Second attempt at structure plan for Raglan stalls

Last week’s meeting of the Raglan Community Board was told that the second attempt at a structure plan for Raglan has stalled.  And the Raglan Community Board only got to hear about it as Bob MacLeod spotted it buried on an agenda for a Council meeting held in Ngaruawahia. ‘Variation 15’ – the Waikato Council’s first attempt at a structure plan for Raglan was withdrawn a few years ago when it was clear that it was out of line with community needs.  Now the Raglan Spatial Plan, the Waikato Council’s second go at a structure plan has met the same fate.

The staff report to the Waikato Council says, “Events regarding the proposed private plan change by the Raglan Land Company for the Rangitahi Peninsula (“the private plan change”) have now superseded the need to introduce a full spatial plan in Raglan, at this stage anyway. Instead, it is the opinion of staff that many of the issues and options for the CBD that have been received from the community groups consulted can be addressed through normal business operation but may require changes to the LTP regarding funding.”

The staff approach seems to be to wait until after the final outcome of the private plan change is known and then do a structure plan. 

Raglan Ward Councilor, Clint Baddeley, urged Council staff to release the full report on the community consultation.  But from comments made at the meeting by a Council officer it seems likely that only a censored version of the report will be released.

So Raglan is in an unsatisfactory position with the Raglan Land Company, proceeding with a private plan change for the major development on the Rangitahi Peninsula and the Waikato District Council not having a structure plan in place for Raglan.

Raglan Community Board Chair said that he is stunned that after the Board and community groups had put so much time into the Spatial Plan that is not going ahead.

Waikato District Council staff have identified the following issues:

District Plan matters
Town Centre expansion:
previous report there were options proposed to:
Rezone the town centre; or

• Place an overlay on the existing Living Zone for James and Wallis Street; or
• Expand the town centre westwards along Wainui Road to link up with the Museum and Information Centre; or
• Expand the town centre into the southern side of Bankart Street with a new sensitive rule framework; or
• Do nothing.

Non District Plan matters
These options can be undertaken as part of council normal operating functions (unless otherwise indicated) and will have LTP funding implications.
1. Car parking:
There is acknowledgement that there is a lack of car parking (generally during summer months) within the town centre. The following recommendations have been provided to address this:
Changing the car parks in the town centre to angled parking, improving manoeuvring and increasing the number of bays. This is generally supported, except on Bow Street as the community consider the current car parks are an important element defining the character of that street. However some feedback detailed that there was not enough space between the centre island of Bow St and footpath for the safe use of angled car parks;

• Establishing angled car parks in the road reserves on both sides of Wallis Street, the western side of James Street opposite the bowling club and church as well as on the northern side of Stewart Street
• James Street rehabilitation is scheduled for the 2013/14 financial year (i.e. already included in LTP2OI2-2021).
• Reconfiguring the car parks at Joyce Petchell Park (adjacent to the museum) to increase the number of spaces;
• Suggestion of establishing a campervan specific car park;
• Increasing the 1 hour car parking limit to 2 hours as I hour does not provide enough time for a coffee and shopping; and
• Providing car parking at the rugby grounds with a shuttle for special events. (Note:
• this is not a Council responsibility but one for the event organiser to look into).
• Car parking issues are identified in the LTP Priority Project List for Raglan.

2. Cliff Street one-way:
There are split opinions over this issue. On the one hand, supporters of this feel that as a one way street this would slow the traffic (in conjunction with traffic calming measures) and encourage a more pedestrian environment particularly around the use of the picnic areas. The contrary view is that with parking on both sides of Cliff Street the street is effectively one way. Converting Cliff Street to one way would adversely affect the residents along this street who would have to drive round to James Street to head into town. ft may also increase speed levels, without traffic calming measures such as chicanes. This matter is already on the LTP Priority Project List for the Raglan.
3. Additional bus stop
Consultation has raised the issue of the different locations of the bus stops in Raglan with the bus collecting passengers from outside Council offices but the drop off locality is on Wallis Street. It is acknowledged that the area outside the Information Centre is an efficient location as an additional pick up and drop off point. This is an issue that can be easily addressed.

Conclusion
It is the recommendation of staff that consideration for a spatial plan for the Raglan CBD and surrounding environs is delayed until the outcome of the private plan change is known. The options regarding car parking, Cliff Street one-way and the additional bus stop outside the Information Centre are undertaken as normal business operations and, if required, funding is applied for in the 2015-2025 LTP and evaluated against the LTP Priority Project List. Currently the car parking issue and the Cliff Street one-way issue is on the Raglan LTP Priority Project List.