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

Appendix 2 - best practice in resource consent processing – road safety and efficiency considerations, and typical checklist items

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

Typical checklist to address road safety and efficiency issues

NB: This list is not all-inclusive but indicative of the types of factors that can be included.

• Part 2 analysis must conclude that the sustainable management of resources is promoted by the proposed activity.
• An environmental bottom line is the current safety and efficiency associated with any particular road. Consent to an application should not be to the detriment of this environmental bottom line, nor part 2 matters of the RMA.
• All technical matters relating to safety and efficiency should be covered. This will cover matters described within the district plan for each particular council.
• There should be an acknowledgement of limits on in-house skills, which will signal to applicants when a council may need to consider commissioning consultant reports to assess the technical aspects of any application. This will include liaising with the applicant to agree who will be commissioned and the likely costs.
• A specialist report should include if identified effects could (if combined with other effects related to the activity or the site and locality) create different effects from those anticipated or whether any of the effects are likely to change over time. It will also describe possible conditions that may avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effects.
• Any request for further information should ideally be a one-off.
• Full information will allow an assessment of who potentially affected parties are. They may not be restricted to direct neighbours, including the road controlling authority of the road directly accessed by the development. Nearby road-controlling authorities, if they are different parties, should also be considered in terms of the potential wider impact of the proposal on the road network. Some effects (other than those signed away by directly affected parties) may still need to be considered in making the decision on an application.
• Specific consideration of potential adverse effects, eg, light spill/glare for adjacent road users, signage distraction, roadside vegetation, vibration or any other nuisance.
• Consultation with relevant roading authorities, eg, Transit in the case of state highways, early in the consent process should be encouraged so potential adverse effects can be identified and addressed in development proposals at an early stage.
• Developers should be made aware of the limited access road (LAR) classification and its implications on the provision or design of any access.
• Developers should be made aware of Transit’s expectations under the Transit Act for resource consent applications affecting state highways that are LAR and that councils will consult with Transit New Zealand for these applications.
• Applications should be assessed by an officer competent in recognising traffic safety and efficiency considerations, including downstream ramifications.
• Councils can disseminate brochures that outline Transit New Zealand’s role and responsibilities. Council officers must be aware of their council’s own roading responsibilities.
• Ensure ready communication between council planners and traffic engineers/asset managers regarding time availability to review the application and incorporation of recommended engineering conditions into a resource consent report.
• Have clear procedures for determining which projects should be safety audited, requesting an audit and dealing with the recommendations from the audit. An audit is not a traffic-impact assessment. The latter is typically restricted to parking and traffic generation and may neglect safety issues.

Typical basic information

• Site location.
• Nature of, access to and traffic characteristics of adjoining activities.
• Traffic generation, volumes, types, frequency, lengths of visits, employees, visitors, service and loading vehicles.
• Pedestrian generation, especially young and old, identified separately.
• Parking demand, length of queues.
• Catchment area to be served.
• How estimates were arrived at.
• Access point location, sight distances, distance from intersections, etc.
• Pedestrian access and circulation.
• Parking, loading, and servicing facilities and manoeuvring.
• Location of public transport routes, bus stops.

< previous | next >

Page created: 1 October 2008