C1 minutes 5 August 2017

Page | 1

CRLL - PMs Meeting Agenda and Action Points/Minutes [Date]

C1/C2 CLG minutes - ACTION POINTS / MINUTES Date: Time: Venue:

15 August 2017 5:30pm – 7:15pm AMP – Level 17, Mairangi Room

Attendees CLG: Kathy Ross David Hogan John Bristow Roy Parlane James Campbell Kerry Harding

Kate Burrows Jim Burrows Noel Thompson Julian Smith Ross Boswell David Haines

CRL: Carol Greensmith Makere Carroll Fritha Witton Simon Lough

Jasmax: Evan Williams

Aurecon Karin Lepoute

David Brown Ross Baxter + 3 residents from 26 Albert Albert St + 1 resident from Stamford Residences

Page | 2

Item

Topic

1

Welcome

1.1

Carol opened the meeting and presented a recap on the role of the CBLG

1.2

Fritha presented on the planning background and the scope of the Outline Plan, including the Urban Deisgn Delivery Work Plan

2

Public Realm Works – Albert St

2.1

Evan presented on the public realm works for Albert St

CRLL - PMs Meeting Agenda and Action Points/Minutes [Date]

Responsible

Page | 3

2.2

A CLG attendee asked if Wolfe St would have the same treatment as Mills Lane with north bound traffic turning left - Evan answered that this was still being discussed with AT - The residents expressed concern over traffic going north bound on[ from Wolfe onto Albert?] Wolfe St

2.3

Various CLG attendees advised several times throughout the meeting that the CLG meeting couldn’t be considered consultation if AT as the asset manager was not present to hear their concerns directly

2.4

CLG attendees asked in regards to the overall design what the priority was for buses, pedestrians and cars - Simon answered that it was currently pedestrians taking priority, then buses, then cars

2.5

Stamford residents expressed concern around their vehicle access and that there wasn’t proper consultation as AT were not present.

2.6

An attendees asked if the entrance to Mills Lane and Wolfe St would be single lane - Simon answered that this was the current position. Everyone’s suggestions were taken on board, which generated four options that has been through a safety audit. AT Operations have provided their feedback also. This is still being discussed, nothing has been closed off and when the audit process is completed a meeting to discuss the resulting recommendation with stakeholders will be arranged.

2.7

CLG attendees expressed concern about the access in and out of their buildings being restricted, specifically around congestion, deliveries and pick ups/drop offs

2.8

A CLG attendee asked who was in charge of the design - Simon answered that the design would be implemented by CRL, however the design being progressed by CRL is responding to the requirments of AT

2.9

Most attendees advised their opposition for having Mills Lane and Wolfe St as one way. Generally, the preferred option for Mills Lane is to keep the status quo.

2.10

Evan advised that after analysis, the safety audit as well as taking the design perspective into consideration this was the preferred option, however this was still open for discussion - Simon added that the decision for this will sit with AT

2.11

An attendee asked why the bus indents were so close together along the street - Simon answered that it was based on being the last part of the journey for the Northwestern busses, as well as there being 80 bus movements at peak hour

CRLL - PMs Meeting Agenda and Action Points/Minutes [Date]

-

Page | 4

An attendee asked if there would be bus stops outside of Commercial Bay in Lower Albert St Simon answered that there would be bus stops but not bus indents

2.12

An attendee asked if the CRL would diminish the need for more busses - Simon answered that it wouldn’t as the city continues to grow quickly

2.13

An attendee asked how the busses would be powered - Simon answered that they were powered by diesel - Various attendees expressed concern over the use of diesel buses and air quality effects

2.14

James asked if the bus bays could be used for drop offs and pick ups for their building - Simon answered that this wouldn’t be possible as they would be 24/7 bus bays

2.15

Ross advised that he was happy with the approach of having pedestrians first with cars coming third, as well as the placement of trees and the wide footpaths

2.16

David Hogan expressed concern over the placement of the bus bay outside 17 Albert St as the turning traffic could cause accidents at the entrance to Wolfe St

2.17

Kerry asked how easy it will be crossing the road - Evan answered that there would be formalised crossings with barnes dances at all of the main intersections

2.18

An attendee asked what the best way was to give feedback - Carol answered that it would be best to email her with any feedback

2.19

Kathy asked if there were bins in the proposed design - Evan answered that there was dual purpose bins[ recycling and general rubbish]

2.20

Ross Baxter advised that there was rubbish piling up in their entryway - CRL to follow up with contractors on this

2.21

An attendee asked if amenities would be able to support not having bus bays further up Albert St - Simon answered that this wasn’t the only termination spot for buses

2.22

David Brown asked if there will be tree pits where there are bus bays

CRLL - PMs Meeting Agenda and Action Points/Minutes [Date]

-

Page | 5

Simon advised that this wouldn’t work in the current plan, however the intended bus bays will be future proofed for tree pits

2.23

Ross expressed that the communication from DSBJV and Brandy has been excellent (NB C1 area works]

2.24

Various attendees expressed that they would like AT executives to be at the next consultation meeting regarding Albert St - CRL agreed to advise AT of the requirement to meet with those attending the CLG

2.25

David Brown asked what would be done with the eves and awnings of their building - Simon answered that AT was yet to give feedback on this, however it was the CRL’s preference not to touch these

2.26

Julian asked in regards to the Stamford Hotel awning if there could be a discussion around changing this to match the new environment once Albert St has been reinstated with the new design as the current awning matches the current streetscape - Noted by CRL attendees

2.27

Attendees from Stamford residents expressed concern about the seating placement of street furniture near the entrance to their apartments as there have been safety issues with people tailgaiting in the past, this would give these people a place to wait

2.28

An attendee asked what panel was taking place in two days - Simon answered that it was the Urban Design Panel. This is where professional bodies review the streetscape and provide a response which is required by the CRL designation conditions

2.29

Various attendees suggested putting signage on the ground to give way to cars on Mills Lane as they believe this could be a safety issue with the walkway being a level ground

2.30

Attendees from Stamford Residences advised that there had been some trouble with taxis picking people up and dropping people off - Carol advised that all of the taxi companies as well as the taxi federation had been contacted in regards to the changes on Albert St that would affect them

2.31

An attendee asked if the CRL have input into the phasing of the traffic lights - Carol advised that the team who manage the traffic lights have taken on feedback from the CRL and that they have been very responsive

CRLL - PMs Meeting Agenda and Action Points/Minutes [Date]

Page | 6

2.32

An attendee advised that Alan at Connectus had been doing a good job with consultation

3

Close

3.1

Carol thanked people for coming and closed the meeting

CRLL - PMs Meeting Agenda and Action Points/Minutes [Date]