I hereby give notice that an extraordinary meeting of the Planning Committee will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

 

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 24 June 2021

11.30am or at the conclusion of Governing Body, whichever is later

Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

 

Kōmiti Whakarite Mahere / Planning Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Chris Darby

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Josephine Bartley

 

Members

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

Cr Tracy Mulholland

 

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

IMSB Member Liane Ngamane

 

Cr Pippa Coom

Cr Greg Sayers

 

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

Cr Desley Simpson, JP

 

Cr Angela Dalton

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

Cr Alf Filipaina

Cr Wayne Walker

 

Cr Christine Fletcher, QSO

Cr John Watson

 

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

Cr Paul Young

 

IMSB Member Hon Tau Henare

 

 

Cr Shane Henderson

 

 

Cr Richard Hills

 

 

(Quorum 11 members)

 

 

 

Kalinda Iswar

Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor

21 June 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 021 723 228

Email: kalinda.iswar@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 


 


 

Terms of Reference

 

Responsibilities

 

This committee guides the physical development and growth of Auckland through a focus on land use, transport and infrastructure strategies and policies relating to planning, growth, housing and the appropriate provision of enabling infrastructure, as well as programmes and strategic projects associated with these activities. The committee will establish an annual work programme outlining key focus areas in line with its key responsibilities, which include:

 

·         relevant regional strategy and policy

·         transportation

·         infrastructure strategy and policy

·         Unitary Plan, including plan changes (but not any wholesale review of the Plan)

·         Resource Management Act and relevant urban planning legislation framework

·         oversight of Council’s involvement in central government strategies, plans or initiatives that impact on Auckland’s future land use and infrastructure

·         Auckland Plan implementation reporting on priorities and performance measures

·         structure plans and spatial plans

·         housing policy and projects

·         city centre and waterfront development

·         regeneration and redevelopment programmes

·         built and cultural heritage, including public art

·         urban design

·         acquisition of property relating to the committee’s responsibilities and in accordance with the LTP

·         working with and receiving advice from the Heritage Advisory Panel, the Rural Advisory Panel and the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board to give visibility to the issues important to the communities they represent and to help effect change.

 

Powers

 

(i)      All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities, including:

(a)     approval of a submission to an external body

(b)     establishment of working parties or steering groups.

(ii)      The committee has the powers to perform the responsibilities of another committee, where it is necessary to make a decision prior to the next meeting of that other committee.

(iii)     If a policy or project relates primarily to the responsibilities of the Planning Committee, but aspects require additional decisions by the Environment and Climate Change Committee and/or the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee, then the Planning Committee has the powers to make associated decisions on behalf of those other committee(s). For the avoidance of doubt, this means that matters do not need to be taken to more than one of those committees for decisions.

(iii)     The committee does not have:

(a)     the power to establish subcommittees

(b)     powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2).

 


 

Auckland Plan Values

 

The Auckland Plan 2050 outlines a future that all Aucklanders can aspire to. The values of the Auckland Plan 2050 help us to understand what is important in that future:

 

 


 

Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

 

Members of the public

 

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

 

Those who are not members of the public

 

General principles

 

·           Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

·           Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

·           Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

·           In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

 

Members of the meeting

 

·           The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

·           However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

·           All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

 

Independent Māori Statutory Board

 

·           Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

·           Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

 

Staff

 

·           All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

·           Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

 

Local Board members

 

·           Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain.  This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

 

Council Controlled Organisations

 

·           Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.

 

 


Planning Committee

24 June 2021

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        9

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   9

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               9

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          9  

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    9

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          9

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                9

8          2021-2031 Regional Land Transport Plan                                                                 11

9          Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Apologies

 

An apology from Cr E Collins has been received.

 

2          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

There is no confirmation of minutes section.

 

4          Petitions

 

There is no petitions section.

 

5          Public Input

 

There is no public input section.

 

6          Local Board Input

 

There is no local board input section.

 

7          Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local  authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”


Planning Committee

24 June 2021

 

2021-2031 Regional Land Transport Plan

File No.: CP2021/09030

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek Planning Committee’s endorsement of the final 2021-31 Regional Land Transport Plan recommended by the Regional Transport Committee, before being submitted to the Auckland Transport Board for final approval.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The draft 2021-2031 Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) was publicly consulted on between 29 March 2021 and 2 May 2021 using the Special Consultative Procedure. Approximately 5,800 submissions were received.

3.       There were a wide range of responses from the public, local boards, Planning Committee and stakeholder groups. The local boards were strong in their support for more investment in footpaths and asset renewals. The public and stakeholder groups strongly supported investment in travel choices, safety and asset management.

4.       There were two areas of criticism of the draft RLTP:

·   that the programme does not do enough to address climate change and should be substantially reprioritised to increase investment in sustainable modes; and

·   key stakeholders noted that the programme does not do enough to address congestion and needs reprioritisation to address freight connectivity issues.

5.       Significant changes to increase or reprioritise the programme are limited by funding constraints and the impact on other priority areas to enable an effective, efficient and safe transport system in the public interest.

6.       However, several changes are proposed following feedback from the consultation process (including Planning Committee and local board feedback) and the announcements on 4 June 2021 and 13 June 2021 from the Minister of Transport on the New Zealand Upgrade Programme (NZUP) and the Clean Car package respectively. The key amendments to the draft final RLTP are:

·   the addition of a small number of projects;

·   modifications to reflect increased opex for bus services; and

·   modifications to reflect NZUP package changes.

7.       In addition to this, Auckland Transport’s (AT’s) capital programme has been re-profiled to align with the Long-Term Plan. While the total funding is the same over ten years, around $450 million has been shifted from the 2021-26 to the 2026-31 period.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning Committee:

a)      note that the final Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 has been endorsed by the Regional Transport Committee and recommended to you for its endorsement. 

b)      note the changes from the draft Regional Land Transport Plan reflected in the final Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 as outlined in this report.

c)      endorse the final 2021-31 Regional Land Transport Plan for submitting to the Auckland Transport Board for final approval.

d)      note that, as requested by the Planning Committee on 11 March, council and Auckland Transport staff are jointly developing a Transport Emissions Reduction Plan for Auckland that will identify the pathways to support the required emissions reductions reflected in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri, which includes investigating:

i)       the mix of future complementary transport investments that support emissions reduction

ii)       vehicle fleet and fuel decarbonisation;

iii)      land transport pricing reform;

iv)     urban growth management;

v)      road space reallocation;

vi)     behaviour change; and

vii)     addressing inequalities inequities arising from the impacts of decarbonisation.   

Horopaki

Context

8.       The RLTP (Attachment 1) outlines Auckland region’s 10-year investment programme undertaken by AT, Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi), and KiwiRail to improve Auckland’s transport system. It identifies the key land transport objectives, a range of capital and operational expenditure activities, a programme of policy advocacy, and monitoring measures.

9.       The RLTP is the culmination of 15 month’s work combining the Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021 Refresh (ATAP) and the development of the RLTP. AC and AT collaborated to jointly develop the ATAP package with central government, which has been the basis for developing the RLTP. AC and AT worked jointly to align the RLTP with Council’s draft Long Term Plan (LTP).

10.     The statutory role of endorsing and approving the RLTP sits with the Regional Transport Committee and AT Board respectively. However, following the 2020 CCO Review’s recommendations,  Auckland Council’s Planning Committee now has a non-statutory role in endorsing the RLTP.

11.     The Planning Committee, on 11 March 2021, endorsed the draft RLTP to proceed for consultation and requested Council and AT staff jointly develop a Transport Emissions Reduction Plan for Auckland that will identify the pathways to support the required emissions reductions reflected in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri. A project and engagement plan will be put to the Planning Committee and the AT Board for endorsement by August 2021, with the work anticipated to be complete by December 2021.

12.     Consultation on the draft RLTP was undertaken between 29 March 2021 and 2 May 2021.

13.     The Regional Transport Committee has considered the results of this consultation, along with other external changes, and now recommend the Planning Committee endorse the draft final RLTP before it goes to the AT Board for approval.


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14.     This RLTP represents the most efficient transport package to advance the agreed central government and AC objectives for the transport system within the funding available and the large portion of the program that is already either committed or essential. The package reflects a significant allocation of funding to support improved access, mode shift, greenhouse gas reductions, investing in the Vision Zero approach to road safety – while ensuring an appropriate level of renewals.

15.     The RLTP advances AC’s key objectives of:

·   Enabling Auckland’s growth through a focus on intensification in brownfields areas and with some managed expansion into emerging greenfield areas.

·   Accelerating better travel choices for Auckland.

·   Better connecting people places goods and services.

·   Improving the resilience and sustainability of the transport system, and significantly reducing the greenhouse gas emissions it generates.

·   Making Auckland’s transport system safe by eliminating harm to people.

·   Ensuring value for money across Auckland’s transport system through well targeted investment choices.

16.     However, for Auckland to successfully meet its challenges and realise its full potential, investment in infrastructure and services must run alongside some significant policy and regulatory changes. This RLTP includes several proposed policy responses to realise the full potential of the benefits in investing in infrastructure and services over time. Many of these require significant advocacy from AT and AC to central government to progress, including the following areas:

·   Climate Change (refer to the Climate impact statement section);

·   Access equity (implementing a 50% discount on public transport fares for Community Services Card holders);

·   Safety (penalties, enforcement, speed limit reviews); and

·   Congestion pricing (through The Congestion Question).

Consultation

17.     The draft RLTP was widely consulted on to seek the views of Iwi, elected members, stakeholders and the wider public. AT received 5,818 submissions, including 110 from partners and stakeholders. This included submissions from all 21 local boards who together represent Auckland’s communities. We also received a survey conducted by Councillor Sayers which canvassed the community on a range of issues related to the Rodney area.

18.     The Public Feedback Report is provided in Attachment 2, and the submissions on the RLTP from the local boards, partners and key interest groups is provided in Attachment 3.

Public Feedback

19.     53% of respondents felt that the draft RLTP correctly identified the challenges facing transport in Auckland, down from 73% in the previous 2018 RLTP. Of those that did not select ‘yes’, many took the opportunity to: emphasise the importance of one of the challenges already raised, identify challenges they didn’t support, or give a specific example of a project or activity they felt was important.

20.     For each of the focus areas in the draft RLTP, between 68% - 91% of submitters said they were very or moderately important areas to allocate funding towards, with the highest support being for travel choices, particularly public transport. This strong support for public transport was reflected across all categories in the consultation.

21.     When asked what could be included or excluded from the RLTP, there was a large proportion of submissions identifying that Penlink and Mill Road should be removed, and that more should be done to discourage car use and be stronger on climate change. Overall, many respondents saw roads as a low priority and only “roads” received more responses that they should not be a priority compared to that they should be a priority. Councillor Sayers’ survey highlighted strong support for projects in the Rodney area, including Hill Street and funding for improvements to unsealed roads.

22.     A majority of submitters felt the policy changes proposed were very or moderately important to deliver an effective and efficient transport system.

Mana Whenua Feedback

23.     AT presented at 5 hui attended by 12 Iwi and received written submissions from Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whaimāia and Te Uri o Hau. The key themes from their feedback are summarised as follows:

·   Environment and climate change: There were concerns about the ‘low’ prioritisation of funding for the environment, sustainability, water quality and climate change. Increased population into the region will put further stress on the environment and more resource needs to be dedicated to reducing carbon emissions.

·   Equity: There was feedback that the RLTP needs to give more consideration to lower income communities who are also adversely affected by the Regional Fuel Tax.

·   Travel choice: There was support for greater investment in the public transport network. More needs to be done to reduce public transport journey times and make it more attractive, reliable, affordable and better integrated. There are limited travel choices for communities in the outer areas of Tāmaki Makaurau, who are often lower income earners. There was feedback that more needs to be done to reduce the number of single occupancy vehicles clogging our roads.

·   Electric vehicles and higher standards for fuel emissions: There were concerns that policies that reduce the number of higher-emitting vehicles, or that incentivise the uptake of electric vehicles, can disadvantage lower income households including Māori.

·   Congestion charging: one group expressed support for congestion charging on urban arterial routes that are already well-catered for by public transport. However, concerns were raised about the impact on lower-income households including Māori and other disadvantaged groups if a pricing scheme was implemented without alternatives that meet their needs.

Local Board Feedback

24.     Written submissions were received from all the local boards. The majority of the local boards support the investment in travel choices (active modes and public transport) and asset management. Local boards were particularly strong in their support for improved walking infrastructure and small localised projects to improve community outcomes. The summary of feedback from the local boards is as follows:

·   Local Board Initiatives Fund (previously Local Board Transport Capital Fund: The local boards support the proposed investment package in the RLTP to reinstate the Local Board Transport Capital Fund to $20 million per annum, with many noting that this fund has been crucial in achieving smaller scale local improvements.

·   Climate change and the environment: There was support for the key shift from the previous RLTP to respond to climate change and its impacts but concerns that the actions outlined will not reduce emissions enough to achieve the targets outlined in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri. Other concerns include the resilience of the network to cope with sea level rise and extreme weather events particularly in rural and island areas which could be isolated as a result.


 

·   Mode shift and Travel Choices: Local boards are broadly supportive of the strong focus on providing Aucklanders with better travel choices to enable more sustainable and economically productive transport options to reduce the increase in private vehicle travel. Some boards noted that public and active transport is not a choice available for many Aucklanders, particularly for those in greenfield development, semi-rural and rural areas.

·   Green Infrastructure and the Environment: Many local boards support increased investment in infrastructure that reduces negative environmental impacts, increases restoration and regeneration of the environment and protects biodiversity. There were a number of specific items requested by individual local boards concerning green infrastructure.

·   Accessibility improvements: There was feedback that supports investment in accessibility improvements at bus, train and ferry facilities. This feedback speaks to accessibility for different communities including those with disabilities, the elderly, families with pushchairs. There was also support measures that expand travel choices through assistance to lower income residents, and those living in more deprived areas.

·   Safety: There was support for continued delivery of the safety programme as set out in the Vision Zero for Tāmaki Makaurau Transport Safety Strategy in 2019, and support investment in transport that reduces Deaths and Serious Injuries (DSIs), including some support for a wider investment in safe cycling facilities.

·   Managing transport assets: Several local boards noted that low renewal expenditure over the 2018-2021 period (including due to budget impacts from the Covid-19 pandemic) has created a renewal backlog and support increased investment in road renewal, rehabilitation, and maintenance. Local boards see “like-for-like renewals” as a risk in terms of affecting transformational shifts to meet the challenges of growth and climate change.

·   Unsealed roads and chip seal: There was support for investment in unsealed road and signage improvements. Some local boards advocated for increased renewal, rehabilitation, and maintenance funding to be made available to AT to renew more of the network in any given year.

Stakeholder Group Feedback

25.     A wide variety of stakeholder and advocacy groups submitted on the draft RLTP advocating for a range of activities to: address climate change; reduce congestion; provide choices; and, to enable equitable access (particularly in relation to footpaths).

26.     A snapshot of the key submissions are as follows:

·   The submissions from Bike Auckland and the Public Transport Users Association indicated that whilst they support the direction of the RLTP, more needed to be invested in better travel choices, and less investment in roads.

·   The submission from All Aboard Aotearoa (A coalition of climate and transport advocacy groups, including Generation Zero, Bike Auckland, Movement, Women in Urbanism, Greenpeace, Lawyers for Climate Action NZ) indicated that their view was that the draft RLTP does not comply with the law and should be overhauled because it fails to consider climate change in the context of the public interest. This group has indicated that they may seek a judicial review if the RLTP is approved.

·   New Zealand Automobile Association (AA) indicated that their view was that the current approach ‘would be a transport programme that severely degrades levels of service for the transport mode that the vast majority of Aucklanders depend on’ and called ‘for an appropriate level of balance between encouraging public transport use and the need to adequately support private vehicles’.  Their members indicated that they want to see ‘a balance between roading improvements, and upgrades and extensions to the public transport network – not solely a focus on one or the other’.


 

·   The Auckland Business Forum, Road Transport Association and the National Road Carriers submitted that the RLTP reflects a strategy that is too heavily weighted towards public transport and not enough was being done to ease congestion for people and freight which make up the majority of the users of the network. They would like to see more done to ease congestion with a focus on improving congestion for freight and the economy, rather than arresting the decline.

Proposed Changes to the RLTP following consultation

27.     The feedback from the consultation provided general support for the direction of the RLTP, and particularly strong support for the direction to invest more in public transport. Many wanted more investment in particular areas. However, whilst desirable, the opportunity for additional investment is limited by funding constraints.

28.     Within the feedback, there were two particular areas of criticism of the RLTP. The first was that the programme does not do enough to address climate change and should be substantially reprioritised to increase investment in sustainable modes. The second, from key road user groups, was that the RLTP does not do enough to address congestion and needs reprioritisation to address freight connectivity issues.

29.     In addressing congestion, the emphasis of this RLTP is to focus on providing effective alternative modes of travel to address demand, rather than increasing network capacity for vehicles (especially private single occupancy vehicles). It is acknowledged, however, that there is a risk that the uptake of the alternative modes fails to avoid more severe congestion especially in the medium term. Scenario testing during the ATAP confirms this. For this reason, the RLTP advocates for the implementation of pricing policy levers to accelerate the uptake of alternative modes.

30.     In addressing climate change, the combination of the RLTP investment programme (including the electrification of public transport services) combined with policy measures, which are primarily driven by the central government (including the recently announced Clear Car package), are expected to make significant contributions to the reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions. This is expected to generate a momentum towards a more sustainable transport system and the goal of a net zero transport system by 2050.

31.     We agree with the submitters that it is desirable to seek better outcomes in terms of emission reductions and improving freight connectivity (amongst other areas). However, due to funding constraints there is limited opportunity to reprioritise the RLTP towards one area without compromising other GPS priorities or the overall contribution to efficiency, effectiveness, safety or the public interest.

32.     Having considered the submissions, and noting that there is limited flexibility for significant change, several refinements are proposed to address more localised issues. These are set out below.

Additional projects added

33.     A small number of additional projects have been proposed. These reflect areas where there is significant feedback from consultation and/or local boards; there is a community expectation as a project was included in the previous RLTP; planning was underway; the projects can be funded within the current funding arrangements; and the projects are consistent with the GPS and the intent of ATAP. Projects include:

A)      An additional $20 million investment over ten years in new footpaths, responding particularly to local board advocacy in this area; 

B)      Inclusion of $12.5 million (uninflated) to address safety and efficiency issues with the intersection of Dairy Flat Highway and the Avenue Intersection; and

C)     Providing a 25% local share for Hill Street Intersection (Warkworth).

34.     While there is no new funding available, these projects are proposed to be delivered via opportunities arising in the program when and if funding becomes available due to delivery of another project being delayed.

Changes in timing

35.     Auckland Council’s (AC’s) capital funding for AT has been adjusted to reflect:

A)      AT’s confidence in shifting to a $820 million capital programme in 2021/22;

B)      AT’s capex profile in the draft RLTP which exceeded funding in 2024/25 and 2025/26; and

C)     the Council’s own funding parameters.

36.     While the total funding is the same over ten years, the capital programme has been adjusted, with around $450 million shifted from the 2021-26 to the 2026-31 period.

37.     The main implications of this adjustment are the spreading of investment in the Eastern Busway (Stages 2 – 4), Connected Communities and safety programmes over a longer timeframe.

38.     AT is continuing its preparation for the upcoming pipeline of work to ensure that the projects and programmes in the RLTP are delivered as planned.

39.     The Business Case for Lake Road has also been re-timed by spreading the allocated funding such that $1m is allocated in each of 2021/22 and 2022/2 financial years.

Modifications to reflect increased opex for bus services

40.     AC has approved an additional $5 million p.a. operating funding for AT to provide new bus and ferry services.  When coupled with savings to be identified by AT and assumed co-funding from Waka Kotahi, a total of $200 million (excluding farebox revenue) would be available for new bus and ferry services, compared to the draft RLTP. Initial indications from Waka Kotahi are that AT will not receive all the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) funding requested for public transport operations and road renewals in the first three years of the programme.  AT is working with AC on mechanisms for mitigating the funding shortfall.

Modifications to reflect the NZUP package

41.     On 4 June 2021, the Minister of Transport announced changes to the NZUP with the rescoping of Mill Road, investment in Drury Stations and the Northern Pathway being the key changes.

42.     These announced changes will complement and support the other RLTP investments planned for the Drury area and are consistent with the consultation feedback that supported more investment in public transport and active modes, at the expense of investing in additional road capacity.

43.     The changes also help to address some of the key themes in the stakeholder feedback, particularly in terms of some stakeholder opposition to the Mill Road project.

Meeting legislative requirements

44.     The RLTP now includes a section outlining how it meets the main statutory requirements set out in Section 14 of the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA). The RLTP and its associated development process has also been reviewed by Simpson Grierson who have noted that the advice provided by AT staff to the RTC has addressed each of the s14 requirements.

Other changes

45.     Auckland-Wellington Regional Passenger Services - including commentary to the effect that work is underway to investigate the feasibility of a North Island inter-regional passenger rail service operating on the North Island Main Trunk Line to provide alternative travel options and work towards a low carbon transport system that enables economic growth.

46.     Including commentary to demonstrate AT’s commitment to work with local board around the funding and allocation of small local projects that improve community outcomes. This continues the success of what we have achieved with the local boards in the last 12 months.

47.     Recognition of the Clean Car Package announced by the Minister of Transport on 13 June 2021.

48.     Various technical changes to ensure that it fully meets the requirements of the LTMA and remains consistent with ATAP.

Implications of the RLTP not being approved

49.     If the RLTP is not approved by the AT Board the 2018-28 RLTP would remain in effect.

50.     The implication is that a decision not to approve the RLTP:

A)      is likely to mean that $345 million of new activities not included in the 2018 RLTP would not be available for co-funding from Waka Kotahi. Examples include: CRL Day one activities; Northwest bus improvements, Airport to Botany Rapid Transit Route Protection, and Decarbonisation of the Ferry Fleet Stage 1; Minor Cycling and Micromobility (Pop-Up Cycleways); supporting electric vehicles; and some safety activities.

B)      may impact on the ability to access the increase in funding required to deliver the activities continuing from 2018-28 RLTP into this RLTP, including (but not limited to): EMU Rolling Stock and Stabling Tranche for CRL, Connected Communities; and, the Urban Cycleways Programme; and, Glenvar Road/East Coast Road intersection and corridor improvements.

2021-2024 Investment Programme

51.     In the 2021-24 period, there is major investment proposed for rapid transit projects, safety and active modes. Notable investments include:

A)      Projects supporting the CRL ($378M)

B)      Eastern Busway and Northwest Interim Bus Improvements ($446M)

C)     The Urban Cycleway Programme and the cycling and micromobility programmes (over $270M)

D)     Safety on local roads, state highways and around schools (over $430M)

52.     In addition to this, NZUP investments in the Northern Pathway, Wiri to Quay Park (third main), Papakura to Pukekohe Electrification and SH1 Widening from Papakura to Drury will progress substantially. 

53.     The detail of the proposed investment in the 2021-24 period is provided in Attachment 4.

Summary

54.     The RLTP makes a significant step forward in advancing the objectives of AC and meeting the community’s feedback for greater investment in alternative modes, safety and asset management. Whilst there is a desire to do more, the direction of this RLTP contributes towards an effective, efficient and safe transport system in the public interest.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

55.     The RLTP's key contribution to emissions reduction is the investment in infrastructure and services support mode shift away from private vehicles and towards public transport and active modes. Additionally, the RLTP also contributes through the electrification of public transport services, like buses and trains.


 

56.     Mode shift and public transport electrification (i.e. RLTP investment) are, however, only two components of a set of measures needed to reduce transport GHG emissions and have a modest effect on their own. Other measures - which are primarily the central government's responsibility - include reducing GHG emissions from the vehicle fleet by incentivising electric vehicle purchases, setting vehicle fuel efficiency standards, and setting a biofuel requirement in fuels.

57.     With the RLTP investment, improvements to vehcile fleet efficiency and confirmed future government policy as at May 2021 (fuel efficiency standards and biofuel requirements), transport GHG emissions are expected to reduce by approximately 1% (between 2016 and 2031) – despite Auckland’s population being expected to grow by 22% over the same period.

58.     This RLTP contributes to the purpose of the LTMA and is consistent with the GPS priority area of climate change, as demonstrated in the Section 14 assessment appended to the RLTP. This RLTP also reflects the LTP requirements for AT to support the implementation of actions identified in the ACP.

Beyond the RLTP

59.     As requested by the Planning Committee on 11 March, Council and AT staff are jointly developing a Transport Emissions Reduction Plan for Auckland that will identify the pathways to support the required emissions reductions reflected in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri. A project and engagement plan will be put to the Planning Committee and the AT Board for endorsement by August 2021, with the work anticipated to be complete by December 2021. The scope of this work is yet to be finalised, but is expected to include:

A)      investigating the mix of future complementary transport investments that support emissions reduction:

B)      vehicle fleet and fuel decarbonisation;

C)     land transport pricing reform;

D)     urban growth management;

E)      road space reallocation;

F)      behaviour change; and

G)     addressing inequities arising from the impacts of decarbonisation.

60.     Looking longer term, the RLTP takes into account the target of reaching net zero emissions by 2050, through its objective of Improving the resilience and sustainability of the transport system. This objective is primarily addressed through the investment in alternative modes.

61.     The RLTP also considers the 2050 emissions forecast and notes that the accelerated uptake of low emissions vehicles (e.g. EVs) is vital to reduce road transport emissions. This is reinforced by the Minister’s announcement of the Clean Car package on 13 June 2021 which aims to increase the uptake of low emission vehicles by introducing a range of measures that will help meet New Zealand’s 2050 net zero target, including a proposed rebate on the sale of new and used EVs.

62.     At this point, a full analysis of the potential benefits resulting from the final Climate Change Commission advice and the Clean Car Package has not been completed. It is anticipated that these could contribute significantly towards the goal of being a net zero transport system by 2050.

63.     AT will continue to work with Council and central government under the umbrella of ATAP and The Congestion Question to progress policy changes to take a whole of system approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transport in Auckland.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

64.     The CCO review recommended AT and AC jointly prepare the RLTP, the draft of which Council endorses before going to the AT Board for final approval. 

65.     The 2021-31 RLTP has been under development for some time and due to the timing of the CCO Review, its recommendations were not able to be built into the RLTP process from the start.  However, AT has worked collaboratively with AC, particularly the Transport Strategy team, on the RLTP as part of the year-long ATAP process.

66.     AT has worked closely with Council to ensure that the RLTP is aligned to the LTP.  Because of the pace of the recent RLTP development and amendments it has not been possible to interact as closely during the finalisation of the document.  This provides an opportunity to improve the process during the development of the next RLTP. 

67.     AT has continued to engage with the AC Planning Committee as representatives of the Council throughout the RLTP development process.  A series of workshops (refer to the table below) have kept the Planning Committee informed about the RLTP process, objectives, principles applied in developing the RLTP, and the inherent challenges and trade-offs that AT faces.

68.     This has meant that throughout the RLTP the views of the Council (via the Planning Committee) have been thoroughly considered. 

Council Engagement

Topics and outcomes

Finance and Performance Committee Workshop 14/10/20

Discussed challenges, objectives and principles used in developing ATAP and RLTP.

Planning Committee Workshop 3/12/20

Discussed RLTP process, process for engagement with Council, progress on ATAP, funding envelope, emerging programme.

Planning Committee Workshop 3/2/21

Discussed ATAP funding issues and trade offs, feedback on the recommended package, RLTP programme and forecast outcomes.

Planning Committee Meeting 11/3/21

Unanimously approved the recommended Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021-31 indicative package. Confirmed that the Auckland Council Group should “ensure the Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021-31 indicative package is a key input to decisions on the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-31.”

 

Unanimously endorsed the general direction of the draft 2021-31 Regional Land Transport Plan in advancing agreed Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021-31 objectives within the funding envelope available.

 

Agreed that the draft Regional Land Transport Plan aligns with the Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2021-31 package agreed between Auckland Council and central government, and council’s draft Long-term Plan 2021-31.

Planning Committee Workshop 26/5/21

Update on public consultation.  Discussion on potential amendments to the RLTP, pathway on climate change and process for formal consideration and endorsement of the RLTP. Local board chairs were invited to this workshop.

Planning Committee Meeting 3/6/21

Local boards presented to the Planning Committee on their submissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

69.     The consultation process with the local boards was agreed with AC’s local board services, prior to commencing. The engagement steps are outlined in the table below.

Date

Local board engagement

15 Feb

AT attended the Chairs Forum to give an overview on the RLTP process, to outline how the RLTP is put together and finally what the process is for local board input.

29 March – 2 May

AT ran workshops with all local boards to discuss the RLTP.

4 – 18 May

AT sought resolutions from the local boards to officially record their feedback on the RLTP.

3 June

Local boards could use their statutory input slot at a Governing Body Meeting (Planning Committee) to give their views on the RLTP, where it was resolved that the Planning Committee will consider feedback from local boards, when making recommendations on the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031.

 

70.     Written submissions were received from all 21 local boards and their feedback is outlined in the Local Board Feedback section. At its 3 June 2021 meeting, the Planning Committee resolved to consider the feedback from local boards when making recommendations on the RLTP 2021-2031 (PLA/2021/50).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

71.     AT presented at five hui attended by 12 Iwi and written submissions were received from Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whaimāia and Te Uri o Hau. The key themes from their feedback are outlined in the section above.

72.     An assessment of the impacts of the 2021 RLTP on Māori, focusing on areas with significant Māori population in the south, west and parts of the isthmus found the following.

A)      The number of jobs accessible by car in the morning peak decreases in the south and west due to increasing motorway congestion. Despite this projected decline in access, most of the south and parts of the west still see higher car accessibility relative to areas such as the North Shore.

B)      The number of jobs accessible by public transport in the morning peak increases in the south and west, but overall access by public transport in these areas is lower than the isthmus and North Shore.

C)     The focus on mode shift means the RLTP prioritises improving public transport accessibility. Fares are an important component of public transport accessibility and are often raised as an issue of concern for Māori. This package includes the introduction of a public transport discount card for Community Services Card holders that will benefit some Māori. 

73.     The RLTP includes a substantial safety related programme that will benefit Māori, who face higher rates of transport-related death and serious injuries comparted to the regional average. Funding specifically targeted at improving marae and papakāinga-related road safety is included in the package.

74.     Impacts on Maori are largely unchanged between the draft and final RLTP.


 

75.     As requested by the Planning Committee on 11 March 2021, more work will be undertaken by ATAP partner agencies in collaboration with Mana Whenua to identify options to address inequity of access and transport choice for Māori. This will also include refining the ATAP assessment framework to incorporate Te Ao Māori and better reflect outcomes for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

76.     AT and AC have aligned the RLTP with the LTP (noting the changes outlined in this paper).

77.     The AC draft LTP provides for a $7.5 billion opex programme and an $11.4 billion capex (including Waka Kotahi financial assistance, but net of direct revenue) programme over the next 10 years. The RLTP is now aligned with the funding outlined in AC’s LTP.

78.     Waka Kotahi and KiwiRail have also made changes to the timing and costs of some activities in their programme. 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

79.     Key risks and mitigations include:

Key risk

Mitigation

Failure to deliver policy change:  The desired outcomes for carbon emissions reductions are not achieved due to lack of the necessary policy intervention from central government. 

Engage actively with the MOT, with the support of AC, to advocate for policy changes required. AT and AC jointly develop an Auckland specific Climate Change pathway

Funding availability for projects: Changes to available funding, or inability by AT to access NLTF funding that was assumed in the ATAP agreement, will result in an inability to deliver the full RLTP and will affect achievement of the outcomes and targets.  

The RLTP contains a mitigation mechanism by prioritising projects in event of lower than expected funding. AT and AC continue to advocate to MOT and Waka Kotahi to progress work to enable the full funding allocation of the programme.

Funding availability for continuous programmes: Waka Kotahi continuous programme funding approval is lower than assumed in the first 3 years of the LTP.

AT and AC continue to work with MoT and Waka Kotahi to resolve the issue. If the funding options are not resolved, in the short term AC may need to temporarily take on more borrowing to cover any shortfall until the situation is remedied.

Asset condition: AT’s infrastructure assets fail due to insufficient funding for maintenance and renewals.

Maintenance and renewals spend has been prioritised so that critical assets are maintained and renewed to expected standards.

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

80.     Following a decision by the Planning Committee, the final RLTP will be submitted to the AT Board for their approval. If approved, the RLTP will become operational and will be submitted to Waka Kotahi for consideration as part of the National Land Transport Plan.

81.     As requested by the Planning Committee on 11 March 2021, AT will be working jointly with AC and central government on a range of issues, including the following:

A)      The Transport Emissions Reduction Pathway, as discussed above.

B)      Ensuring transport funding setting enable delivery of the 2021-2031 ATAP package (and therefore the RLTP).

C)     Identifying the high-level ATAP investment programme for 2031 to 2051.

D)     Identifying options to address inequity of access and transport choice, particularly for the south and west of Auckland.

E)      Identifying options to address inequity of access and transport choice for Māori, as discussed above.

F)      Support transport safety in areas such as enforcement and compliance mechanisms along with regulatory changes to improve safety for vulnerable road users.

G)     Jointly develop appropriate targets to measure progress against key outcomes such as emission reduction and mode shift.

82.     These pieces of work are currently in a scoping stage, with oversight from the ATAP Chief Executives Governance Group, and will be reported back to the Planning Committee in due course.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

2021-2031 Regional Land Transport Plan (final)

25

b

Public Feedback Report

153

c

Submissions on the Draft Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 from local boards, partners and key interest groups (424 pages) (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Phasing of the Capital Programme

293

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Tim Brown – Investment Planning Manager, Auckland Transport

Hamish Bunn – Group Manager: Investment Planning and Policy, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jenny Chetwynd – Executive General Manager: Planning and Investment, Auckland Transport

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

 


Planning Committee

24 June 2021

 

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

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


Planning Committee

24 June 2021

 

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

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


Planning Committee

24 June 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator