Managing road safety and efficiency under the Resource Management Act 1991: The way forward

2. Background

Print version: Managing road safety and efficiency under the Resource Management Act 1991 (PDF, 259 KB, 63 pages)

• 2.1   Evolution of the BPG
• 2.2   BPG development and consultation

2.1   Evolution of the best practice guideline

Land Transport NZ’s role in the transport industry is wide ranging. It includes the provision of funding for the construction and maintenance of state highways and local roads, funding for passenger transport services (such as commuter trains, buses and ferries) and funding for alternatives to road transport (such as rail freight and barging). It also includes the assessment of walking and cycling projects, and funding of projects that support regional development.

Through carrying out these functions, Land Transport NZ received concerns by other key parties in the roading industry regarding managing road safety and efficiency in New Zealand. In particular, Land Transport NZ noted the potential influence district plans could play in addressing road safety and efficiency issues before the issues are exacerbated by further land-based development.

Addressing adverse effects of development on road safety and efficiency after the development has already occurred requires essentially retrospective action. That is, because of problems arising from development (either permitted through district plans or from the implementation of resource consents), remedial action becomes necessary to ensure the roading system can still meet appropriate safety and efficiency standards. If development is allowed in the wrong place, remedial action may be ineffective or very expensive, and therefore may not meet the cost-benefit ratio required for road improvements to be funded.

The funding of new roads and improvements to existing roads has also been influenced by recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and, in particular, how local authorities can take financial contributions and development contributions for developments. Previously, the district plan was required to outline when financial contributions were to be taken and the criteria for determining how much the contributions would be. Now councils are required to prepare long-term council community plans (LTCCP) that provide a strategic approach to community facilities and infrastructure. Annual plans prepared by councils are the mechanism to fund the community facilities and infrastructure included in the LTCCP. There are now opportunities for these mechanisms to be used to fund roading projects to address the effects of land-based development on the safe and efficient operation of roads, with the developers contributing to the costs.

A holistic approach to protecting road safety and efficiency demands that any new development must make adequate provision to ensure it does not impose subsequent downstream problems on the road network.

District plans contain planning instruments that may provide for activities that directly affect road safety and efficiency. By the same token, district plans also have the ability to require mechanisms to be implemented to address any adverse effects in a manner that avoids, remedies or mitigates them.

This BPG has been developed in acknowledgement of the overriding tenet of the RMA to sustainably manage resources and to therefore ensure district plan provisions do not provide for activities that will compromise safety or efficiency of the roading network.

2.2   Best practice guideline development and consultation

There is already a wealth of information in the public arena about road management, and their safety and efficiency parameters.

Stage 1 of the development of the guideline involved examining a range of existing relevant guidelines and texts, as well as a review of provisions within a sample of district plans. Options for filling the identified ‘deficiencies’ and enhancing the use of ‘good’ provisions in district plans were reported back to Land Transport NZ and its working group at the conclusion of stage 1.

The industry working group comprised representatives from key organisations, ie, local government (engineers and planners), Transit, Land Transport NZ and consultants.

The findings of stage 1 essentially highlighted that:

1. . . . although councils have recognised there are issues relating to road safety and efficiency and have adopted appropriate objectives and policies, there is a need for plans to adopt better methods to implement the objectives and policies, and to monitor the plan provisions to ensure they are addressing the issues defined. (Transfund NZ, 2002)

Stage 1 was used as a basis to prepare a draft guideline in stage 2. This draft was then circulated to the working group and key stakeholders for further input before its finalisation in stage 3.

< previous | next >

Page created: 26 September 2008