Southlanddc.govt.nz

Section 2.10
Transportation

Submitter Name/
Plan Provision
Summary of Submission
Decision Requested
Submission No.
and Point
C E Henderson
Support generally the Section 32 analysis. Request more government funding for Southlands „Roads of National Importance‟. To Request retention of Objectives and Policies. maintain safety and resilience, also restoration of rail passenger services. Support in part. The explanation at the end of the section regarding transportation rules refers plan users to the infrastructure section. Removal of “infrastructure” from sentence on pg 54 relating There are no transport rules in this section. to Transport rules, to accurately reflect the correct sections of the proposed District Plan where Transportation rules can be found. Institute
of General
Support the Objectives, Policies and Rules. Not stated, It is considered the submitter is requesting the Surveyors
A and R Johnston
Concerned about the safety of roads around large operation such as Fonterra. Not stated, It is considered the submitter is requesting the following: Greater controls around traffic generated from large scale activities. Objective TRAN.1
Policy TRAN.1
Fiordland
Trails Policy TRAN.1 and Support policies but would like to see more specific implementation around cycling. Walking running and cycling could be made safer Include specific actions to help implement the policies and
and more accessible, which would have health and economic benefits for the community. Allow cycling on paved routes between residential Te Anau Cycling
Adopt and implement the cycle strategy (attached to Allocate regular funds to the trails trust Policy TRAN.2
Southern DHB
Suggests health impact assessments as an effective tool in understanding potential wider health effects of a proposed policy or plan Health Impact Assessment should be considered as a in relation to community severance/access. method of consultation as part of any major transport network undertaking. Policy TRAN.2 fails to give effect to Policy 25 of New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010 in the coastal environment as the policy Amend the policy to read: fails to consider relocation of infrastructure such as roads subject to natural hazards. A test of avoided in the first instance is appropriate to give effect to Part 2 Resource Management Act 1991 in particular when s6 Recognise benefits from the development, operation, maintenance, and upgrading or relocation of the transport network, whilst avoiding in the first instance, remedying or mitigating adverse effects on the environment. Add to the last sentence of the Explanation: Particular consideration should be given to adverse effects on public health and safety and on areas that are outstanding natural features and landscapes or areas of significant indigenous vegetation or are significant sites for iwi. Further Submission
Name and No.
Support/oppose
The NZTA suggests that a test of avoidance in the first instance is not necessary to give effect to Part 2 of the RMA. The RMA gives equal weighting to avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse effects and the wording of this policy should not be inconsistent with the wording of the Act. Policy TRAN.3
Federated
The policy provides necessary flexibility to allow Council to adopt a flexible approach to managing these aspects. This is important as the potential effects from each subdivision, land use or development will differ in terms of impact, and subsequently require different treatment. Form - Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section Section 2.10
Transportation

Submitter Name/
Plan Provision
Summary of Submission
Decision Requested
Submission No.
and Point
Policy TRAN.4
Policy TRAN.5
Form - Summary of Submissions and Decisions Requested by Plan Section

Source: http://www.southlanddc.govt.nz/assets/Section-2.10-Transportation.pdf