Agenda of Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee

Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee Agenda – 06 December 2024

7.3 Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2024 Monitoring Report

Report To:	Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee
Meeting Date:	6 December 2024
Report Author:	Jane Murray, Transportation Planning Advisor
Report Authorisers:	Dwayne Fletcher, Strategic Policy Manager
Report Number:	RNTRTC24-12-3

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To provide information on the performance of the transport system over the last three years against the objectives of the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 for Nelson City and Tasman District.

2. Report Summary

2.1 This report provides information on the performance of the transport system over the last three years against the objectives of the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031. Results are provided for Nelson City and for Tasman District.

2.2 There are a number of transport objectives that the Top of the South and Tasman District and Nelson City were failing to meet. These include:

2.2.1 the ability for the road network to respond to unplanned events;

2.2.2 the number of people being killed or seriously injured on the roads as well as the number of accidents; and

2.2.3 the share of people using active transport.

2.3 All of these areas are being addressed in the new 2024-2034 Regional Land Transport Plan, with specific priority given to coping with growth, safety, resilience and network condition and environmental impact. Funding constraints may impact on the achievement of the targets above.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee

1. receives the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2024 Monitoring Report, RNTRTC24-12-3

4. Background and Discussion

4.1 Section 16(3)(f) of the Land Transport Management Act 2003 states that the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) requires measures to monitor the performance of transport activities. The Monitoring Indicator Framework in the 2021 RLTP details the monitoring indicators, measures and targets.

4.2 This report uses the indicators and targets for the 2021 RLTP and reviews the previous financial years to determine trends.

4.3 There are a number of measures that we don’t have reliable data for:

4.3.1 travel time;

4.3.2 unusual events interrupted normal traffic flows (e.g. road works).

4.4 In addition, new monitoring methods may also invalidate long term trends and in some instances, such as air quality monitoring in Nelson Tasman, data collection is no longer undertaken.

4.5 The monitoring information is presented using data from Nelson City Council, Tasman District Council and New Zealand Transport Agency. It also incorporates 2023 Census data when it has been available.

4.6 The performance summary tables use colour codes to report on performance. The meaning of the colours is explained below.

		Achieved the performance target
		On track to achieving the performance target
		Did not achieve the performance target
		Not measured or data was unreliable

5. Nelson Tasman Performance

5.1 Table 1 below summarises performance of the transport system in Nelson Tasman against the targets. Further details and trends are provided below

Table 1: Nelson Tasman Monitoring Summary

Regional Objectives	Indicator	Target	Performance	Area
1) A sustainable transport system that is integrated with well planned development, enabling the efficient and reliable movement of people and goods 2) Supporting economic growth through providing better access	The annual variation of mean time to travel key routes	No more than 20%	Unable to report due to difficulties obtaining data.	TOS
	Percentage completion of HPMV network	Increasing	Increasing as bridges are renewed (Tasman)	TDC
3) Communities have access to a resilient transport system.	Number of journeys impacted due to unplanned road closure	Decreasing	Increased over time. These will fluctuate depending on large storm events each year	TOS
3) Communities have access to a resilient transport system.	Number of hours that sections of journey routes are closed due to unplanned disruption	Decreasing	As above	TOS
4) Communities have access to a safe transport system regardless of mode	Number of deaths and serious injuries	Decreasing	Has slightly increased over past five years.	TOS
	Deaths and serious injury as a proportion of all crashes	Decreasing	Fatal accidents remain at about 2% of all crashes. Serious injuries remain about 9% whereas Nelson serious injuries have decreased from 8% to 6%	Tasman
	Deaths and serious injury as a proportion of all crashes	Decreasing		Nelson
5) Communities have access to a range of travel choices to meet their social, economic, health and cultural needs.	Mode share of all trips by walking & cycling & PT mode share	Increasing	The proportion of trips taken by walking, cycling and PT to work and school has reduced slightly between 2018 and 2023 from 22% to 21%.	TOS
	Number of people living within 500m of a high quality cycling facility	Increasing	This is a new data set so no trend to report on. 77% of the Nelson-Richmond urban area live within 500m of a high quality cycling facility.	TDC NCC
	Cycle and walking counts	Increasing	Pedestrian and cycling counts remain relatively static, this may be a result of weather conditions when data is collected	TOS
	Percentage of community living within 500m of a bus stop	Increasing	The proportion of the population living within 500m of a bus stop has increased from 32% in the last year of the Nbus system to 37% in the first year of the Ebus system that began on 1 August 2023. This increase is due bus services covering a larger geographic area.	TOS
	Number of annual boardings	Increasing peak and off peak boardings	The average monthly number of boardings in 2023/2024 was 74,544, compared with 2022/23 at 37,880 boardings.	TOS
6) Reduced negative impact on the environment from transport activities	Number of poor air quality exceedances	Decreasing	Tasman has had no exceedances of PM₁₀ however PM_2.5 levels exceeded the 2021 WHO daily guideline value of 15 µg/m³ a total of 68 days in winter 2024^{^[1]} (compared with an average of 64 days over the previous five-year period 2018-2023). The WHO guideline allows for 3-4 exceedances in a 12-month period. Nelson data is not available.	TDC
	Annual greenhouse gas emission for transport	Decreasing:	Emissions are gradually trending downwards with emissions being 15% lower now than in 2019.	TOS

Travel Time Variability

5.2 Collection and analysis of travel time data has proven to be a challenge with the cost and complexity of the data sources proving to be a barrier. These issues have now been worked though between the NZTA, Tasman District Council and Nelson City Council with the expectation of being able to report these statistics in the next annual report to the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee.

High Productivity Motor Vehicles Routes

5.3 All State Highway routes in Nelson and Tasman are approved for High Productivity Motor Vehicles (HPMV). Tasman is slowing increasing the number of HPMV routes as budgeting allows Tasman achieves this through improving load carrying capacity on bridges when they are renewed and certifying existing bridges carrying capacity. There has been one bridge upgraded in the past three years.

Unplanned Disruptions

5.4 Every year, there is a series of unplanned disruptions to the transportation network. There are a number of reasons for closures including:

5.4.1 Slips

5.4.2 Fire

5.4.3 Crashes

5.4.4 Snow

5.4.5 Fallen trees

5.4.6 Police events.

5.5 State Highway 6 and State Highway 60 (both are prominent highways through Nelson and Tasman) have been particularly affected by weather events in 2018, 2021 and 2022 which resulted in sections of the highways being closed for a number of days. For example, SH6 between Hira and Rai was closed for 14 days in August 2022.

5.6 Table 2 below shows that there has been an increase in the number of unplanned hours that state highways have been closed since 2014/15.

Table 2: Unplanned Disruptions on State Highways over 10 years (Road Closures)

	2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24	Average 2014/15 – 2018/19	Average 2018/19 - 2020/24
SH6 Nelson	7	35	86	21	54.5	35.5	27	134	520.5	22.5	40.7	147.9
SH6 Tasman	7	35	86	21	54.5	286.5	25	290.5	75.5	5	40.7	169.3
SH60	4	21	28	182	40	34.5	22	112.5	175	5	55	69.8
SH63	0	6	15	21	16.5	0	0	84.5	6.5	0	11.7	18.2
SH65	0	0	6	25	0.5	4	17	78.5	1.5	0	6.3	20.2
Total	12	69	272	259	130.5	356.5	91	700	774.5	50.5	148.5	394.5

5.7 Unplanned Disruptions (Local Road Closures) in Tasman

	2021	2022	2023
Number of closures	52	111	35
Number of hours closed	3480	48,399	2376

5.8 Unplanned Disruptions (Local Road Closures) in Nelson in 2023/2024

	2023/2024
Number of closures	37
Number of hours closed	492.9

Note that earlier data for Nelson is not currently available

Death and Serious Injury Crashes

5.9 Figure 7 below shows that the number of Death and Serious Injury (DSI) in the Nelson Tasman area between 2021-2023 have slightly increased on local roads. However, the number of DSI crashes has been less than the peak in 2017.

5.10 Figure 8 below shows that the number of deaths and serious injuries on State Highways has decreased in Nelson Tasman over the past three years. In particular the number of deaths has decreased considerably. The figures below show the reductions in crashes on two State Highways. These two State Highways may have their speed limits reversed.

Crashes on SH6 Hope to Wakefield (speed limit changed July 2021)

Crash Severity	100km/h and 70km/h Jan 2017-Dec 2019	80km/h and 60km/h August 2021- July 2024
Fatal	3	0
Serious Injury	7	2
Minor injury	16	15
Non injury	64	50

Crashes on SH6 Nelson to Blenheim (speed limit changed December 2020)

Crash Severity	100km/h May 2018-Dec 2020	90km/h, 80km/h and 60km/h Jan 2021- Aug 2022*	90km/h, 80km/h and 60km/h Jan 2023- Aug 2024
Fatal	4	1	1
Serious Injury	12	0	5
Minor injury	25	29	34
Non injury	65	48	110

* Significant road closures occurred after the August 2022 weather event.

5.11 Figure 9 shows the number of deaths and serious injuries on local roads in Nelson Tasman. Serious injuries on Nelson roads have remained static over the past three years whereas the number of serious injuries has increased for Tasman.

5.12 Figure 10 shows deaths and serious injuries crashes in proportion to all crashes in Nelson Tasman. Less than 2% of all crashes led to deaths. Approximately 10% of Tasman crashes result in serious injuries compared with 6% of Nelson crashes. Crashes in Nelson are more likely to be in urban areas of 50km/h or less.

Figure 7: Nelson Tasman DSI Crashes against previous 6 year Trend

A graph of a crash

Description automatically generated

Figure 8: Deaths and Serious Injuries on State Highways in the Nelson Tasman region

A graph of a number of people

Description automatically generated

Figure 9: Deaths and Serious Injuries on Local Roads in the Nelson Tasman region

Figure 10: Death and serious injury crashes as a proportion of all crashes in Nelson and Tasman

Walking, Cycling and Public Transport

5.13 The 2023 Census travel to work and education data was released in October this year. The proportion of trips taken by walking, cycling and public transport to work and school has reduced slightly between 2018 and 2023 from 22% to 21%.

5.14 The 2023 Census shows that 67,344 people live within the Nelson-Richmond urban area. 51,778 people within this area live within 500m of a high-quality cycling facility (77%). A high quality cycling facility has been defined as separated cycle path that are either on-road or off road. This may include shared paths but not footpaths. The paths may be on gravel and equivalent to a grade one mountain bike track (such as the Great Taste Trail). At this stage, the GIS team has not yet mapped this for other towns in Tasman.

5.15 Figure 9-11 shows an annual comparison of cyclists on key cycling routes in Richmond and Nelson over the past four years. There has been an increase in the number of cyclists using the Saxton Field cycleway and this may be due to recent improvements on the route. Cycle counts have remained relatively static over the past three years. Significant investment has occurred in Richmond, Mapua and Motueka in terms of cycle infrastructure as part of the Transport Choices and Streets for People funding. In the summer of 2023, a range of cycle counts were taken pre-implementation however summer 2024 counting has not yet begun. This will be reported on in the next monitoring report.

Figure 9: Cycle counts on Saxton Cycleway – (Avery fields Saxton Field)

A graph with colored lines

Description automatically generated

Figure 10: Cycle counts on GTT – Whakatū Cycleway – (Aquatic Centre)

A graph of different colored lines

Description automatically generated

Figure 11: Cycle counts on Railway Reserve – (Bishopdale near Beatson Road)

A graph with lines and numbers

Description automatically generated

5.16 Figure 12-13 shows an annual comparison of pedestrians on key walking routes in Nelson over the past four years. Tasman does not have a consistent series of pedestrian data. Like the cycling counts, pedestrians counts also remained relatively static over the past three years. Note that the counter was not working from May to October 2023.

Figure 12: Pedestrian counts on Railway Reserve – (Bishopdale near Beatson Road)

A graph of a number of days

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Figure 13: Pedestrian counts on Railway Reserve – (Andrew Street, Stoke)

A graph of a graph

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Percentage of community living within 500m of a public transport route

5.17 The new Ebus service began operation on 1 August 2023, with increased frequencies and wider coverage. The proportion of the population living within 500m of a bus stop has increased from 32% in the last year of the Nbus system to 37% in the first year of the Ebus system. This increase is due bus services covering a larger geographic area. This is due to the area covered by the service as a result of it.

5.18 Boardings for the first year of the Ebus operation are around 100% higher than those during the last year of the old Nbus operation with a total of 938,384 passenger trips taken between 1 August 2023 and 31 July 2024. In 2021, Covid-19 alert levels changes restricted movement at certain times of the year which influenced how and when people travelled. The introduction of half-price fares in July 2022 helped bolster passenger numbers and these reduced fares continued until May 2024. Patronage numbers have continued to climb since June from 71,632 to 78,715 in October 2024.

Figure10: Monthly bus patronage (NBus compared to EBus)

A graph of blue and orange lines

Description automatically generated

Number of poor air quality exceedances

5.19 Under the National Environment Standards for Air Quality (Air Quality NES), airsheds are only allowed one permissible exceedance of PM10 of 50 µg/m³ over 24-hours, in any 12 month period. Over the last two years, there have been no exceedances in the Richmond Airshed. PM levels are not currently being monitored in the Nelson Airshed and the rest of Tasman.

5.20 The Air Quality NES currently does not include a national standard for PM_2.5. However, it is anticipated that the government will introduce one or more standards for PM_2.5 in the future. PM_2.5 is from human-made sources including domestic fires, motor vehicles, industry, and windblown dust. The annual average PM_2.5 concentrations for Richmond for 2022/2023 is 8.2 µg/m3, which is above the 2021 WHO annual air quality guideline value of 5 µg/m3. The winter (May-August) average was 15.7 µg/m3 and the average for the non-winter months (September–April) was 4.4 µg/m3. It is unclear at this stage, the proportion that motor vehicles contribute to in the winter months. It is unlikely that winter vehicle numbers are four times those than summer and therefore it is likely that other factors contribute to higher PM_2.5 numbers in winter. There has been an average of 63 exceedances of the WHO PM_2.5 daily guideline value over the last five years (2019-2023), with an average maximum concentration of 43 µg/m3 in recent years.

5.21 Nitrous oxide (NO₂) can also be a primary indicator of air pollution exposure however Tasman does not currently monitor this. Research monitoring of NO₂is planned for 2025 to understand if there is an issue in Richmond.

Annual greenhouse gas emission for transport

5.22 Nelson City Council has developed a regional emissions model for Nelson and Tasman that breaks greenhouse emissions down by activity. The model relies on fuel use information along with vehicle registration data. The graph below shows the estimated on-road transport emissions for the last five financial years.

A graph of a graph showing the number of vehicles in the same direction

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

5.23 As shown in the graph above, emissions have been gradually trending down with the 2023/24 result being around 15% lower than in 2019/20 despite growth in the population. It is likely that other emissions are following this trend.

6. Important considerations for decision-making

6.1 Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Monitoring of the outcomes of the Regional Land Transport Plan is a requirement of the Land Transport Management Act 2003.

6.2 Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Monitoring of the outcomes of the joint Regional Land Transport Plan is a requirement of the Land Transport Management Act 2003.

6.3 Risk

There are no risks that have been identified.

6.4 Financial impact

There are no financial implications related to the acceptance of this report.

6.5 Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because it is a monitoring report of the Regional Land Transport Plan which has previously been widely consulted on.

6.6 Climate Impact

Monitoring of annual greenhouse gas emission for transport, along with active and public transport mode trends will contribute to future decision making in relation to transport choice and transport emissions.

6.7 Inclusion of Māori in the decision-making process

No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in preparing this report

6.8 Legal context

Monitoring of the outcomes of the Regional Land Transport Plan is a requirement of the Land Transport Management Act 2003

6.9 Delegations

The Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee has the delegations to consider this matter.

7. Conclusion and Next Steps

7.1 The monitoring of the transport network against the 2021 RLTP has identified a number of areas that need to be improved. Most of these issues have already been identified through the new 2024 RLTP which already has responses in place.

8. Attachments

Nil

Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee Agenda – 06 December 2024

7.4 Speed Limits Update

Report To:	Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee
Meeting Date:	6 December 2024
Report Author:	Bill Rice, Senior Infrastructure Planning Advisor - Transportation
Report Authorisers:	Dwayne Fletcher, Strategic Policy Manager
Report Number:	RNTRTC24-12-4

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To:

1.1.1 Inform the Committee of changes in the Setting of Speed Limits Rule 2024 and the impacts of those changes on the Joint Nelson Tasman Speed Management Plan (SMP).

1.1.2 Seek the Committee’s approval of a letter to Minister of Transport seeking authority to progress with already agreed speed limits changes.

2. Report Summary

2.1 The new Setting of Speed Limits Rule 2024 (the Rule) came into force on 30 October 2024. It requires variable speed limits outside schools to be implemented by 30 June 2026. There is no requirement in the rule to use electronic variable signs for variable school limits other than if a variable limit applies outside normal school start and finish time.

2.2 The Rule also does not permit any speed limit changes (other than variable limits outside schools) which had been adopted under the 2022 Rule but were not in force on 30 October 2024 to come into force. Speed limits on Cable Bay Road and Māori Pa Road were changed on 29 October 2024, but no other speed limit changes within the SMP were implemented.

2.3 Any changes to existing limits proposed in our SMP (except limits outside schools) will now need to be treated as new speed limit changes, and consultation is required. This consultation must include a “cost benefit disclosure statement” and be open for a minimum period of six weeks.

2.4 Tasman District Council is proposing to undertake the following process for speed limit changes:

2.4.1 approve (Quarter 4 2024) and implement variable speed limits for urban schools (Quarter 1 2025);

2.4.2 consult and decide on high-risk rural roads and for base speed limits outside rural schools between mid-January to end of February 2025 (Quarter 1 & 2 2025);

2.4.3 consult on further speed limit changes from the SMP (Quarter 2 & 3 2025);

2.4.4 implement speed limit changes on high-risk roads and base and variable speed limit changes outside rural schools (Quarter 3, 2025); and

2.4.5 implement further speed limit changes (2026 onwards).

2.5 Nelson City Council is undertaking the following process for speed limit changes:

2.5.1 implement variable speed limits for the four urban schools that currently have no school speed zone (July 2025); and

2.5.2 consider the appropriate timing of the remining school zones that already have a 40/50km/h variable zone. The consideration is balancing the safety benefit against the cost to implement along other transport priorities.

2.6 On 14 November, Tasman District Council’s Strategy and Policy Committee resolved “that the Committee write to the Minister to ask for approval to implement speed limit changes previously consulted on and express concerns regarding the process and impact that it will have on the Tasman region.” A letter for approval is attached to this report.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee

1. receives the Speed Limits Update report, RNTRTC24-12-4;

2. approves the letter to the Minister of Transport (Attachment 1 to the agenda report) to ask for approval to implement speed limit changes previously consulted on and express concerns regarding the process and impact that it will have on the Nelson and Tasman regions; and

3. authorises the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee to sign the letter and to approve minor edits to the letter to the Minister of Transport.

4. Background and Discussion

4.1 Central government changes to the Speed Setting Rule have meant that the approved speed changes for Nelson and Tasman cannot be implemented as planned and many of the changes require further consultation.

4.2 The draft Setting of the Speed Limits rule was introduced on 13 June 2024. The draft Rule indicated that any speed limit changes (other than those on specified roads) that had been certified by the Director of Land Transport and added to the National Speed Limit Register prior to the introduction of the new Rule would be able to be implemented.

4.3 The Nelson Tasman Speed Management Plan (SMP) was approved at the Nelson Tasman Joint Committee meeting on 23 July 2024. The speed limit changes in the SMP were certified and able to be added to the National Speed Limit Register before the new rule came into force. This meant that they met the requirements of the draft Rule enabling them to be implemented at a later date.

4.4 However, the final Rule added a requirement that speed limits (apart from variable speed limits around schools) that were in the National Speed Limit Register, but not implemented (signs installed) by 30 October 2024, were to be treated as new rules, and need to go through the consultation and approval process again.

4.5 There is no requirement in the new Rule for Regional Speed Management Plans. The existing Plan agreed to by Joint Council still stands as an important strategic document in terms of having a consistent approach across the region and sets out implementation plans for both councils.

4.6 Tasman District Council’s Strategy and Policy Committee considered the impacts of the Setting of Speed Limits Rule at their 14 November meeting. It agreed to write to the Minister to ask for approval to implement speed limit changes previously consulted on and express concerns regarding the process and impact that it will have on the Tasman region.

4.7 It is considered that the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee is the most appropriate body to write to the Minister of Transport on transport matters.

5. Tasman District Council approach to Speed Management

5.1 The following process is recommended for implementation of speed limit changes, and has been supported by the Tasman District Council’s Strategy and Policy Committee:

11 December Tasman District Council meeting:

· approve variable speed limits for urban schools; and

· approve consultation plan for high risk rural roads (Motueka Valley Highway, Moutere Highway, Dovedale Road, Neudorf Road, Edwards Road, McShane Road), and for base speed limits outside rural schools.

Mid-January to end of February 2025

· consult on high risk rural roads and base speed limits outside rural schools.

Quarter 2 2025

· implement urban variable speed limits outside urban schools;

· decide on speed limit changes on high risk roads, base and variable speed limit changes outside rural schools.

· consult on further speed limit changes from the Speed Management Plan.

Quarter 3 2025

· implement speed limit changes on high risk roads and base and variable speed limit changes outside rural schools.

6. Nelson City Council approach to Speed Management

6.1 Implement variable speed limits for the four urban schools that currently have no school speed zone. (14 July 2025) The four schools are:

6.1.1 Auckland Point School

6.1.2 Clifton Terrance School

6.1.3 Birchwood Primary School

6.1.4 Nelson Christian Academy.

6.2 Consider the appropriate timing of changing remaining school zones to 30/50 variable as they already have a 40/50km/h variable zone. The Speed Limit Setting Rule does not require these to be changed by a certain date, thus the Council is able to balance the safety benefit against the cost to implement including if any co-investment is made available by Waka Kotahi.

7. Important considerations for decision-making

7.1 Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Local speed limit changes must comply with the Setting of Speed Limits Rule 2024.

7.2 Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

A Speed Management plan contributes to the community outcome: our communities are healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient. The recommended proposal is broadly consistent with the adopted SMP, while also complying with the Speed Limit Setting Rule 2024. It is also consistent with both Councils’ LTPs.

7.3 Risk

The introduction of the new Rule and subsequent guidance provides us with the framework for speed changes.

This risk is mitigated by separating the school speed limit changes which are required by the rule from those that require a Cost Benefit Disclosure Statement.

7.4 Financial impact

Speed changes have already been budgeted for in the LTPs over the next 10 years however both Nelson and Tasman had assumed co investment of 51% would be available from Waka Kotahi when the LTP was initially developed and consulted upon. Co-investment from Waka Kotahi for this activity was not confirmed when the National Land Transport Programme was announced, however Waka Kotahi have since signalled funding may be available. An announcement regarding this funded is anticipated this year. Exactly how much and when is currently unclear.

Tasman’s proposed programme is able to be delivered within the local share portion of the budget for the next three years.

Nelson has proposed a staged approach to minimise the financial impact. This considers upgrading the existing school variable zones from 40/50km/h to 30/50km/h only when co-investment becomes available.

7.5 Degree of significance and level of engagement

The JNTRTC has already consulted on its Joint Speed Limit Management Plan. For Tasman, further consultation is required because there are specific requirements under the new Rule for consultation with the public on speed changes before the new limits can be implemented. Consultation is required to follow the principles of consultation in section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002. There must be a period of at least six weeks and consultation material must include a benefit cost disclosure statement.

7.6 Climate Impact

Where rural speed limits are reduced from 100km/h, fuel consumption and emissions are expected to reduce.

Reducing limits around schools from 50km/h to 30km/h may result in a small increase in fuel consumption and emissions. Overall, the climate impact of possible speed limit changes is expected to be small.

7.7 Inclusion of Māori in the decision-making process

In the original preparation of the Speed Management Plan in 2023, staff had engaged with iwi on specific sites of significance. The Setting of Speed Limits Rule 2024 guidance states that road controlling authorities must use reasonable efforts to consult on proposed speed limit changes with Māori and do everything reasonably practicable to separately consult Māori on any proposed change affecting or likely to affect Māori land or land subject to any Māori claims settlement Act.

7.8 Legal context

Speed limit changes must comply with the Setting of Speed Limits Rule 2024.

There is no requirement in the new Rule for Regional Speed Management Plans.

Other than school speed limit changes, there is no longer any obligation to implement the other speed limit changes proposed in our Joint Speed Management Plan. Nor is there any obligation to review the Plan.

7.9 Delegations

The Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee had delegated authority to develop a joint Regional Speed Management Plan. Despite the 2024 Setting of Speed Limits Rule removing the requirement to develop Regional Speed Management Plans, it is within the remit of the Joint Regional Transport Committee to comment on speed limit matters.

8. Attachments

1.⇩

Letter to Minister re speed limit consultation

Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee Agenda – 06 December 2024

7.5 Public Transport Review Update

Report To:	Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee
Meeting Date:	6 December 2024
Report Author:	James Hills, Senior Transport Planner, Nelson City Council
Report Authorisers:	Dwayne Fletcher, Strategic Policy Manager
Report Number:	RNTRTC24-12-5

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 This report provides an update on the Public Transport (PT) Review of the eBus service in Nelson-Tasman that went operational on 1 August 2023. It provides a summary of the recently completed Phase 1 of the PT Review which has provided the New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA) with the data that enables them to assess if the eBus service is delivering upon the outcome the NZTA has invested in. In addition, this report provides a summary and a proposed updated structure of the next stages, Phases 2 and 3 of the PT Review for Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee (JNTRTC) consideration.

2. Introduction

2.1 As part of the new eBus service, a 12 month operational review was required and is a condition precedent to New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA) funding for the 2025/26 and 2026/27 financial years.

2.2 As part of Phase 1 of the review, Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council have provided the NZTA with public transport service data for analysis and evaluation. The first stage of the review enables the NZTA to assess if the new eBus services are delivering the outcomes that the NZTA had invested in.

2.3 The NZTA has subsequently outlined that it is satisfied that Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council have met the data requirements of Phase 1 and is now preparing a paper for its December 2024 Values, Outcomes and Scope (VOS) Committee. The outcomes of the Committee will decide future funding for the eBus service for the next two years.

2.4 This report is a high-level summary analysis by Nelson City Council and Tasman District Councilof the data collected and provided to the NZTA during Phase 1.

2.5 Following the completion of Phase 1 of the PT review, transport officers from both Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council are now focusing on Phases 2 and 3.

3. Recommendation

That the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee

1. receives the Public Transport Review Update report, RNTRTC24-12-5

4. Phase 1 of the PT Review: Data Analysis and Discussion

Patronage

4.1 Figure 1 (below) shows the actual patronage on the old public transport network for 2022-23 period (August-July) (blue), the new eBus service for the first 12 months (August-July) of service (green) and projected forecasted as presented in the 2021 Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP) (orange).

4.2 At the end of the first 12 months of service (31 July 2024), patronage had increased by 103% from the previous 12 months under the old public transport network. A total of 938,384 passenger boardings had occurred.

4.3 The eBus service outperformed the RPTP patronage targets by 26% across the first 12 months of service. A component of the case for NZTA investment was to deliver the RPTP patronage targets so to exceed these in the first year is a commendable achievement for the eBus service. Our assessment suggests that we have achieved a level of patronage in year one similar to that we were aiming to achieve in year three.

Financial

4.4 Table 1 (below) provides a financial summary of the new eBus service (actual) compared with the replaced NBus service (baseline).

4.5 The larger, low emission and high frequency eBus network, cost approximately $4.3m more over its first year of operation than for the previous NBus service, an increase of approximately 151%. Likewise, subsidy per passenger increased by 19% ($1.22) across all routes. This was expected due to the higher associated gross costs of launching the new larger and more comprehensive eBus network.

4.6 However, owing to the significant increase in patronage, fare revenue also increased substantially by approximately $560,000 (or +159%). This meant that the Farebox Recovery Ratio 1 essentially stayed the same (actually increasing by 0.4% to 13%).

Measure	Baseline 1 Aug 2022–31 July 2023	Actual 1 Aug 2023 – 31 July 2024	Difference (%)
Total Gross Cost ($)	$2.8m	$7.1m	151%
Fare Revenue ($)	$356k	$920k	159%
Farebox Recovery ratio (%)	12.6%	13%	0.4%
Subsidy per passenger ($)	$5.33	$6.55	19%

Table 1: eBus financial metrics ‘2022-2023 Baseline’ v ‘2023 - 2024 Actual’

Passenger Survey Results

4.7 Part 1 of the Public Transport Review required Nelson City Council and Tasman District Councilto carry out in-person customer satisfaction surveys of eBus passengers across all routes. In total the team received 214 survey responses.

4.8 The survey questions were answered on a scale from 1-10, with ‘1’ being ‘extremely dissatisfied’ and ‘10’ being ‘extremely satisfied’ with the metric in question.

4.9 Figure 2 (below) shows the responses of customers when asked about their ‘most recent trip’ and other metrics regarding the service.

4.10 When asked about their most recent trip on the eBus service, 94% of respondents awarded the service a 7 or above.

4.10.1 the service scored high across several metrics (Figure 2) but scored lower for frequency and reliability;

4.10.2 passenger satisfaction of the service overall scored high, with 88% of respondents scoring the service 7 or more out of 10; and

4.10.3 the eBus service also scored high for ease of payment and journey times, but passengers would like improved communications regarding services changes and general information.

5. Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the PT Review: Background and Discussion

5.1 Phases 2 and 3 of the PT Review will analyse the data collected in Phase 1 and develop and explore measures to improve public transport, address issues generated, grow patronage, and provide a better customer experience.

Phase 2 Customer Feedback and Service Improvements

5.2 Following the passenger survey carried in Part 1 of the PT Review, Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council have commenced an exercise to analyse feedback and categorise response measures into short-term, mid-term and long-term improvements.

5.3 Since the eBus service went live, over 1770 feedback responses have been received via service requests and Shape Tasman, in addition to the Long Term Plan, the Regional Land Transport Plan and the Regional Public Transport Plan processes.

5.4 In early 2025, an additional survey will be undertaken with bus drivers seeking their views of the services they operate.

5.5 Categorising customer feedback into short-term, mid-term and long-term improvements is consistent with the approach that transport officers make in investigating and implementing service changes and improvements.

5.6 All suggested improvements will be subject to funding and a key part of the process will be to work with and maximise the available budget to have the biggest impact for customers. In conjunction with developing improvements, new and potential funding mechanisms will also be explored.

Phase 2A: Short-Term Improvements

5.7 Phase 2A of the review will focus on short-term ‘quick wins’ improvements that can be implemented at minimal cost with the available budget. Examples of quick win improvements could include but are not limited to:

5.7.1 improved customer communications;

5.7.2 improved seating provision at interchanges; and

5.7.3 bus stop upgrades.

5.8 It is expected that, subject to funding, short-term improvements will be implemented before July 2025 and will be wrapped up into business as usual as part of continual efforts to respond to customer feedback and improve the service on an ongoing basis.

Phase 2B: Mid-Term Improvements and Optimisations

5.9 Phase 2B involved more in-depth analysis than Phase 2A and will look to implement optimisations to improve the eBus service and respond to customer needs.

5.10 Optimisations involve making the most of the resource and budget available and working with the operator to run the service more efficiently.

5.11 Optimisations at this stage will seek to improve the current level of service with no significant impacts to budget.

5.12 Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council will consult with the NZTA: ‘Priority and Optimisation – Public Transport Design Guidance¹’ when investigating optimisation measures.

5.13 Examples of optimisations to be explored include but are not limited to:

5.13.1 bus stop configuration and placement;

5.13.2 timetable review to maximise patronage and improve overall utilisation of bus fleet; and

5.13.3 increased green time for buses at signalised intersections.

5.14 It is expected that mid-term improvement and optimisations will be in place for 1 July 2025, Year 3 of the eBus service and are subject to agreement with the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee (JNTRTC) through workshops and committee meetings.

5.15 Mid-term improvements are subject to funding and measures will be identified that maximise the budget available.

Phase 3: Long-Term Improvements and Step Changes

5.16 Improvements that are unable to be implemented before July 2025, or those with a substantive change component (cost, services, fleet etc) will be categorised as long-term improvements. It is expected that long-term improvements will be investigated in the process of developing the combined Regional Public Transport Plan 2027 and the next round of the Long Term Plan.

5.17 Long-term improvements by nature require longer lead times and greater resources. They can incur significant cost and are considered a ‘step change’ from the current level of service.

5.18 It is important to recognise that improvements and optimisations investigated as part of Phase 2B can and will lead to a transition from a mid-term improvement to a long-term improvement and therefore be considered in Phase 3. For example, increasing the provision of bus stops (a mid-term improvement) can lead to longer run times which in turn can lead to impacts on the availability of drivers to have sufficient breaks. This would then lead to a larger timetable change. It is also important to note that routes do not operate in isolation and a small change in one route can affect another. The network therefore needs to be considered holistically.

5.19 It is therefore important that transport officers take a thorough approach to investigating and implementing changes to understand the impacts to the wider network.

5.20 Examples of longer-term step changes could include but are not limited to:

5.20.1 comprehensive timetable change;

5.20.2 new earlier / later and weekend services;

5.20.3 increased frequency of routes;

5.20.4 change of route; and

5.20.5 bus priority measures.

6. Public Transport Policy Changes

6.1 The NZTA is undertaking a number of significant policy reviews as they relate to public transport. An example being the increase in private share (IPS) programme of work currently underway. The next phases of the PT Review will provide a mechanism to develop our responses to these policy discussions documents and to implement any changes that arise from them.

7. Collaborative working with the JRTC

7.1 In addition to continuing to provide the JNTRTC with regular updates by way of summary slides and through quarterly JNTRTC meetings, Nelson City Council and Tasman District Councilofficers welcome feedback from the JNTRTC on how often and the level to which they would like to be engaged as part of the next stage of the PT Review.

7.2 At this stage Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council recommend regular workshops around key mid-term and long-term improvement suggestions.

8. Conclusion and Next Steps

8.1 Phase 1: The NZTA will prepare its assessment of the eBus services performance against the initial investment objectives and present that to its 12 December 2024 VOC. Approval at the VOC will enable the National Land Transport Programme funding that has been allocated to the eBus service in the remaining two years of this Regional Land Transport Programme period to be released. Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council are awaiting the outcome of the NZTA VOS Committee and any impacts this could have on the level of service Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council are able to provide.

8.2 Phase 2 & 3: Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council have commenced work to categorise customer feedback into short-term, mid-term and long-term improvements which will inform the next phases of the PT Review.

8.3 Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council propose holding a first workshop with the JNTRTC in conjunction with their next meeting in February 2025. This will provide an opportunity to work through the initial findings of customer feedback and the categorisation process of developing short-term, mid-term and long-term improvements. It will also enable JNTRTC members to identify any issues or opportunities they want included.

8.4 This workshop would also provide an opportunity for Nelson City Council and Tasman District Council to work through the NZTA expectations of public transport policy changes and potential responses. Transport officers will be in a better position to inform of expectations as more information is released at the start of 2025.

9. Attachments

Nil

[1] Other factors, in addition to transport, contribute to winter PM_2.5levels

	Chairperson Deputy Mayor S Bryant (Tasman District Council)	Deputy Chairperson Mayor N Smith (Nelson City Council)
Members	Cr B Dowler (Tasman District Council)	Deputy Mayor R O’Neill-Stevens (Nelson City Council)
NZTA Waka Kotahi	Ms E Speight
Alternate Members	Cr C Butler (Tasman District Council)	Cr M Courtney (Nelson City Council)
	Cr J Ellis (Tasman District Council)	Cr J Hodgson (Nelson City Council)