Tēnā koe Cody,

 

I apologise that this acknowledgement was not sent earlier, that is
entirely my fault as it appears to not have sent despite being written on
1 November 2024.

 

I can confirm that we have received your request and are handling your
request under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act
1987 (LGOIMA). We have forwarded it to the appropriate Christchurch City
Council staff, and we will provide a response or update within 20 working
days of the date we received your request. If we are unable to respond to
your request by then, we will notify you of an extension of that
timeframe.

 

If you have any queries, please feel free to contact me. If any additional
factors come to light which are relevant to your request, please do not
hesitate to contact me so that these can be taken into account.

 

If you have not had a reply within 10 working days, please email
[1][Christchurch City Council request email]  

 

Nāku noa iti, nā

 

Jess Griffin
Official Information Advisor
Te Ratonga Ture me te Manapori - Legal & Democratic Services

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Kia ora Cody,

 

On 1 November 2024, you requested the following information, under the
Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA):

 

In the past 10 years, there have been 2 fatalities of cyclists at level
crossings. Of the two, one happened in Christchurch on February 11, 2016
with the level crossing located at Fendalton Road when Richard Craig
Chandler rode from a footpath onto the tracks. This is adjacent to the
Northern Line cycleway.

As far as I can tell, the design at the level crossings remains the same
today in 2024 as it was back in 2016 - some 8 years later. There are no
barrier, gates or chicanes for people walking or cycling at the crossing.
The level crossing design in Christchurch is approximately the same as the
one in Tauranga where the second cyclist died.

On or around January 8, 2018, Coroner Marcus Elliot wrote to CCC, NZTA and
KiwiRail about a pedestrian access gates recommendation, but received no
response.

1) Why did Council not respond to or engage with the Coroner?

Council recently approved and began construction of three level crossings
north of this area, purportedly because of the risks to cyclists, but did
not elect to upgrade the one where a cyclist literally died.

2) How did Council make the decision to upgrade these three other level
crossings vs. the one where someone literally died?

3) Is either KiwiRail or Council planning to upgrade, close or otherwise
change this level crossing? Given that 8 years have now elapsed so funding
should have surely been made available to do so by now.

 

 1. Why did Council not respond to or engage with the Coroner?

Council responded to KiwiRail on 9 March 2018, with the coroner’s office
also receiving a copy. In summary, Council’s belief at the time was that
Section 81 of the Railways Act puts primary responsibility for deciding on
the appropriate warning devices on KiwiRail as the Licenced Access
Provider.

 

KiwiRail responded on 20 April 2018, with the coroner’s office again
receiving a copy. They disputed this interpretation, but noted that all
level crossings are to be assessed using the methodology described in the
Level Crossing Safety Impact Assessment (ALCAM, plus crash and incident
history, plus site specific factors). This letter also recommended a
meeting between the parties to discuss this. At this time, it is unknown
if this meeting took place.

 

Copies of both letters are on file and can be requested if required.

 

 2. How did Council make the decision to upgrade these three other level
crossings vs. the one where someone literally died?

A number of level crossings were selected for upgrade in order to
construct the Northern Line cycleway. This is because they either: did not
have safe crossing facilities (Harewood, Langdons, Sawyers Arms); or
because the construction of the cycleway would constitute a change of use
(Tuckers, Sturrocks, Barnes, and Old Blenheim, Riccarton, Kilmarnock).

 

Ones where either traffic volumes are low, or safe crossing facilities
along the cycleway already existed, were not selected for upgrade by
Christchurch City Council as part of the cycleways programme.

 

Fendalton Road had road crossing facilities for the cycleway for many
years, so upgrading the existing level crossing would fall into business
as usual safety upgrades. These would need to be assessed and prioritised
against all other level crossings around the country, using the process
defined and led by KiwiRail.

 

 3. Is either KiwiRail or Council planning to upgrade, close or otherwise
change this level crossing? Given that 8 years have now elapsed so
funding should have surely been made available to do so by now.

KiwiRail do assessments of safety at level crossings across the country,
using the process laid out in the Level Crossing Risk Assessment Guidance.
The works are then prioritised based on needs.

 

KiwiRail and Council have discussed a number of sites that are high
priority. Council do not believe that Fendalton Road is currently
considered a priority.

 

Council holds a programme budget for dealing with maintenance works at
level crossings, which can be drawn down to deal with issues at specific
sites as required.

 

You have the right to ask the Ombudsman to investigate and review our
decision. Complaints can be sent by email to
[1][email address].

 

Publication of responses to LGOIMA requests

Please note: our LGOIMA responses may be published on the Christchurch
City Council website a month after they have been responded to, with
requesters’ personal details withheld. If you have any concerns about
this, please contact the Official Information team on
[2][Christchurch City Council request email].

 

Nâku noa iti, nâ

 

Jess Griffin
Official Information Advisor
Te Ratonga Ture me te Manapori - Legal & Democratic Services

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and
may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch City Council.
If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the
sender and delete the email.

[3]Christchurch City Council logo

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[Christchurch City Council request email]
3. Christchurch City Council logo
https://ccc.govt.nz/