Agenda of Traffic Subcommittee

HuttCity_TeAwaKairangi_BLACK_AGENDA_COVER

Traffic Subcommittee

1 February 2018

Order Paper for the meeting to be held in the

Council Chambers, Level 2, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt,

on:

Monday 12 February 2018 commencing at 3.00pm

Membership

Cr M Cousins (Chair)

Cr S Edwards (Deputy Chair)

Cr L Bridson	Cr J Briggs
Cr T Lewis	Cr L Sutton
Cr C Barry (Alternate)	Deputy Mayor D Bassett (Alternate)
Cr G Barratt (Alternate)	Cr M Lulich (Alternate)
Cr G McDonald (Alternate)	Cr C Milne (Alternate)

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

TRAFFIC SUBCOMMITTEE
Membership:	One Councillor from each Ward
Alternates:	One Councillor from each Ward
Quorum:	3
Meeting Cycle:	The Traffic Subcommittee will meet on a six weekly basis.
Reports to:	Council

PURPOSE

The Traffic Subcommittee has primary responsibility for considering and making recommendations to Council on traffic matters and consider 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 Hearing of submissions on cycling matters and make recommendations to Council, via the City Development Committee.

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

1.3 Provide options for the consideration of Council

The Chair will have authority to:

1.4 Refer any traffic/cycling matter to:

1.4.1 A Community Board/Community Committee; or

1.4.2 The Policy and Regulatory Committee; or

1.4.3 The City Development Committee; or

1.4.4 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, Level 2, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt on

Monday 12 February 2018 commencing at 3.00pm.

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

4. Recommendations to Council - 13 March 2018

i) Marine Drive - Proposed Motorcycle and Mobility Park Restrictions (17/1609)

Report No. TRS2018/1/8 by the Traffic Engineer 8

ii) Wakefield Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1740)

Report No. TRS2018/1/9 by the Contractor 13

iii) Amberley Grove - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1764)

Report No. TRS2018/1/10 by the Contractor 17

iv) Wilson Grove - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1765)

Report No. TRS2018/1/11 by the Contractor 22

v) Athlone Crescent - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1797)

Report No. TRS2018/1/12 by the Contractor 26

vi) Cambridge Terrace - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions
(17/1806)

Report No. TRS2018/1/13 by the Contractor 29

vii) Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Titiro Moana Road (17/1865)

Report No. TRS2018/1/14 by the Contractor 33

viii) Stokes Valley Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1873)

Report No. TRS2018/1/15 by the Contractor 37

ix) Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - 90 Dowse Drive (17/1896)

Report No. TRS2018/1/16 by the Contractor 41

x) Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Udy Street (17/1897)

Report No. TRS2018/1/17 by the Contractor 45

xi) Lincoln Avenue - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1904)

Report No. TRS2018/1/18 by the Traffic Engineer 49

xii) Marina Grove - Proposed Parking Changes (17/1905)

Report No. TRS2018/1/19 by the Traffic Engineer 53

xiii) Poole Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1906)

Report No. TRS2018/1/20 by the Traffic Engineer 59

xiv) Holborn Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (17/1907)

Report No. TRS2018/1/21 by the Traffic Engineer 65

xv) Peterkin Street - Proposed Mobility Park Restrictions (17/1908)

Report No. TRS2018/1/22 by the Traffic Engineer 71

xvi) Wainui Road - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (17/1909)

Report No. TRS2018/1/23 by the Traffic Engineer 74

xvii) Collingwood Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (18/9)

Report No. TRS2018/1/24 by the Contractor 78

xviii) Taungata Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (18/81)

Report No. TRS2018/1/25 by the Contractor 82

5. 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.

Donna Male

COMMITTEE ADVISOR

8 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1609)

Report no: TRS2018/1/8

Marine Drive - Proposed Motorcycle and Mobility Park Restrictions

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the relocation of the existing Motorcycle Parking Restrictions, and installation of three new Mobility Park Restrictions in Marine Drive, Days Bay, attached as Appendices 1 and 2 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) approves the relocation of the existing Motorcycle Parking Restrictions in Marine Drive, Days Bay, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii) approves the installation of two new Mobility Parking Restrictions in Marine Drive, Days Bay, attached as Appendix 1 to the report; and

(iii) approves the installation of one new Mobility Park Restriction in Marine Drive, outside Days Bay Wharf, as attached as Appendix 2 to the report.

For the reason(s)

̵ There are currently no on-street mobility parks provided in the area. The proposal will improve accessibility to the wharf, beach and shops for mobility impaired road users, with minimal loss of unrestricted user parking spaces.

Background

2. Council received requests from a resident of Eastbourne, and Councillor Josh Briggs, to provide Mobility Park Restrictions along Marine Drive, by the Days Bay Wharf and in the vicinity of the shops at Nº 612 to 614.

3. The concern expressed is that no on-street mobility parks are provided in the vicinity of the public transport terminal at Days Bay Wharf or close to the shops at Nº 612 to 614 Marine Drive.

4. The resident also notes that there are Mobility Parks in Williams Park but the gates are not open until several morning buses and/or ferries have departed.

5. Council officers note that Williams Park is Council Reserve land and the Hutt City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2007 states that “no person may park any vehicle in a reserve unless the person in control of the vehicle intends to remain in the reserve while the vehicle is parked”; therefore the existing mobility parks are not suitable for commuters.

Discussion

6. The proposal involves relocating the existing motorcycle park (opposite Moana Road) to unutilised space adjacent to the bus stop opposite #616 Marine Drive and using the vacated space to introduce two mobility parks. This means only a single parking space (currently P120, from 7:00am to 11:00am) will be lost to accommodate the two mobility spaces.

7. Adjacent to the Days Bay Wharf, a single unrestricted parking space will be converted to a mobility parking space.

8. In total, two existing parking spaces (one unrestricted and one P120, from 7:00am to 11:00am) will be removed to accommodate the three new Mobility Park Restrictions.

Options

9. The options are:

i. To leave the area as it is without mobility park restrictions and accept that the current level of service for mobility impaired road users will remain;

ii. To relocate the existing motorcycle parking restrictions, install two Mobility Park Restrictions in the vicinity of the shops and one mobility park restrictions adjacent to Days Bay Wharf as proposed and improve the level of service for mobility impaired people or;

iii. To relocate the existing motorcycle parking restrictions, install one Mobility Park Restriction in the vicinity of the shops and one Mobility Park Restriction adjacent to Days Bay Wharf as proposed and improve the level of service for mobility impaired people.

Consultation

10. Council officers consulted the six directly affected businesses at Nº 612 to 614 Marine Drive in regards to the proposed changes shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

· All the consulted businesses signed a petition in support of the proposal.

Legal Considerations

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

Financial Considerations

12. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

13. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings and signage.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Marine Drive - Proposed Motorcycle and Mobility Park Restrictions - Appendix 1 17/1609	11
2 ⇩	Marine Drive - Proposed Motorcycle and Mobility Park Restrictions - Appendix 2 17/1609	12

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

13 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1740)

Report no: TRS2018/1/9

Wakefield Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Wakefield Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s)

- The proposed restriction will improve accessibility to the complainant’s business and improve safety in the vicinity.

- Although four on street four parking spaces be lost, there is adequate on street parking available within the immediate area.

- The surrounding businesses support the proposal.

- The proposal is in keeping with Council’s Parking Policy.

Background

2. Council received a request from a local business (Hale Motor Bodies) at #21 Wakefield Street for a No Stopping At All Times Restriction (broken yellow lines) across the road from their business.

3. The concern raised is that vehicles parked opposite the business entrance make it difficult for long trucks to entering and exit the workshop.

Discussion

4. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed will ensure adequate space for long trucks to manoeuvre.

5. The proposal would result in the loss of four on street parking spaces.

6. The parking demand in this part of Wakefield Street is primarily for the employees of local businesses.

7. Further to the east (300m+) along Wakefield Street the parking demand is primarily for residential parking and commuter parking for the Ava Railway Station.

8. Sufficient on street parking would remain within short walking distance of the proposed restriction.

9. The proposal is in keeping with the Parking Policy which places a high priority on existing property access.

Options

10. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current accessibility level of service; or

b. install the proposed changes and improve the accessibility level of service.

Consultation

11. Consultation documents were delivered to three nearby businesses on Wakefield Street.

12. All three were in support of the proposal.

13. One of these (Brendan Foot Motors Ltd) noted: “I have discussed this with our neighbours (Hales) and consider it a safety issue and fully support their request”.

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

16. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Wakefield Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 8.2018 17/1740 Cycle 1 2018	16

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

17 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1764)

Report no: TRS2018/1/10

Amberley Grove - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions

Purpose of Report

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

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the retrospective approval for No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Amberley Grove, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the following reason(s):

̵ to prevent vehicles being parked too close to the intersection and driveways, improving vehicle manoeuvrability and visibility; and

̵ to improve compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Background

2. Council received a request from a resident of Amberley Grove to improve the visibility and vehicle manoeuvring space within the cul-de-sac and prevent vehicles parking too close to the intersection (with Kings Crescent) and driveways.

3. Concern was raised over the safety of vehicles entering Amberley Grove when vehicles are parked on the entry curve to the street.

4. Concern was also raised about the lack of manoeuvring space within the cul-de-sac head (turning area) when vehicles are parked in this area.

Discussion

5. Located within walking distance of the Lower Hutt CBD, Amberley Grove, and other nearby streets, attract all day parking from CBD workers/commuters. Parking within the cul-de-sac is often fully occupied during the working day.

6. A short section of broken yellow lines was previously installed on the south side of the street (the exit lane) to prevent vehicles parking between the Give Way controlled intersection and the nearest driveway.

7. It is proposed to install additional No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (broken yellow lines, as shown attached as Appendix 1) to prevent parking in areas where vehicle manoeuvrability and visibility are compromised.

8. The proposed restrictions will alleviate the concerns by preventing vehicles being parked near the street entrance and too close to driveways and reducing the number of vehicles that park within the manoeuvring space of the cul-de-sac head.

9. The proposed markings at the entrance to Amberley Grove are consistent with the entrances to the other streets off the east side of Kings Crescent which all have broken yellow lines to prevent parking too close to the intersections.

10. There would be 13 parking spaces available within the cul-de-sac following implementation of the proposed restrictions.

11. The two spaces within the turning area at the cul-de-sac head have been retained to maximize the parking spaces available. Although these spaces would ideally be removed, there is adequate space for vehicles to turn around with these spaces occupied (larger vehicles may have to undertake a three point turn).

12. Due to a miscommunication between council officers and contractors the proposed parking restrictions have already been installed, prior to gaining council resolution. This report therefore seeks retrospective resolution of the restrictions so that they may be legally enforced.

Options

13. The options are:

a. To restore the cul-de-sac to its previous level of service by removing the newly installed parking restrictions (and accept the issues raised will remain); or

b. Retain the newly installed restrictions and have them formally resolved and legalised through the council process (to improve visibility and vehicle maneuvering space); or

c. Retain the newly installed restrictions, install additional parking restrictions to prevent any cars from being parked within the cul-de-sac head (two parking spaces would be removed), and have them formally resolved and legalised through the council process.

Consultation

14. Consultation documents were delivered to all 17 properties in Amberley Grove.

15. Four (23%) questionnaires were returned, three in support of the proposal and one against.

16. Comments from supporting residents include:

a. “I totally agree with this as cars parked are too crowded and sometimes it’s difficult to drive out from our driveway”.

b. “I totally approve of this proposal, 90% of the cars that park on our Grove during the day are NOT residents of the street. I would even go a far to suggest the yellow line went totally up one side of the street so cars can only park on one side”.

17. Comments from the objecting residents include:

a. “The yellow lines are completely useless. In 16 years I have been living on this street, there has never been an incident where cars were parked on your proposed yellow lines”.

b. “Having these markings on the road gives way to abuse from the parking wardens who will seize every opportunity to leave fines in the windows”.

§ Officer’s Response(s):

̵ There are mixed views from residents whether there is a problem or not. Parking on the entry curve to the street, and within 1m of driveways, is prohibited under the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, therefore the proposed restrictions will reinforce compliance with the existing law whether the issues are real or perceived.

̵ Officers do not consider the enforcement of parking laws by parking wardens to be ‘abuse’.

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 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

20. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standards signage.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	G156.2017 Amberley Grove - BYLs	21

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

22 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1765)

Report no: TRS2018/1/11

Wilson Grove - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Wilson Grove, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s):-

- The proposed restriction will improve the level of service for accessibility and sight distance within the cul de sac turning area.

- The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as shown attached as Appendix 1 will promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Background

2. Wilson Grove is a cul-de-sac which intersects with Poto Road in Maungaraki.

3. A karate dojo/ hall is located within the grove.

4. Council received a request from the resident at #14 Wilson Grove to improve parking etiquette in the street.

5. Concern was raised about vehicles parking over the driveways of #12-16 Wilson Grove (within the turning area of the cul-de-sac).

Discussion

6. Parking demand within the grove is occasionally heavy when Karate training is being held at the hall at #7 Wilson Grove.

7. Parking within the turning area of the cul-de-sac is already an offence under the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 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 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…’.

8. An existing No Stopping At All Times Restriction (broken yellow lines) prevents parking within a section of the turning area and outside the driveways to #14 to #18 Wilson Grove.

9. Vehicles are often parked within the turning area and the approach to the turning area, where there are no existing parking restrictions, reducing the level of service for accessibility and visibility for residents.

10. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed will encourage compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, ensuring driveways will not be blocked and allowing adequate manoeuvring space within the turning area.

Options

11. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current level of service for accessibility and sight distance; or

b. to install the proposed changes to improve the level of service for accessibility and sight distance.

Consultation

12. Consultation documents were delivered to 12 directly affected properties; from #10 to #19 Wilson Grove inclusive.

13. Six questionnaires were returned; five (83%) in favour and one (17%) against the proposal.

14. Initial consultation with residents excluded the section of broken yellow lines outside #10 Wilson Grove. After the addition of this section of the restriction was suggested by a resident during consultation, we went back to the resident at #10 who agreed with the additional restriction.

15. Some comments from supporting residents include:

a. “We would welcome more yellow lines in the Grove. It is a regular occurrence for one of the local residents to park his car on the lines already there, though, so hopefully with increased lines this could be prevented”.

b. “To stop people parking opposite one another, can the yellow line be continued past the driveway to No. 19?”

Officers’ response

- We have amended the original proposal by extending the Parking Restrictions by another 10m at the entrance to the cul de sac turning area (outside #10 Wilson Grove).This will prevent vehicles being parked opposite each other.

16. The comment from the opposing resident:

a. “Total waste of time and money!! We have been here for seven years, non-issue and we don’t use it. Find something more worthwhile to spend our money on!”

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

19. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Wilson Grove - No Stopping At All Times Restrictions	25

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Victor Leal

Assistant Traffic Engineer

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

26 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1797)

Report no: TRS2018/1/12

Athlone Crescent - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Athlone Crescent as shown in Appendix 1 attached.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s)

̵ That it will ensure adequate carriageway width for two way traffic along the sharp bend at the entrance to the street.

Background

2. Council received a request from the resident at 29 Athlone Crescent to introduce parking restrictions in the street. Two concerns were raised:

a. Vehicles parking over his driveway; and

b. Vehicles parking at the end of the cul-de-sac, restricting space for other vehicles to manoeuvre.

Discussion

3. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed will ensure adequate space for all vehicles at the cul-de-sac.

4. Vehicles are already prohibited from parking within 1m of a driveway, and close to corners, bends etc. by the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004. The proposed restrictions will reinforce these requirements and encourage compliance with the Rule.

Options

5. The options are:

a. To leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current level of service, or

b. Install the proposed parking restrictions and improve access and maneuverability.

Consultation

6. Consultation documents were delivered to the ten directly affected properties.

7. Three questionnaires were returned; all in support of the proposal.

8. One comment included “This will make access to driveways easier, and allow for better access for emergency services and public utilities”.

Legal Considerations

9. These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2007 (Amended 20 November 2014).

Financial Considerations

10. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

11. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Athlone Crescent - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 1.2018 17/1797 Cycle 1 2018	29

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

29 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1806)

Report no: TRS2018/1/13

Cambridge Terrace - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Cambridge Terrace as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s):

- The proposed changes will improve the sight distance for vehicles exiting these driveways, without reducing the number of on street parking spaces.

Background

2. Council received a request from 11 residents on Cambridge Terrace (Nos. 71A to 76/1) to improve parking etiquette and accessibility in the street.

3. The concern is that vehicles parked too close to residential driveways restrict visibility of oncoming traffic.

Discussion

4. The complainants’ homes are located close to the Waterloo Interchange train station (within 50m – 150m of the southern rail car park).

5. Parking demand is high on Cambridge Terrace as a result of overflow parking from the rail Park N Ride.

6. Cambridge Terrace is classified as a Primary Collector under the One Network Road Classification.

7. Average annual daily traffic volumes on Cambridge Terrace are in the order of 8,000 to 9,000 vehicles per day.

8. An existing P120 No Stopping At All Times Restriction ends immediately north of the complainants’ homes, outside No. 77 Cambridge Terrace. This restriction means that the first all day parking available for commuters is outside the complainants’ homes.

9. The complainants originally requested that the existing P120 restriction be extended to the south to include the area outside their homes.

10. Council officers assessed this request but considered that extending the P120 restriction would simply transfer the same issue to the adjacent homes to the south.

11. The proposal now involves marking parking bays outside the complainant’s homes which meet the best practice guidelines for parking bay length and maximising the separation between parking spaces and the adjacent driveways, as shown attached as Appendix 1.

12. The minimum recommended parking space length required to park a single car is 5m. For two cars a minimum length of 10m is recommended.

13. If an intermediate distance (between 5m and 10m) is provided, motorists are often encouraged to try and fit two cars into a space that can realistically only fit a single vehicle. This leads to vehicles being parked too close to adjacent driveways.

14. The proposal involves reducing the length of the parking spaces outside Nos. 71, 73 and 74/1 Cambridge Terrace to align with these recommended lengths and marking No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (dashed yellow lines) to prevent parking too close to driveways.

15. Although the kerb side length available for parking will reduce, the number of legal parking spaces will not change as a result of the proposal.

Options

16. The options are:

a. to leave the parking as it is and accept the current level of safety for accessibility and road safety; or

b. to install the proposed changes to improve visibility and improve the level of service for accessibility and road safety.

Consultation

17. As the original submission was from all 11 directly affected residents, additional consultation has not been deemed necessary.

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

20. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Cambridge Terrace - No Stopping At All Times Restrictions	32

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Victor Leal

Assistant Traffic Engineer

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

33 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

06 December 2017

File: (17/1865)

Report no: TRS2018/1/14

Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Titiro Moana Road

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 in Titiro Moana Road, attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s)

- The proposed changes will improve accessibility to the street and road safety in the vicinity of blind corner.

Background

2. Council received a request from a local resident to improve visibility and safety along this section of road.

3. Concern was raised over the lack of visibility when vehicles are parked along the inside of this corner.

Discussion

4. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as shown in Appendix 1 will prevent vehicles from parking on this corner and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 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 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…’.

Options

5. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the visibility issue will remain; or

b. to install the proposed markings and improve visibility and safety.

Consultation

6. Consultation documents were delivered to 16 local residents

7. Five (31%) questionnaires were returned; all five were in support of the proposal.

8. Some comments included

a. “Go ahead, great idea”.

b. “Good idea as quite a few people use the driveways as drop-off areas, plus visibility is zero warning if you are driving around corner”.

c. “Fine by us, thanks. Would also be good to paint a centreline along the road in this location as many people fail to keep left”.

9. The Petone Community Board will consider the recommendation at its meeting on 7 February 2018 and the resolution will be tabled at the Traffic Subcommittee meeting on 12 February 2018.

Legal Considerations

10. These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2007 (Amended 20 November 2014).

Financial Considerations

11. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/20187 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

12. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it improves accessibility for the benefit of all road users. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	G173.2017 Titiro Moana Road #12 - BYLs to improve visibility	36

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

37 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

12 December 2017

File: (17/1873)

Report no: TRS2018/1/15

Stokes Valley Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Stokes Valley Road as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s)

- The proposed changes will improve accessibility to the street and road safety in the vicinity of the Driveway.

Background

2. Council received a request from the resident at 89 Stokes Valley Road to introduce parking restrictions outside her premises.

3. Vehicles that park here block visibility for entering and exiting the driveway.

Discussion

4. A bus stop is located approximately 10m south of the complainant’s driveway.

5. Kerb extensions are installed approximately 3.5m to the north of the complainant’s driveway to assist pedestrians crossing to and from the Stokes Valley Kindergarten.

6. Parking demand is high in the area during Kindergarten drop off/pick up times.

7. There is insufficient kerb side space between the driveways to #89 and #93 Stokes Valley Road for a car to park without obstructing one of the driveways (a minimum of 7m is required, however only 6.3m is available between the prolongation of the driveways).

8. A similar kerb side distance on the opposite side of the road (between #76 Stokes Valley Road and the marching ground driveway) already has broken yellow lines marked.

9. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed will improve visibility for the residents of #89 and #93 and be consistent with the surrounding markings.

10. The proposed restrictions would also improve access for buses entering the bus stop.

Options

11. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current level of service and visibility issue will remain; or

b. to install the proposed changes to improve visibility and safety.

Consultation

12. Consultation documents were delivered to the two directly affected properties (#89 and #93 Stokes Valley Road).

13. Both respondents support the proposal. Some comments included:

a. “Yes, this is exactly what we want. Much safer for all concerned”

b. “I fully support the extension of the yellow lines. It has become increasingly frustrating trying to safely enter and exit our driveway over the last three years”.

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	G173.2017 Stokes Valley Rd - Proposed BYLs	40

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

41 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

21 December 2017

File: (17/1896)

Report no: TRS2018/1/16

Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - 90 Dowse Drive

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the extension of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions outside Nos. 90 and 90a Dowse Drive, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the extension of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions outside Nos. 90 and 90a Dowse Drive as attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s)

- The proposed changes will improve the road safety level of service for the residents of No’s 90 and 90a Dowse Drive with no loss of on-street parking.

Background

2. Council received multiple requests from the residents at Nos. 90 and 90a Dowse Drive, to improve accessibility and visibility when exiting their shared driveway.

3. The complainants stated that vehicles frequently park too close to their shared driveway, which forces them to cross the road centreline when exiting to the left.

4. Vehicles parked close to the driveway also restrict the sight distance available for exiting vehicles.

Discussion

5. The shared driveway for the two properties is on the outside of a relatively tight horizontal curve (approximately 35m radius) which restricts the sight distance to approaching vehicles.

6. Vehicles parked close to the driveway further restrict the sight distance.

7. It is proposed to extend the existing No Stopping At All Times parking restriction approximately 3m to the east as shown attached at Appendix 1.

8. The proposed restriction will prevent vehicles parking too close to the complainant’s driveway, improving sight distance and accessibility.

9. The proposal will not result in the removal of any on road parking spaces.

10. To further improve safety along the bend, officers also consulted with nearby residents to extend the restriction over the neighbouring driveway (Nos. 92 - 94). However, the affected residents did not support this addition, as reflected in the consultation below.

Options

11. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current level of service for safety and accessibility; or

b. install two broken yellow lines outside Nos. 90 and 90a, improving the levels of service for both safety and accessibility; or

c. install two broken yellow lines outside Nos. 90 and 90a and extend the restriction over the driveways of Nos. 92-94.

Consultation

12. Consultation letters were delivered to seven local residents.

13. Four responses (57%) were received.

14. There were no objections to painting two broken yellow lines outside Nos. 90 and 90a.

15. Four responses (100%) opposed installing broken yellow lines over the driveways of Nos. 92-94.

16. Some responses from objectors include:

a. “I have never seen cars park over driveways here, only stopping temporarily. So I’m not sure there is a problem”.

b. “I have lived down the driveway at No94c for nearly years and there have been no issues of any great concern over that time”.

17. Officers’ response

- We acknowledge the local opposition to installing broken yellow lines over the driveway of Nos. 92-94, and recommend that this part of the proposal not be adopted.

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

20. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it improves safety for the benefit of all road users. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions – 90 Dowse Drive	44

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Victor Leal

Assistant Traffic Engineer

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

45 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

21 December 2017

File: (17/1897)

Report no: TRS2018/1/17

Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Udy Street

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 in Udy Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the Council approves the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Udy Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s)

- The proposed changes will improve the sight distance for vehicles exiting the Working Men’s Club without the reducing the number of vehicles that can park on street.

Background

2. Council received a request from the Petone Working Men’s Club to improve safety for drivers exiting their premises onto Udy Street.

3. An on-street car park bay is adjacent to, and immediately west of, the Club exit. Vehicles parked towards the front (east) of the bay reduce the visibility for drivers exiting the Club.

4. This section of Udy Street is classified as an Arterial Road under the One Network Road Classification structure.

5. The existing parking bay is 26m long and can fit a maximum of four cars.

Discussion

6. The proposed Parking Restrictions would shorten the parking bay to 22m and would still accommodate four cars (ie, no reduction in the on street parking availability).

Options

7. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current road safety level of service; or

b. to install the proposed changes to improve visibility and increase the road safety level of service.

Consultation

8. A consultation document was delivered to the one directly affected property – Hutt Wholesale Cars. They are in support of the proposal.

9. The Petone Community Board will consider the recommendation at its meeting on 7 February 2018 and the resolution will be tabled at the Traffic Subcommittee meeting on 12 February 2018.

Legal Considerations

10. These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2007 (Amended 20 November 2014).

Financial Considerations

11. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

12. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	G180.2017 Udy Street #39 - BYLs to improve visibility	48

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

49 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

27 December 2017

File: (17/1904)

Report no: TRS2018/1/18

Lincoln Avenue - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Lincoln Avenue as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s)

̵ The proposed changes will improve accessibility to Lincoln Avenue and road safety in the vicinity of the intersection with High Street.

Background

2. Council received two requests; one each from a resident of Lincoln Avenue and the River of Life church to improve safety in the vicinity of the intersection with High Street.

3. The concern expressed is that at times vehicles park on both side of the road reducing the effective carriageway width to one lane forcing drivers to cross the centreline into oncoming traffic therefore causing a safety hazard for all road users.

4. The resident also noted that at times, due to the reduced carriageway width, drivers can be stranded in the middle of the intersection of High Street with Lincoln Avenue as there is not sufficient space to enter the street.

Discussion

5. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed will ensure adequate carriageway width for two-way traffic at the entrance to Lincoln Avenue, improving safety and accessibility to the street.

6. This proposal would result in the removal of four existing on-street parks (two outside #784 High Street and two outside #7 Lincoln Avenue).

Options

7. The options are:

i. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept that the safety and accessibility issues will remain; or

ii. to install the proposed changes to improve safety at the intersection and ensure adequate carriageway width for two-way traffic at the entrance to Lincoln Avenue; or

iii. to end the proposed restrictions after the driveway of Nº 784 High Street to ensure adequate carriageway width for two-way traffic in the vicinity of the intersection (the two parking spaces outside #7 Lincoln Avenue would be retained).

Consultation

8. Consultation documents were delivered to the eight directly affected properties at Nºs 7, 8, 9, 9A, 10 and 11 Lincoln Avenue, Nºs 774 and 784 High Street and the original complainant who lives further along Lincoln Avenue.

· Six (75%) questionnaires were returned.

̵ Three (50%) in support of the proposal.

̵ Three (50%) objected to the proposal.

§ The reasons given by the objectors were:

̵ This is opposite our house; therefore the on-street parking outside our house would always be full and unavailable to us. Instead I would recommend widening the road as there is a wide berm currently and this could be reduced.

̵ Seeing as I am a home owner, why should my visitors be forced to park halfway down my street? The problem is because of the church's over crowed parking problem. Why should it become mine? Put yellow lines on the church side.

̵ You may be aware that Council recently issued a resource consent for 784 High Street to operate as a boarding house. The key issue that needed to be addressed during the consent process was parking provision requirements. The consent was granted considering the number of on-street parks available in the vicinity of the property. In now proposing a parking restriction on Lincoln Avenue Council is undermining the grounds on which it granted the resource consent.

§ Officers’ responses:

̵ Widening the carriageway is not commensurate with the benefits.

̵ One of the options considered was to install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions along the south side of the road (outside the church) however this would have required the loss of eight parking spaces to achieve the same benefit.

̵ The 2017 Resource Consent for #784 High Street considered that ‘any additional parking requirements can be serviced by kerbside parking in front of the application site’. As the current proposal involves the removal of only four parking spaces, and there would be adequate on street parking available within short walking distance of #784 High Street (including across the street) it is considered that the proposal does not undermine the grounds on which the Resource Consent was granted.

Legal Considerations

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

Financial Considerations

10. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

11. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it improves safety for the benefit of all road users. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Lincoln Avenue - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/1904	53

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

53 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

27 December 2017

File: (17/1905)

Report no: TRS2018/1/19

Marina Grove - Proposed Parking Changes

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to install No Stopping At All Times Restrictions and to change the existing P120 Parking Restrictions to apply from Monday to Friday only in Marina Grove as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) approve the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Marina Grove as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report; and

(ii) approve the modification of the P120 Parking Restrictions to apply from Monday to Friday only in Marina Grove as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s)

̵ That it will ensure adequate carriageway width for two way traffic along the sharp bend at the entrance to the street.

̵ To increase the availability of unrestricted parking spaces for residents and their visitors during the weekends.

Background

2. In June 2017, Council received requests from the Waste Management company, the New Zealand Fire Service and three residents of Marina Grove to improve accessibility along the street.

3. The concern expressed is that, with vehicles parked on both sides of the street, the effective carriageway width is reduced to a single lane which makes access along the street difficult, especially for service and emergency vehicles.

4. Officers note that this has been an ongoing issue as consultation has been carried out three times (in January 1999, October 2010 and July 2017) seeking residents’ support to restrict on-street parking to one side of the street only.

5. In September 2017, Officers presented a report to the Traffic Subcommittee recommending the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions along the north side of Marina Grove.

̵ That proposal required the removal of 17 car parks along the street, improving accessibility but reducing the on-street car park availability by approximately half.

̵ Feedback from the residents who attended the Traffic Subcommittee meeting was mixed, therefore the Traffic Subcommittee decided that officers should meet further with residents to find a more widely accepted solution.

6. Councillor Simon Edwards offered to organise a public meeting with the residents of Marina Grove to further discuss and agree on any restrictions.

̵ This meeting occurred on Monday 4 December 2017, at 6:00pm in the Hutt City Council Chambers, Laings Road, Lower Hutt.

7. At this meeting, a consensus of residents agreed to:

̵ install No Stopping At All Times Restriction across the existing P120 parking space outside Nº 6 (western side);

̵ extend the existing No Stopping At All Times Restriction on the eastern side of the street between Nº 5 and Nº 9;

̵ change the existing Monday to Sunday P120 Parking Restrictions along the grove to apply from Mondays to Fridays only; and

̵ reduce all parking bay widths to 2.0 meters and mark longitudinal white lines on all parking bays along the street to encourage drivers to park as close as possible to the kerb.

Discussion

8. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed would ensure adequate carriageway width for two way traffic along the sharp bend on the start of the street alleviating the accessibility issue while retaining a combination of long term and unrestricted parks.

9. The removal of P120 Parking Restrictions during the weekends would increase the number of unrestricted parks available along the street during the weekends therefore improving the level of service for residents and their visitors.

10. This proposal would require the removal of four P120 car parks along the street (outside #5, #6 and #7 Marina Grove).

11. Reducing the parking bay widths to 2.0 meters and installing longitudinal whites lines on the parking bays would encourage drivers to park closer to the kerb.

Options

12. The options are:

i. to leave the area as it is and accept that the accessibility level of service issue will remain unchanged;

ii. to install the proposed changes to improve accessibility to the street and increase the availability of unrestricted parking spaces for residents during the weekends.

Consultation

13. Councillor Simon Edwards and Deputy Mayor David Bassett invited all residents of Marina Grove to a public meeting on 4 December 2017, at 6:00pm in the Council Chambers in order to discuss options that can appropriately alleviate/address the raised issues.

· Approximately 20 residents of Marina Grove attended the meeting and a consensus of residents agreed to the proposed changes.

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 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

16. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government as defined in the Act. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings and signage.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Marina Grove - Proposed Parking Changes 17/1905	57

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

59 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

27 December 2017

File: (17/1906)

Report no: TRS2018/1/20

Poole Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Poole Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approve the installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Poole Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s)

̵ The proposal would reduce the likelihood of drivers parking in unsuitable locations along the street and improve road safety and accessibility in the area.

̵ The proposal would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Background

2. Council has received numerous requests from residents of Taita and attendees of Walter Nash Centre to improve road safety and parking etiquette in the area.

3. The concern expressed is that, due to the high parking demand in the area, drivers frequently park in unsuitable locations along corners and encroaching driveways therefore creating a safety hazard for all road users and making access to private properties difficult.

4. The residents also note that vehicles parked along the corners obstruct drivers’ visibility to oncoming traffic when exiting the intersections along Poole Street.

Discussion

5. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed would maintain access to private properties, improve parking etiquette in the area and reduce visibility obstruction at the intersections along Poole Street, improving the levels of service for accessibility and road safety.

6. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions as proposed would prevent vehicles from parking on corners and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 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 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…’.

7. The proposal is in keeping with the Parking Policy which places a high priority on maintaining existing property access in Residential ‘Live and Play’ areas.

8. The proposal would not result in the removal of any legal on street parking spaces.

Options

9. The options are:

i. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept that the current levels of service for accessibility and road safety would remain;

ii. to install the proposed changes, improving parking etiquette in the area and improving the levels of service for accessibility and road safety; or

iii. to install the proposed changes, but delete the broken yellow lines from outside driveways where residents failed to respond during consultation.

Consultation

10. In October 2017, Council officers carried out two rounds of door-knocking consultation to all 34 properties along Poole Street to find out which residents wanted No Stopping At All Times Restrictions installed across their driveways.

· 15 (44%) answered the door.

̵ 11 (73%) advised they want No Stopping At All Times Restrictions across their driveways.

̵ Four (27%) advised they do not want No Stopping At All Times Restrictions across their driveways.

11. As officers were not able to contact some of the residents, a third consultation round was organized.

12. Consultation documents were delivered to the 34 directly affected properties from Nºs 1 to 38 Poole Street, Nºs 1 and 10 Hooper Grove and Nº 6 Macky Street.

· Eight (24%) questionnaires were returned.

̵ Seven (88%) in support of the proposal.

̵ One (12%) did not specify his/her position towards the proposal.

13. Where residents have stated during consultation that they do not want broken yellow lines outside their driveways, these have been removed from the proposal.

14. Where residents have failed to respond during consultation, the proposed broken yellow lines outside their driveway have been retained in the proposal.

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

17. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it improves safety for the benefit of all road users. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Poole Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions 17/1906	62

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

65 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

27 December 2017

File: (17/1907)

Report no: TRS2018/1/21

Holborn Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to retrospectively resolve/legalise the No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Holborn Drive as shown attached as Appendices 1 to 3 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(i) resolve the No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Holborn Drive as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii) resolve the No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Holborn Drive as shown attached as Appendix 2 to the report; and

(iii) resolve the No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Holborn Drive as shown attached as Appendix 3 to the report.

For the reason(s)

̵ The parking restrictions improve the level of service for accessibility and road safety.

̵ That existing parking restrictions need to be formally resolved by Council so they can be legally enforced.

Background

2. Council received multiple requests from a resident of Holborn Drive to improve safety in the vicinity of the intersection with George Street.

3. The concern expressed is that vehicles parked on the kerb side force drivers to cross the centreline into oncoming traffic on the approach to a blind bend and intersection.

Discussion

4. Council officers investigated the situation and propose extending the existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Appendix 1) to prevent parking in the vicinity of the corner, existing bus stops and the intersection with George Street.

5. Council Officers considered the safety risk on the corner and decided to install the broken yellow lines immediately (November 2017) and subsequently seek Council resolution for the restriction.

6. Council officers determined that the existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Appendix 1) have not been formally resolved by Council and cannot be legally enforced.

7. Two further areas of existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (Appendices 2 and 3) have also not been formally resolved by Council.

8. Council Officers have considered all the existing restrictions and determined that they are appropriate and improve accessibility and road safety.

9. This report seeks Council’s formal resolution of the No Stopping At All Times Restrictions installed in November 2017, as well as the other areas of exiting restrictions shown on Appendices 1, 2 and 3, so they can be legally enforced.

Options

10. The options are:

a. to remove the existing restrictions which may reduce safety for road users; or

b. to resolve the No Stopping At All Times Restrictions so they can be legally enforced.

Consultation

11. As the safety risk in the vicinity of the intersection with George Street is considered significant, no consultation has been undertaken.

12. As the existing No Stopping At All Times Restrictions have been installed for many years without objection, no 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 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

15. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it improves safety for the benefit of all road users. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Holborn Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Appendix 1 17/1907	68
2 ⇩	Holborn Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Appendix 2 17/1907	69
3 ⇩	Holborn Drive - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Appendix 3 17/1907	70

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

71 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

28 December 2017

File: (17/1908)

Report no: TRS2018/1/22

Peterkin Street - Proposed Mobility Park Restrictions

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s retrospective approval/ resolution for two Mobility Park Restrictions in Peterkin Street, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council rretrospectively resolve the two existing Mobility Park Restrictions in Peterkin Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s)

̵ That parking restrictions need to be formally resolved by Council so they can be legally enforced.

Background

2. Council received a request from CCS Disability Action to complete the installation of two Mobility Parks in Peterkin Street.

3. The concern expressed is that the already installed mobility parks have no signage therefore they are not compliant with legislation.

4. Council officers investigated the situation and found out that, besides not having the required signage, there is also no formal Council resolution for these restrictions therefore they cannot be legally enforced.

Discussion

5. The two Mobility Park Restrictions have already been installed to provide allocated parking spaces for mobility impaired individuals.

6. This report seeks to formally approve these restrictions so they can be legally enforced.

Options

7. The options are:

i. to remove the existing restrictions and reduce the current level of service for mobility impaired drivers; or

ii. to resolve the two mobility park restrictions so they can be legally enforced, maintaining the current level of service for mobility impaired drivers.

Consultation

8. As the mobility parks are already installed, no consultation has been undertaken.

Legal Considerations

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

Financial Considerations

10. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

11. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings and signage.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Peterkin Street - Proposed Mobility Park Restrictions 17/1908	74

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

74 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

28 December 2017

File: (17/1909)

Report no: TRS2018/1/23

Wainui Road - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the installation of P15 Parking Restrictions from 7:30am to 9:00am and 4:00pm to 6:00pm, Mondays to Fridays only, in Wainui Road, attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the installation of P15 Parking Restrictions from 7:30am to 9:00am and 4:00pm to 6:00pm, Mondays to Fridays only, in Wainui Road attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s)

̵ That there are limited parking options for parents and caregivers dropping off/picking up children at the childcare centre.

Background

2. Council received a request from the manager of Early Years Childcare Centre, in Wainui Road, to provide short term parking in the vicinity of their premises during the centre’s opening/closing times.

3. The concern expressed is that, due to the high parking demand in the area, at times there are no parks available in the vicinity of the childcare centre for parents and caregivers to drop off/pick up children.

4. The childcare centre has four off-street parking spaces but these are not sufficient to adequately cater for all parents/caregivers during peak times.

Discussion

5. The installation of P15 Parking Restrictions as proposed will increase parking turnover on two currently unrestricted parks during the childcare centre opening/closing times therefore increasing the likelihood of parks beings available for parents/caregivers dropping off/picking up children at the childcare centre.

6. The proposal is in keeping with the Parking Policy which places a high priority on drop off/ pick up zones in ‘Work and Learn’ areas.

Options

7. The options are:

i. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept that the current level of service for parents/caregivers dropping off/picking up children at the childcare centre will remain; or

ii. to install the proposed changes and increase turnover on the two parking spaces adjacent to the childcare centre therefore improving the level of service for parents/caregivers whose children attend the childcare centre.

Consultation

8. Consultation documents were delivered to the eight directly affected properties at numbers 2A, 2B, 2C, 1/4, 2/4, 4A, 4B and 6 Wainui Road.

· Five (63%) questionnaires/responses were returned, including a verbal response.

̵ four (80%) in support of the proposal; and

̵ one (20%) objects to the proposal.

§ The reasons given by the objector were:

̵ This is a very busy road and with the childcare centre and bakery across the road, it is already extremely hard to find parking from 7:00am to 7:00pm. I would like to see more parking rather than reducing the number for local residents.

§ Officers’ response:

̵ The difficulty in finding available parking during the day confirms the need for short term parking restrictions in order to improve the level of service for customers of the childcare centre.

̵ The addition of parking spaces is not possible in this location.

9. The Petone Community Board will consider the recommendation at its meeting on 7 February 2018 and the resolution will be tabled at the Traffic Subcommittee meeting on 12 February 2018.

Legal Considerations

10. These restrictions are made pursuant to the provisions of the Hutt City Council Traffic Bylaw 2007 (Amended 20 November 2014).

Financial Considerations

11. These changes can be funded from Council’s 2017/2018 operational budget.

Other Considerations

12. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard signage.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Wainui Road - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions 17/1909	77

Author: Sylvio Leal

Traffic Engineer

Reviewed By: Zackary Moodie

Traffic Engineer - Network Operations

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

78 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

11 January 2018

File: (18/9)

Report no: TRS2018/1/24

Collingwood Street - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions

Purpose of Report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the extension of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions in Collingwood Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council approves the extension of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions outside Nos. 18, 20 and 23 Collingwood Street as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

For the reason(s):

- The proposed changes will improve the levels of service for accessibility and road safety for the residents of No’s. 18, 20 and 23 Collingwood Street, with little impact for on-street parking availability.

Background

2. Council received a request from the resident at No. 20 Collingwood Street, to improve the visibility for vehicles exiting his driveway and that of his neighbour (at No. 18 Collingwood Street).

3. There are parking spaces of 11.7m long and 8.3m long outside Nos. 20 and 18 Collingwood Street, respectively.

4. The residents claim that each of these spaces are frequently occupied by two-three vehicles, causing partial obstruction to these driveways.

5. Collingwood Street is classified as an Access Road under the One Network Road Classification.

Discussion

6. The minimum recommended length required to park two cars is 10m. For three cars a minimum length of 16m is recommended.

7. The proposal involves reducing the length of the parking spaces outside Nos. 18 and 20 Collingwood Street to align with these recommended lengths.

8. This proposal will reduce the parking space outside No. 20 from 11.7m to 10m, which is adequate for two car parks.

9. This proposal will reduce the parking space outside No. 18 from 8.3m to 5m, which is adequate for one car park.

10. The number of legally available car parks does not change.

11. The installation of No Stopping At All Times Restrictions, as proposed, will improve visibility for drivers exiting these driveways.

12. During consultation, the resident at No. 23 Collingwood Street asked whether the No Stopping At All Times Restriction outside their house could be extended to the north by 5m to make the two restrictions in this area continuous, in order to improve visibility when exiting their driveway. This modification was subsequently added to the proposal.

Options

13. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current levels of service for accessibility and road safety; or

b. to install the proposed changes to improve visibility and increase the level of service for accessibility and road safety.

Consultation

14. Consultation documents were initially delivered to three local residents (Nos. 18, 21 and 23 Collingwood Street). The complainant at No. 20 Collingwood Street had already expressed support for the proposal.

15. Two responses were received; both in support of this proposal.

16. During consultation, the resident at No. 23 Collingwood Street asked whether the No Stopping At All Times Restriction outside their house could be extended to the north in order to improve visibility when exiting their driveway.

17. New consultation documents were delivered to three additional local residents (Nos. 90, 92 and 94 Trafalgar Street) to gauge support for this additional restriction. All three were in support.

18. One comment from the second round of consultation includes:

“As existing system creates restricted vision at Give Way sign Trafalgar Street/Collingwood Street I fully support this.”

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

21. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it improves safety for the benefit of all road users. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Collingwood Street - No Stopping At All Times Restrictions	81

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Victor Leal

Assistant Traffic Engineer

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager

82 12 February 2018

Traffic Subcommittee

30 January 2018

File: (18/81)

Report no: TRS2018/1/25

Taungata Road - Proposed No Stopping At All Times 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 in Taungata Road, as shown attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Recommendations

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

For the reason(s):

- The proposed changes will improve the levels of service for accessibility and road safety in the vicinity of the intersection.

- The proposed restrictions will prevent vehicles from parking within the intersection and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Background

2. Council received a request from a local resident to introduce parking restrictions in the vicinity of the intersection between Taungata Road and Marine Drive.

3. Vehicles parked within the intersection create a safety hazard by maneuvering within the intersection and restricting sight distances.

Discussion

4. Taungata Road forms a Y intersection with Marine Drive on the outside of a moderate horizontal curve.

5. The intersection is somewhat unusual as there is a central island within the intersection which accommodates a bus stop and creates two short ‘slip lanes’ between Taungata Road and Marine Drive, as shown attached as Appendix 1.

6. Road widths between 4.5m and 6.5m on Taungata Road mean that parked cars force motorists to cross the centreline when approaching the intersection.

7. The unusual layout of the intersection means results in restricted sight distances, particularly when entering Taungata Road from Marine Drive.

8. Cars parked within the intersection further restrict sight distance.

9. Marine Drive has a posted speed restriction of 70 km/h past the intersection. There is anecdotal evidence that motorists frequently enter the intersection at speeds in excess of 50 km/h from Marine Drive.

10. The proposal involves introducing No Stopping at All Times Restrictions within the intersection, including around the central island to prevent vehicles restricting sight distance and reducing the carriageway width.

11. The proposed restrictions would improve visibility for vehicles entering Taungata Road, increasing the level of service for Road Safety.

12. The restrictions would also reduce instances of vehicle maneuvering within the intersection, reducing the likelihood for vehicle conflict.

13. The proposed restrictions will prevent vehicles from parking within the intersection and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 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 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…’.

14. The proposed restriction would remove parking spaces that could currently be occupied by up to ten vehicles, however these existing spaces are not legal when considered against the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Options

15. The options are:

a. to leave the area as it is without any restrictions and accept the current levels of service for accessibility and road safety; or

b. to install the proposed changes to improve visibility and increase the levels of service for accessibility and road safety.

Consultation

16. Consultation documents were delivered to ten local residents.

17. Four responses were received (40%); all in support of this proposal.

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 2017/2018 road markings budget.

Other Considerations

20. In making this recommendation, officers have given careful consideration to the purpose of local government in section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. Officers believe that this recommendation falls within the purpose of the local government in that it ensures access for emergency vehicles at all times. It does this in a way that is cost-effective because it utilises standard road markings.

Appendices

No.	Title	Page
1 ⇩	Taungata Road - No Stopping At All Times Restrictions	85

Author: Martin Barry

Contractor

Reviewed By: Victor Leal

Assistant Traffic Engineer

Approved By: Damon Simmons

Traffic Asset Manager