the P60 restriction would free up the carpark from all day parking and would provide users of the playground and the Playcentre with parking. He said a P120 or P240 could equate to up to six to eight hours of parking. He added officers could monitor the installation based on any complaints received.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Engineer – Network Operations advised a different time restriction was proposed for the carpark compared to the street to accommodate all possible users. He said the proposal aimed to provide a balance for all users of the carpark.

In response to questions from members, the Traffic Asset Manager advised that a sign stating the carpark was only for users of the playground and the Playcentre was not common practice nor enforceable. He said that the primary purpose of the carpark, being within a parks reserve, should be for accessing that reserve for recreational purposes.

In response to further questions from members, the Traffic Engineer – Network Operations advised officers had considered a mix of parking time restrictions in the carpark. He said that given it was a small carpark it made sense to stick with one parking time restriction. He said a P60 time restriction would increase parking turnover and parking for the playground would become easier. He clarified that the P60 restriction would be a 24/7 restriction.

Cr Mitchell expressed concern with the recommendations. He said the Playcentre was not consulted with and the P60 time restriction did not work for them. He added the restriction would impact the users of the Playcentre.

Cr Briggs noted that the consultation process needed to be reviewed. He believed there would not be a lot of use of the carpark if the P60 time restriction was introduced.

Cr Brown said it came down to the users of the carpark. She expressed support for the recommendations and she believed the carpark was primarily for the playground.

Cr Dyer expressed support for the recommendations. He said the P60 time restriction was a good balance and provided for more vehicle turnover. He added that if the time restriction was extended for the users of the Playcentre then there would be no carparks for the playground.

Cr Shaw expressed support for the recommendations. She said it would stop all day parking.

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Brown) Minute No. TSC 20610

“That the Traffic Sub-Committee recommends that Council:

(i) receives and notes the information;

(ii) approves the installation of a P60 (8am-6pm Monday-Sunday) time restriction within the Victoria Street Reserve Carpark, as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(iii) approves the extension of the existing bus stop (2 metres) adjacent to the Victoria Street Reserve Carpark, as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(iv) approves the installation of an additional 12 metres of No Stopping At All Times restriction to facilitate an improved entry taper, as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(v) reconfirms the existing No Stopping At All Times restrictions within the Victoria Street Reserve Carpark, as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(vi) rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(vii) notes that this resolution will take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in this resolution are in place.”

For the following reasons - the proposed time restriction will improve parking turnover and availability within the Victoria Street Reserve Carpark and the proposed bus stop modification will:

(a) reduce the risk of vehicle conflict at the listed on-road bus stop locations;

(b) improve visibility and safety for the benefit of all road users;

(d) meet the requirements as set out in Council’s Traffic Bylaw 2017.

Crs Briggs and Mitchell voted against the recommendations and asked that their dissenting vote be recorded.

Cuba Street, Petone - Proposed P10 Time Restriction (20/895)

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.

Members noted that the Petone Community Board had endorsed the recommendations contained in the report subject to the lease being signed by the business. The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations confirmed that that proposal would only be installed if the business signed a lease for 73 Cuba Street, Petone.

Recommended: (Cr Sutton/Cr Mitchell) Minute No. TSC 20611

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) receives and notes the information;

(ii) approves the installation of a time limited (P10 At All Times) parking restriction on Cuba Street, Petone, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(iii) rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(iv) notes that this resolution will take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in this resolution are in place.”

For the reason that the proposed restriction will improve parking turnover and availability on Cuba Street, benefitting both local businesses and their customers and the proposed changes support Council’s Parking Policy 2017.

xi)

Glen Road, Stokes Valley - Proposed No Stopping Restriction (20/1275)

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.

The Chair vacated the chair at 3.58pm. Cr Dyer chaired the meeting until the Chair rejoined the meeting at 3.59pm.

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Shaw) Minute No. TSC 20612

“That the Traffic Sub-Committee recommends that Council:

(i) receives and notes the information;

(ii) approves the installation of a No Stopping (8am-6pm Monday-Friday) restriction on Glen Road, Stokes Valley, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(iii) rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(iv) notes that this resolution will take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in this resolution are in place.”

For the reason that the proposed no stopping restriction:

a) maintains increased pedestrian crossing visibility during the day;

b) increases the available on-road parking stock during evenings and weekends;

c) maintains the minimum visibility requirements for pedestrian crossings; and

d) meets the requirements as set out in Council’s Traffic Bylaw 2017.

xii)

Waddington Drive, Naenae - Proposed P10 (School Days) Time Restriction (20/1276)

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.

RECOMMENDED: (Cr Sutton/Cr Mitchell) Minute No. TSC 20613

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) receives and notes the information;

(ii) approves the installation of P10 (8.30-9.30am, 2.45-3.30pm, Monday to Friday, School Days) time restriction on Waddington Road, Naenae – outside Wa Ora Montessori School, as shown in Appendix 1 to the report;

(iii) rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(iv) notes that this resolution will take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in this resolution are in place.”

For the reason that the proposed time limited restriction would:

a) improve parking turnover and availability during school drop off and pick up times;

b) maintain the minimum visibility requirements for pedestrian crossings; and

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

xiii)

Margaret Street, Hutt Central - Proposed P15 Loading Zone Class Restriction (20/1285)

The Traffic Engineer – Network Operations elaborated on the report.

Cr Dyer noted that the proposal added a carpark to the area.

recommended: (Cr Sutton/Cr Shaw) Minute No. TSC 20614

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) receives and notes the information;

(ii) approves the installation of a class restricted (P15 Loading Zone – Goods and Services Vehicles Only) parking restriction on Margaret Street, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(iii) rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(iv) notes that this resolution will take effect when the traffic control devices that evidence the restrictions described in this resolution are in place.”

For the reason that the proposed restriction will improve the serviceability for local businesses, without reducing the existing parking stock. The proposed changes support Council’s Parking Policy 2017.

5. QUESTIONS

There were no questions.

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 4.03 pm.

Cr L Sutton

CHAIR

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 8th day of December 2020