Attachment 2
Ngauranga to Airport Steering Group
AGENDA updated with MINUTES
Meeting information
Time:
2.00pm – 4pm
Date:
16 April 2015
Location:
NZTA Wellington Regional Office, Co-operative Building (PSIS House), 20 Ballance
St - Board Room
Members:
Jane Davies (GWRC)
Lyndon Hammond (NZTA)
Wayne Hastie (GWRC)
Amy Kearse (Secretariat)
Geoff Swainson (WCC)
Selwyn Blackmore (NZTA)
Other
Chrissie Little (BRT Project Manager)
Andy Ford (GWRC)
Attendees
Luke Troy (GWRC)
Nick Sargeant (GWRC)
Stewart McKenzie
ACT
Member
Anthony Wilson (WCC)
Apologies:
Reading:
• Minutes of 25 March 2015 meeting
• N2A Action register
• BRT Project status report
• State highway status report
• Urban transformation and local
roads status report
Agenda
Item Description
Activity
Time
1
Welcome
2.00-2.05
INFORMATION
2
Approve 25 March minutes and review action register
Approve/review 2.05-2.10
3
Report back on N2A programme resourcing (LH)
Endorse
2.10-2.30
4
Status report discussion
Discussion
2.30-2.50
• Migration of activities from N2A table
Accept status
• Frequency of reporting
reports
RELEASED UNDER THE
• GWRC report? Plans and strategies?
5
Governance Group preparation
Discussion
2.50-3.05
OFFICIAL
• Next meeting on 28 April
• Draft agenda and report
6
BRT design on Ruahine Street – update on modelling
Discussion
3.05-3.30
and approval pathway (CL, AF, SB)
7
Wellington Urban Growth Strategy (SB)
Discussion
3.30-3.45
8
General Business
Discussion
3.45-4.00
• Review actions
• Meeting schedule
• upcoming meetings 14 May, 4 June (tbc)
N2A Steering Group 16 April 2015
Page 1 of 4
MINUTES
Item Description
Actions
1
Welcome
-
JD noted that this is her last meeting and that LT will be
replacing her on the Steering Group.
2
Approve 25 March minutes and review action register
Approved minutes of 25 March 2015 noting the level of detail
was appropriate.
Steering Group reviewed action register. No changes to the
status of actions.
3
Report back on N2A programme resourcing
LH to update RB as follows
LH introduced the memo ‘N2A Programme Management
for further discussion with
Approach’ (dated 9 April 2015) outlining a proposal for
KL and GC: the SG can
programme management to support successful integration and
see value in an
delivery of the N2A Corridor Strategy in a ‘one network
independent chair and
approach’. SB outlined Jim Bentley’s background and
considered two candidates
experience in consideration for the Programme Manager (PM)
(
and Jim
ACT
role.
Bentley).
WH also queried the end date of October for N2A resourcing.
SH advised that it is significant from a SH perspective, and CL
THE
also reiterated that it is good for BRT also.
CL noted that BRT resources will assist the PM; that these are
already part-time, and that one of the PM’s first actions will be
to confirm the resources needed for N2A programme
management.
LH raised the issue of Chair, noting he has been chairing
meetings by default, and that RB has been considering and
spoken to some of the SG members about an independent
UNDER
chair such as
.
WH queried who would fund. LH advised that it was envisaged
that an independent chair would be appointed in a voluntary
capacity.
INFORMATION
The SG discussed the pros and cons of an independent chair
and potential candidates for such a role including both
and Jim Bentley.
The SG agreed that Lyndon should report back to RB to enable
her to have a further conversation with WCC and GWRC CEs.
The SG then further discussed the value add of having a
stakeholder perspective and the option of using groups such as
RELEASED
the PT Users Group and PT Reference Group engaged
throughout the PTSS or the Chamber of Commerce
OFFICIAL
Infrastructure Group. CL noted her support for engaging with
stakeholders on BRT.
The SG concluded discussion on this item and accepted the
recommendations set out in the ‘N2A Programme Management
Approach’ memo:
a. Agree the need to establish a N2A Programme
Manager to lead and drive the ‘one network approach’
outlined in the N2A Corridor Strategy.
b. Agree the appointment of Jim Bentley as the contracted
Programme Manager.
c. Note that HNO have offered to fully fund the
Programme Manager role through to end of October
2015.
d. Note that a small virtual Programme Management
N2A Steering Group 16 April 2015
Page 2 of 4
support team will be needed to support the Programme
Manager.
e. Agree that the virtual programme support team will
initially be merged into BRT contractor roles through to
end of July only. The Programme Manager will be
required to prepare a resource plan to outline
programme resource requirements after July 2015.
f.
Agree that partner organisations will provide additional
planning support resources from existing staffing
structures.
4
Status report discussion
The SG reviewed the table showing migration of N2A activities
AK to add a standing item
to the N2A status reports, and considered the questions posed
to SG agenda on strategies
by AK about whether each party should report on new plans
and plan updates.
and strategies of relevance to N2A and whether there was the
need for a separate GWRC report.
The SG agreed that the BRT report picked up GWRC enough,
but that the SG may require particular GWRC-focused reports
from time to time if a need is identified (by exception).
The SG to have a standing item on the agenda for plans and
ACT
strategies.
The SG
accepted the status reports as read.
THE
GS advised that the Urban transformation and local roads
status report provides a snapshot of WCC work and that WCC
has allocated Steve Spence as its internal project coordinator to
look after this work and start regular reporting.
Clarification was sought on what the sign-off of the cycling
strategy by WCC on 30 April entailed. GS confirmed that it was
a statement of principles to assist decision-making that was
being signed off, not a detailed network plan, but rather a
programme approach.
UNDER
SB queried whether the walking and cycling improvements as
part of the Mt Vic Tunnel Duplication project were included. This
was confirmed; WCC has adopted a corridor approach
predicated on those facilities being available.
INFORMATION
JD queried whether there was anything likely to conflict with the
PT Spine – and whether there was an opportunity/need to
influence the principles to avoid conflict. GS advised that a
principle was included along the lines of “Implementation of
cycleways will not introduce travel time delays for PT services”.
The BRT report was briefly discussed next. WH noted some
changes to the descriptions of enabling projects. CL agreed to
CL to make adjustments to
RELEASED
amend.
the descriptions of enabling
CL noted that confirmation of the Senior Responsible Owners
projects.
OFFICIAL
for BRT still required. The SRO should be the one to benefit
most from the project, and this was really GWRC’s role to push
through and advocate for BRT. The SG agreed that Greg
Campbell should be confirmed as the Senior Responsible
Owner.
6
BRT design on Ruahine Street – update on modelling
AF presented on the results of the Ruahine Street modelling
(refer presentation for detail).
The following questions were posed:
1. Are the SG comfortable with the broad concept, noting
further work will be done by SM and team?
2. Do the SG want the team to wait for BRT IBC to be
completed before commencing more detailed design?
N2A Steering Group 16 April 2015
Page 3 of 4
The SG considered these questions in depth, including whether
there were advantages in presenting a package of activities or
demonstrating momentum re Mt Vic/Ruahine Street.
WH noted an issue about needing to understand what
standards you need to meet (eg does priority at certain times
meet this standard) to define the system as BRT.
CL noted the risk re branding, and the need to develop the story
about BRT and for the GG to understand what a BRT system
will look like in Wellington. CL expressed her confidence that a
solution could be delivered that is transformational for
Wellington and the IBC will define what this looks like.
The SG queried whether the best performing option ticked the
policy objectives and strategic objectives in plans, including
growing patronage. LT advised yes from a PTSS perspective,
the option achieves modal shift but that we did not know if it
ticked WCC’s objectives. SM advised that there was likely to be
very little difference between the current option and earlier
hybrid option in terms of Town Belt take, particularly with
revised curvature for Tunnel and other refinements to reduce
overall take, and that it would be useful to advance and set in
front of WCC soon.
ACT
The SG cautioned care around the use of language such as
Mt Vic Tunnel Duplication
HoV lanes as this has a commonly understood meaning.
project to consider what
THE
LH queried whether the team could prepare a pictorial to show
work is any could
the initial concept so as to illustrate the impact on the Town
commence in the interim to
Belt. SM advised that it would need to be quite detailed and
enable the project to
would require to start engaging with stakeholders. SM noted his
advance, noting the SG
preference to wait until the BRT IBC is finalised.
has advised to wait until
The SG agreed to wait until the IBC is finalised before
the BRT IBC is finalised
commencing detailed design for the Mt Victoria Tunnel
before commencing
Duplication project but recommended the project consider
detailed design for Mt Vic.
UNDER
further what work if any could commence in the interim to
SM to update the SG on
enable the project to advance.
the process for the
The SG sought an update on the process for the Wellington
Wellington Town Belt
Town Belt Management Bill at or before the next SG meeting.
Management Bill.
INFORMATION
6
Governance Group preparation
The SG discussed the tabled draft GG agenda and slides. The
SG advised it would be useful to inform the GG of the role of the
SG; advise that risks were under currently under control but
these will be reported up from time to time as needed; provide
clarity on what will be delivered through the business case
process; reassurance that workstreams are on-track;
RELEASED
confidence that each agency committed to N2A.
7
Wellington Urban Growth Strategy
OFFICIAL
SM outlined concerns with WUGP that had limited mention of
BRT. GS noted that it was not a statutory document, and there
was no linkage between the LTP and the 2040 strategy focused
on community aspirations for Wellington.
8
General business
CL to schedule 1:1
Upcoming meetings were discussed. The SG agreed that CL
meetings with GWRC and
should have 1:1 meetings with CEs as needed on BRT
WCC CEs to brief them on
business case development, and that the CEs should be invited
BRT business case
to the 4 June SG meeting (morning preferred).
development.
AK to invite CEs and RB to
the 4 June SG meeting.
N2A Steering Group 16 April 2015
Page 4 of 4
Document Outline
