Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Thursday 29 June 2017

Time:                                    12.30pm

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor Vicki Buck

Councillor Phil Clearwater

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Aaron Keown

Councillor Sara Templeton

 

 

26 June 2017

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

David Adamson

General Manager City Services

Tel: 941 8235

 

Samantha Kelly

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6227

samantha.kelly@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Note:  The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted.  If you require further information relating to any reports, please contact the person named on the report.
To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/meetings-agendas-and-minutes/

 


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee - Terms of Reference

 

 

Chair

Councillor Cotter

Membership

Councillor Davidson (Deputy Chair), Councillor Buck, Councillor Clearwater, Councillor Galloway, Councillor Keown, Councillor Templeton

Quorum

Half of the members if the number of members (including vacancies) is even, or a majority of members if the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.

Meeting Cycle

Monthly

Reports To

Council

 

 

Responsibilities

The focus of the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee is the governance of roading and transport, three waters, waste management, and natural hazards protection.

 

The Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

·         Encourages opportunities for citizenship, community participation and community partnerships

·         Works in partnerships with key agencies, groups and organisations

·         Encourages innovative approaches and sustainable solutions

 

The Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committte considers and reports to Council on issues and activites relating to:

·         Water supply, conservation and quality

·         Stormwater drainage including the Land Drainage Recovery Programme

·         Natural environment, including the waterways, aquifers, ecology and conservation of resources

·         Natural hazards protection, including flood protection and river control

·         Solid waste minimisation and disposals

·         Sewage collection, treatment and disposal

·         Roads, footpaths and streetscapes

·         Transport including road operations, parking, public transport, cycle ways, harbours and marine structures consistent with Greater Christchurch Public Transport Joint Committee Terms of Reference.

 

Delegations

 

The Committee delegates to the following working group the responsibility to consider and report back to the Committee:

·         Land Drainage Working Group matters relating to the Land Drainage Recovery Programme, including opportunities for betterment.

 

Major Cycleway Route (MCR) Programme

 

At the Council meeting of 9 March 2017:

 

It was resolved that the Council:

 

1.         Delegates to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee the authority to make all decisions in connection with the Major Cycleway Routes (MCR) programme, including final route selections and anything precedent to the exercise by the Council of its power to acquire any property, subject to:

a.         The Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee and affected Community Boards being briefed prior to any public consultation commencing on any Major Cycleway Route project.

b.         The relevant Community Board Chair(s) will be invited by the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee to participate in the relevant Major Cycleway Route item discussion and give their Board’s feedback or recommendations.

2.         Notes and reconfirms Councils previous decision to designate the MCR programme a metropolitan project, as set out in the Council’s resolutions on 29 January 2015.

·         13.4         Agree to the Major Cycleway Route programme being declared a Metropolitan Programme and delegate to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee all decision making powers.

 

 


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

C       1.       Apologies.......................................................................................................................... 5

B       2.       Declarations of Interest................................................................................................... 5

C       3.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes................................................................................. 5

B       4.       Deputations by Appointment........................................................................................ 5

B       5.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 6

STAFF REPORTS

B       6.       Staff Advice Regarding the Petition Requesting the Intersection of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue Remain Open to Vehicular Traffic in all Four Directions............ 13

C       7.       MCR Heathcote Expressway - Ferry Road Options Report........................................ 17   

 

 


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

 

1.   Apologies

2.   Declarations of Interest

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

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 7 June 2017 be confirmed (refer page 7).

4.   Deputations by Appointment

4.1

Irinka Britnell will speak regarding the staff advice on the petition requesting that the intersection of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue remain open to vehicular traffic in all four directions.

 

4.2

At the close of the following requested speaking rights to present to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee on the Heathcote Expressway – Ferry Road Major Cycleway Route Options Report:

 

1.1       Carina Duke on behalf of the Blind Foundation

1.2       Dirk De Lu on behalf of Spokes Ltd

1.3       Steve Muir (Inner City East Cycles)

1.4       Robert Fleming

1.5       Ernest Tsao (Liberty Market)

1.6       Charlotte Bebbington

1.7       Francesca Bradley

1.8       Ian and Marette Wells

1.9       Dave Alexander

1.10    Jo Pannett (Vintage Wonderland)

1.11    Alastair Evans

1.12    Clare Simpson on behalf of the Automobile Association

1.13    Tony Carey

1.14    David Fleming

1.15    David Lee

1.16    Brent Wylie

1.17    Tessa Sutherland on behalf of Orion Ltd

1.18    Axel Wilke

1.19    David McGregor on behalf of the Grave Vineyard Church

1.20    Tony Walter

 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

There were no petitions received at the time the agenda was prepared.  


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

 

 

Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 7 June 2017

Time:                                    1.04pm

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor Vicki Buck

Councillor Phil Clearwater

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Aaron Keown

Councillor Sara Templeton

 

 

6 June 2017

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

David Adamson

General Manager City Services

Tel: 941 8235

 

Samantha Kelly

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6227

samantha.kelly@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
www.ccc.govt.nz/Council/meetingminutes/agendas/index

 


Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

There were no apologies.

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00019

Committee Decision

That the minutes of the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 10 May 2017 be confirmed.

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Davidson                                                                                                      Carried

 

4.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

5.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

15. Resolution to Include Supplementary Reports

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00020

That the reports be received and considered at the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee meeting on Wednesday, 7 June 2017.

Open Items

16.       Petition: Intersection of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue remain open to vehicular traffic in all four directions

Councillor Clearwater/Councillor Templeton                                                                                                   Carried

 

Report from Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board - 29 May 2017

16. Petition: Intersection of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue remain open to vehicular traffic in all four directions

 

Committee Comment

1.         The Committee received the petition and requested further advice from staff.

 

Community Board Recommendation

That the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board:

1.         Refers the issues raised about the petition to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee for their consideration.

2.         Thanks Mr and Mrs Britnell for their petition presentation.

 

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00021

Part C

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Receive the petition and request further information from staff.

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                   Carried

 

 

 

6.   Briefing by Green Fuels NZ Limited - Heather Locke

 

Committee Comment

The Committee received a briefing from Heather Locke and Martin Johnson from Green Fuels NZ Limited regarding the manufacturing of biodiesel and solutions to reduce carbon emissions.

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00022

Part C

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Request a memorandum from staff regarding the use of biodiesel and guidance on crafting a letter to Central Government requesting that they revisit the biodiesel subsidy.

Councillor Keown/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                           Carried

 

 

7.   Briefing by Glen Koorey

 

Committee Comment

The Committee received a briefing from Glen Koorey regarding lower speed limits around Christchurch.

 

8.   Proposed Christchurch City Biodiversity Fund

 

Committee Comment

The Committee accepted the staff recommendation without change.

 

Staff Recommendations 

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee recommend that the Council:

1.         Receive the information in this report.

2.         Approve the establishment of a Christchurch Biodiversity Fund to provide financial assistance to landowners to maintain and enhance indigenous biodiversity, subject to:

a.         The Council approving grant funding of $200, 000 per annum to the proposed Christchurch Biodiversity Fund, which will be considered for allocation in the 2017/18 draft Annual Plan.

3.         Notes that future grant funding be considered for inclusion in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

4.         Delegate authority to the General Manager Strategy and Transformation to approve the allocation of $80,000 to support landowners in the Sites of Ecological Significance (SES) programme for 2016/17 financial year.

5.         Delegate authority to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee to consider and approve applications to the Christchurch Biodiversity Fund.

 

Committee Decided ITEC/2017/00023

Part A

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee recommend that the Council:

1.         Receive the information in this report.

2.         Approve the establishment of a Christchurch Biodiversity Fund to provide financial assistance to landowners to maintain and enhance indigenous biodiversity, subject to:

a.         The Council approving grant funding of $200, 000 per annum to the proposed Christchurch Biodiversity Fund, which will be considered for allocation in the 2017/18 draft Annual Plan.

3.         Notes that future grant funding be considered for inclusion in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

4.         Delegate authority to the General Manager Strategy and Transformation to approve the allocation of $80,000 to support landowners in the Sites of Ecological Significance (SES) programme for 2016/17 financial year.

5.         Delegate authority to the Council to consider and approve applications to the Christchurch Biodiversity Fund.

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Clearwater                                                                                                   Carried

 

9.   Update on Compliance with Drinking Water Standards - Northwest Christchurch

 

Committee Comment

The Committee received the information provided in the report and requested further information from staff.

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Take note of the information provided in this report, including the revised timeframes for the completion of the Northwest Christchurch well drilling programme.

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00024

Part C

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Take note of the information provided in this report, including the revised timeframes for the completion of the Northwest Christchurch well drilling programme.

2.         Request staff to write to ECan asking for information on quarry compliance in the Christchurch City Council drinking water catchment areas.

3.         Request for staff to circulate the structure of joint working groups from the Mayors Forum downwards, with an expectation of an update through the Mayor’s report.

Councillor Cotter/Councillor Keown                                                                                                                    Carried

 

 

Councillor Galloway left the meeting at 2.32pm.

Councillor Galloway returned to the meeting at 2.34pm.

 

10. Key Findings of the Havelock North Inquiry Stage 1 Report in the Christchurch Context

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Take note of the information provided in this report.

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00025

Part B

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Take note of the information provided in this report.

Councillor Davidson/Councillor Galloway                                                                                                          Carried

 


 

 

11. ITE Report 3 Waters and Waste - April 2017

 

Staff Recommendations

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Receive the information in the 3 waters and waste April 2017 report attached.

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00026

Part B

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Receive the information in the 3 waters and waste April 2017 report attached.

2.       Notes that the Committee will receive further information on the private laterals and gully traps programme.

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Davidson                                                                                                      Carried

 

 

 

12  Resolution to Exclude the Public

 

Committee Resolved ITEC/2017/00027

Part C

That at 2.57pm the resolution to exclude the public set out on pages 370 to 371 of the agenda be adopted.

Councillor Clearwater/Councillor Galloway                                                                                                         Carried

 

The public were re-admitted to the meeting at 3.14pm.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 3.14pm.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2017.

 

Councillor Pauline Cotter

Chairperson

   


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

 

6.        Staff Advice Regarding the Petition Requesting the Intersection of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue Remain Open to Vehicular Traffic in all Four Directions

Reference:

17/627939

Contact:

Lynette Ellis

lynette.ellis@ccc.govt.nz

941 6285

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee to be informed of the impact on any new evidence presented as a result of a community petition relating to the Rapanui-Shag Rock Major Cycleway.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is being provided to fulfil the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee resolution 16.4, that the Infrastructure Transport and Environment Committee receive and consider the petition presented to the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board at its 29 May 2017 meeting.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision(s) in this report low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined as the report is for information.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Receive the information in this report.

 

 

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       A petition has been received to re-consider the decision to close Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue as part of the Rapanui-Shag Rock Major Cycleway.

4.2       The original scheme was consulted on and submissions received.

4.3       No changes have been made to the intersection since the original decision.

4.4       No new information has been provided with the petition to alter advice of staff.

 

 

5.   Context/Background

Background

5.1       Petition from Michael and Irinka Britnell raising a concern that the closure of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue will adversely affect the viability of Linwood Village.

5.2       The prayer of the petition reads

·   The businesses and Community of Linwood Village and Worcester Street environ, request that, the Intersection of Worcester Street and Fitzgerald Avenue remain open to vehicular traffic in all four directions to ensure the revival and survival of this essential and historic shopping and community precinct.

5.3       The petition was presented to Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board on 29 May 2017.  The community Board resolved the following:

5.4       The petition was presented at the 07 June 2017Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee meeting and feedback requested from staff.

Decisions made to date on the Rapanui-Shag Rock Cycleway

5.5       Rapanui – Shag Rock Cycleway consultation closed 25 November 2015.  The proposal closed Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue and at England Street.  The decision of the Infrastructure Transport and Environment Committee meeting (07 April 2016) was as follows:

·   England Street closure not accepted.  The resulting design for the Worcester/England intersection maintained access along Worcester but changed the priority for traffic.

·   Fitzgerald Avenue closure.  Accepted as per the consulted design.

5.6       The rationale for the decision to close Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue was the following:

·   The Streets and Spaces Design Guide clearly shows strong linkages with the Major Cycleways network.

·   The An Accessible City programme in the Christchurch Central Recovery Plan designated Worcester Street as a key cycleway in the central city and as a “slow street”.

·   Maintain or improve traffic flows on Fitzgerald Avenue as one of the key routes.

·   Reduce traffic flows on Worcester – in the central city this meets the needs of the slow street identified in the Christchurch Central Recovery Plan.  For the Rapanui – Shag Rock cycleway this supported the development of a greenway along Worcester Street.

Submissions received on the Rapanui-Shag Rock Cycleway

5.7       Submissions received at the time relating to Worcester Street were in excess of 100 and generally support for the Major Cycleway Route was at 60%. Submissions that mentioned the closure of Worcester Street at Fitzgerald Avenue are summarised as main themes below with the corresponding number of respondents:

Main Theme

Number

Support closure of Worcester at Fitzgerald Ave

3

Cyclists turning right into Worcester from Fitzgerald will have to queue in traffic lane

3

Closing Worcester Street off at Fitzgerald will challenge the community

3

Loss of Worcester Street bus is not good

9

5.8       The original submission from the Britnell’s raised the following objections (summarised):

·   Worcester Street should not be closed at Fitzgerald Avenue.

·   Loss of car parking, particularly at intersections.

·   Access will be reduced to the Linwood Village.

·   England Street/Worcester Street closure not good.

·   A number of alternative routes were proposed.

5.9       A previous petition was received through the consultation process that raised concern with the loss of parking on Worcester and fact that the reduction in traffic on Worcester Street would adversely affect Linwood Village.

6.   Summary

6.1       No changes have been made to the design of the Worcester Street/Fitzgerald Avenue intersection since the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee decision to move to detailed design and construction.

6.2       No new information has been presented with this petition to alter the advice from staff.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Authors

Lynette Ellis - Manager Planning and Delivery Transport

Clarrie Pearce - Senior Project Manager

Jennifer Rankin - Project Manager

Approved By

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

 

7.        MCR Heathcote Expressway - Ferry Road Options Report

Reference:

17/598091

Contact:

Jennifer Rankin

Jennifer.Rankin@ccc.govt.nz

039415177

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee to approve the Ferry Road and Wilsons Road Section of the Heathcote Expressway Major Cycleway Route for design and construction and to provide information on the outcomes of the consultation process and the recommended changes as a result of consultation.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated. This project is specifically identified and funded project within the 2015-2018 Long Term Plan.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision(s) in this report are of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by using the engagement significance matrix.

2.1.2   The community engagement and consultation outlined in this report reflect the assessment.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee:

1.         Approve the Ferry Road and Wilsons Road as the route selection for the remaining part of the Heathcote Expressway.

2.         Approve that the Ferry Road and Wilsons Road Section of the Heathcote Expressway, (between 77 Ferry Road and 9 Charles Street), proceed to detailed design and construction as shown in attachment A – Ferry Road Preferred Option Plans.

3.         Approve the removal of the identified trees to allow for the implementation of the proposed scheme.

4.         Recommend that the detailed traffic resolutions required for the implementation of the route are brought back to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee for approval at the end of the detailed design phase prior to onsite construction.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2015 - 2025):

4.1.1   Activity: Major Cycleways

·     Level of Service: 10.5.1 Reduce the number of fatal and serious crashes on the network involving cyclists

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – Mono Directional Separated Cycle Lanes (preferred option) as consulted, incorporating some changes as a result of consultation feedback.

·     Option 2 – Bi-Directional Separated Cycle Lane (alternative option) as consulted in the second round of consultation.

·     Option 3 – Shared Paths. Developed following consultation in response to significant feedback regarding on street parking loss.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     This option is direct and coherent. Cyclists travelling to and from the City will be used to travelling on this style of facility.

·     Cyclists will have a dedicated lane in each direction with increased visibility from the carriageway following a reduction in on street parking. This option provides the safest option for all road users.

·     Cyclists would be positioned at a good distance from the entranceways to properties.

·     A 0.85m wide kerb separator would separate interested but concerned cyclists from traffic.

·     This option would tie-in the proposals for the An Accessible City (AAC) project proposed for Ferry Road north of Fitzgerald Avenue.

·     Meets the key objectives to attract interested but concerned cyclists.

·     The ‘Stadium Walkway’ pedestrian path width could be retained for future land proposals at the Lancaster Park site.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     Reduction of on street car parking. On street spaces would be reduced to 10 from the 70 currently available.

 

4.4       Option Summary – Advantages and Disadvantages (Option 2)

4.4.1     The advantages of this option include:

·     The solid median down Ferry Road will reduces the potential safety risk created by right turning vehicles across the entranceways across the cycle lane.

·     One side of Ferry Road retains parking. 32 on street parking spaces would be retained.

·     The solid median provides pedestrians with a safer opportunity to cross Ferry Road.

·     Ties in well with the shared space outside Lancaster Park on Wilson’s Road.

4.4.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     It would become more difficult for people to access Ferry Road properties. Vehicles wishing to access properties on the other side of the median from the direction they are travelling would be required to travel extra distances to gain entry. Further journey planning would be required.

·     A safety risk still remains with a bi-directional facility. Drivers will be required to look both directions on entry and exit for a potential conflict with cyclists and pedestrians.

·     Ferry Road has high traffic volumes (10,000 vehicles per day). Drivers would be required to look for a gap in the traffic as well as looking for cyclists coming in both directions to find a suitable and safe gap.

·     Would require an increased cycle phase at Fitzgerald Avenue to allow cyclists to cross to from the north side to the south side.

 

4.5       Option Summary – Advantages and Disadvantages (Option 3)

4.5.1     The advantages of this option include:

·     53 on street parking spaces could be retained.

4.5.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     This option is the least safe option. This option increases the safety risk at entranceways. Drivers would need to look for cyclists and pedestrians on a 4.5m shared path, with limited visibility due to the retention of on street parking.

·     Should a cyclist need to make an evasive manoeuvre they would need to take into account potential pedestrian conflicts.

·     On road cycle lanes would be lost and faster cyclists will either be forced to interact with a large volume of traffic or share the space with pedestrians.

·     Cyclists could be travelling at higher speeds closer to vehicle entranceways. Emerging vehicles would have less space to make an evasive manoeuvre.

 

 

5.   Context/Background

MCR Programme

5.1       The Heathcote Expressway is one of 13 projects in the Major Cycleways Route (MCR) Programme.  The MCR Programme has Urban Cycleway Programme (UCP), CCC and National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) funding attached to it and Heathcote Expressway is in the Long Term Plan as one of the identified MCR Projects.

5.2       The Heathcote Expressway is approximately 7.1km long and starts at Fitzgerald Avenue and finishes at Martindales Road in Heathcote Valley.

Route Selection

5.3       To develop a preferred route the following constraints were used:

·   The start point needs to connect to Ara Institute and the associated An Accessible City project;

·   The end point is Martindales Road in Heathcote Valley. For this report we are considering the end point as Charles Street which has been previously adopted at the preferred route between Wilsons Road and Heathcote Valley.

·   Three primary routes were developed and alternate connections within these four routes were developed. Each of these options were put through a Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) which considered a range of factors including cyclists, community, businesses and network and property issues.

·   Following the MCA assessment Ferry Road came through as the preferred option.  Ferry Road scored highest on a number of key reasons; Safety – this route has the least number of complicated turns, it is direct and requires “straight thru” manoeuvres. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) also scored highly due to the residential surveillance from vehicular traffic and residential surveillance.  The alternative options along Falsgrave Street and the rail corridor scored poorly on Coherence, CPTED, directness and impacts of the wider Christchurch transport network.  The impact on parking was also least on Ferry Road.

·   The preferred route was developed for community consultation. A separated mono directional cycling lane is proposed on each side of Ferry Road. The preferred option ties in with proposals from AAC to develop protected cycle lanes and ties in with the Greenway treatment proposed at Charles Street.


 

6.   Option 1 –Separated Mono Directional Cycle Lanes (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Following consultation a scheme was developed to further enhance parking, initially 7 parking spaces were retained. Following the initial consultation a small number of parks were able to be gained following driveway count surveys. 10 spaces are able to be retained. The preferred option travels down each side of Ferry Road and Wilsons Road, connecting Fitzgerald Avenue to Charles Street.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report.

6.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to consult with stakeholders on the project need, alternatives, opportunities and solutions so that any concerns, alternatives and aspirations are understood and considered.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.4       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

6.5       Adjacent residents and businesses are specifically affected by this option due to the proposed cycleway being adjacent to their properties and changes to the street layout and parking.  Their views are contained in attachment D.

6.6       Initial consultation on the Heathcote Expressway was undertaken from Tuesday 15th November 2016 and 23rd December 2016.  25 of the 170 submissions received during this period related specifically to Ferry Road.  Supplementary information and an alternative option was circulated for further consultation between the 17th March 2017 and 14th April 2017. 

6.7       Booklets were hand delivered to directly affected properties along the route and generally two blocks back. Properties were identified based upon their proximity to the proposed route or access to the road network affect by the cycleway.  Copies of the second round of consultation material were also sent to all submitters that previously submitted. 

6.8       Three drop in sessions during the initial consultation period were held at the Lions Room, Ferrymead Heritage Park; The Tannery and St Marys Church, Heathcote Valley. In total 38 people attended these sessions. On 14th December 2016 a meeting was also held with the business owners of Ferry Road. 15 people attended this meeting. Council also met with some submitters to further understand their concerns.

6.9       A total of 324 further submissions were received from residents, businesses and organisations. Of these submissions, 128 (39%) supported or generally supported the Ferry Road section, while 185 (57%) did not support the scheme, 124 (38%) of submissions were from submitters who attend Grace Vineyard Church; 8 (2%) submissions from members of the Church were in support / general support of the cycleway, the rest were opposed. Spokes Canterbury, submitted in support of the preferred option, on behalf of approximately 1,200 members affiliated with the national Cycling Action Network (CAN). Spokes stated that submissions are developed online and include member’s input and wish to be considered as a single submission representing all 1200 members.

6.10    Of those in support of the cycleway, 85 (26%) supported the preferred option and 11 (3%) supported the alternative option. Twenty-two (7%) submissions generally supported the preferred option while 11 (3%) generally supported the alternative option. Eleven (3%) submissions did not state their position.

6.11    The key issues raised in submissions included: loss of on-street parking, turning restrictions and safety concerns with a bidirectional cycleway (Alternative Option). Safety concerns around the bi-directional options were prevalent in submissions in support of the preferred option.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.12    This option is consistent with Council Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

6.13    There are no increased financial implications over and above those originally reported in the Heathcote Expressway recommended option report on 30 March 2017.

6.14    Maintenance / Ongoing Costs will increase to clean the separated facility but these additional costs have been allowed for in the maintenance budgets.

6.15    Funding source – This project is funded through the Council’s Capital Programme of the 2015- 2025 Long Term Plan and has funding from the National Land Transport Fund and the Urban Cycleways Programme.

Legal Implications

6.16    All decisions associated with projects associated with the Major Cycleway Programme have been delegated to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee by Council.

Risks and Mitigations   

6.17    Risk management was applied by the project team throughout the project development.  The options were analysed via multi criteria analysis and a risk workshop was held to identify and rank project risks.

6.18    The key risks identified were funding, construction resources, and impacts on businesses and the community.

6.19    Mitigation strategies have been developed for risks and periodic risk reviews will continue to be held until the end of the project.

Implementation

6.20    Implementation dependencies   - Staff are working closely with An Accessible City and other Major Cycleway Projects to manage timing and consistency of design.

6.21    Implementation timeframe – the timeframe for implementation of the Heathcote Expressway cycleway has a scheduled construction start of July 2017 with a 12 month construction timeframe.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.22    The advantages of this option include:

·   This option is direct and coherent. Cyclists travelling to and from the City will be used to travelling on this style of facility.

·   Cyclists will have a dedicated lane in each direction with increased visibility from the carriageway following a reduction in on street parking. This option provides the safest option for all road users.

·   Cyclists would be positioned at a good distance from the entranceways to properties.

·   A 0.85m wide kerb separator would separate interested but concerned cyclists from traffic.

·   This option would tie-in the proposals for the An Accessible City (AAC) project proposed for Ferry Road north of Fitzgerald Avenue.

·   Meets the key objectives to attract interested but concerned cyclists.

·   The ‘Stadium Walkway’ pedestrian path width could be retained for future land proposals at the Lancaster Park site.

6.23    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   Reduction of on street car parking. On street spaces would be reduced to 10 from the 70 currently available.


 

7.   Option 2 – Bi Directional Facility on the South Side (alternative option)

Option Description

7.1       Following consultation an alternative scheme was developed to increase available on street parking. 32spaces are able to be retained. The alternative option is a bi-directional separated cycle facility that travels down the south side of Ferry Road and Wilsons Road, connecting Fitzgerald Avenue to Charles Street.

Significance

7.2       The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report.

7.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to consult with stakeholders on the project need, alternatives, opportunities and solutions so that any concerns, alternatives and aspirations are understood and considered.

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.4       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

7.5       Adjacent residents and businesses are specifically affected by this option due to the road layout changes and impacts on parking. Their views are contained in Attachment D.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.6       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

7.7       There are no increased financial implications over and above those originally reported in the Heathcote Expressway recommended option report on 30 March 2017.

7.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs will increase to clean the separated facility but these additional costs have been allowed for in the maintenance budgets.

7.9       Funding source – This project is funded through the Council’s Capital Programme of the 2015- 2025 Long Term Plan and has funding from the National Land Transport Fund and the Urban Cycleways Programme.

Legal Implications

7.10    All decisions associated with projects associated with the Major Cycleways Programme have been delegated to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee by Council.

Risks and Mitigations    

7.11    Risk management was applied by the project team throughout the project development. The routes were analysed via multi criteria analysis and a risk workshop was held to identify and rank project risks.

7.12    The key risks identified were funding, construction resources, and impacts on businesses and the community

7.13    Mitigation strategies have been developed for risks and periodic risk reviews will continue to be held until the end of the project.

Implementation

7.14    Implementation dependencies - Staff are working closely with An Accessible City and other Major Cycleway Projects to manage timing and consistency of design.

7.15    Implementation timeframe – the timeframe for implementation of the Heathcote Expressway cycleway has a scheduled construction start of July 2017 with a 12 month construction timeframe.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.16    The advantages of this option include:

·   The solid median down Ferry Road will reduces the safety risk of right turning vehicles across the entranceways across the cycle lane.

·   One side of Ferry Road retains parking. 32 on street parking spaces would be retained.

·   The solid median provides pedestrians with an opportunity to cross Ferry Road.

·   Ties in well with the shared space outside Lancaster Park on Wilson’s Road.

7.17    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It would become more difficult for people to access Ferry Road properties. Vehicles wishing to access properties on the other side of the median from the direction they are travelling would be required to travel extra distances to gain entry. Further journey planning would be required.

·   A safety risk still remains with a bi-directional facility. Drivers will be required to look both directions on entry and exit for a potential conflict with cyclists and pedestrians.

·   Ferry Road has high traffic volumes (10,000 vehicles per day). Drivers would be required to look for a gap in the traffic as well as looking for cyclists coming in both directions to find a suitable and safe gap.

·   It would require an increased cycle phase at Fitzgerald Avenue to allow cyclists to cross to from the north side to the south side.


 

8.   Option 3 – Shared Paths

Option Description

8.1       This option has been developed as a direct result of the community feedback relating directly to the loss of on street parking. This proposal is to widen the existing footpaths on each side of Ferry Road and create a shared path on each side of the road.

Significance

8.2       The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report.

8.3       Engagement requirements for this level of significance are to consult with stakeholders on the project need, alternatives, opportunities and solutions so that any concerns, alternatives and aspirations are understood and considered.

Impact on Mana Whenua

8.4       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

8.5       Adjacent residents and businesses are specifically affected by this option due to the road layout changes and impacts on parking. Their views are contained in Appendix D.

8.6       No specific consultation on this option was undertaken. All submitters were given a copy of this proposal three weeks prior to this hearing.  Submitters were invited to attend a public information session on 13th June 2017 to ask any questions.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

8.7       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

8.8       There are no increased financial implications over and above those originally reported in the Heathcote Expressway recommended option report on 30 March 2017.

8.9       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs will increase to clean the separated facility but these additional costs have been allowed for in the maintenance budgets.

8.10    Funding source – This project is funded through the Council’s Capital Programme of the 2015- 2025 Long Term Plan and has funding from the National Land Transport Fund and the Urban Cycleways Programme.

Legal Implications

8.11    All decisions associated with projects associated with the Major Cycleways Programme have been delegated to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee by Council.

Risks and Mitigations   

8.12    Risk management was applied by the project team throughout the project development. The routes were analysed via multi criteria analysis and a risk workshop was held to identify and rank project risks.

8.13    The key risks identified were funding, construction resources, and impacts on businesses and the community.

8.14    Mitigation strategies have been developed for risks and periodic risk reviews will continue to be held until the end of the project

Implementation

8.15    Implementation dependencies - Staff are working closely with An Accessible City and other Major Cycleway Projects to manage timing and consistency of design.

8.16    Implementation timeframe - the timeframe for implementation of the Heathcote Expressway cycleway has a scheduled construction start of July 2017 with a 12 month construction timeframe.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

8.17    The advantages of this option include:

·   53 on street parking spaces could be retained.

8.18    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   This option is the least safe option. This option increases the safety risk at entranceways. Drivers would need to look for cyclists and pedestrians on a 4.5m shared path, with limited visibility due to the retention of on street parking.

·   Should a cyclist need to make an evasive manoeuvre they would need to take into account potential pedestrian conflicts.

·   On road cycle lanes would be lost and faster cyclists will either be forced to interact with a large volume of traffic or share the space with pedestrians.

·   Cyclists could be travelling at higher speeds closer to vehicle entranceways. Emerging vehicles would have less space to make an evasive manoeuvre.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Ferry Road Preferred Option Plans

29

b

Ferry Road Option 2 - Bidirectional Lane

35

c

Ferry Road Option 3 - Shared Path Plans

41

d

Heathcote Further Submissions Feedback_public with appendices

47

e

MCR Heathcote Expressway Ferry Road Consultation Communication Analysis Report

149

f

Heathcote Expressway Safety Audit and Network Functionality Review - Preferred Option (Sections 6 - 10)

155

g

Heathcote Expressway Safety Audit and Network Functionality Review - Options 2 and 3

178

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Authors

Jennifer Rankin - Project Manager

Clarrie Pearce - Senior Project Manager

Approved By

Lynette Ellis - Manager Planning and Delivery Transport

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee

29 June 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator