Rotorua District Council Economic Impacts of City Focus Technical Annexures by McDermott Miller Strategies 19 December 2014
Copyright McDermott Miller Limited is the author of this report and holds all copyright and intellectual property rights relating to it. The report, or any part of it, may not be reproduced in any form or communicated to any other person or corporate body without the prior written approval of McDermott Miller Limited. McDermott Miller Limited requires that all parties permitted to use the report and the research contained within it give full and correct acknowledgement of authorship. McDermott Miller Limited, Strategy Consultants CPO PO Box 629 Wellington New Zealand 2 nd Floor 90 The Terrace Wellington Telephone (04) 471-8500 Email strategies@mcdermottmiller.co.nz www.mcdermottmiller.co.nz
TABLE OF CONTENTS ANNEX I ANNEX II: PLANS AND MAPS 1 ACTIVITY IN THE VICINITY OF CITY FOCUS INDICATED I BY PEDESTRIAN COUNTS 6 ANNEX III: TRENDS IN RETAIL SUPPLY PLY INDICATED BY OCCUPANCY/VACANCY DATA 10 ANNEX IV: VALUE OF PROPERTIES 16 ANNEX V: ANNEX VI TRAFFIC FLOWS 19 ROTORUA CITY FOCUS STREET S VIEWS 24 i
LIST OF EXHIBITS Figure A1.1: City Focus Shared Space Concept 2 Figure AI.2: Proposed Precincts of the Rotorua Inner City 3 Figure AI.3: CBD Blocks 4 Figure A1.4: Pairs of Pedestrian Count Locations 5 Figure AII.1: Four Year Moving Average Pedestrian Counts Tutanekai Street 8 Figure AII.2: Pedestrian Counts Hinemoa Street 9 Figure AIII.1: Total Occupied Storefront Space - Tutanekai Street by Block 13 Figure AIII.2: Occupied Comparison Retail Space - Tutanekai Street by Block 13 Figure AIII.4: Total Occupied Storefront Space - Hinemoa Street by Block 14 Figure AIII.5: Total Occupied Comparison Retail Space - Hinemoa Street by Block 15 Figure AIV.1: Average Value of Tutanekai Street Properties by Block North to South 17 Figure AIV.2: Average Value of Hinemoa Street Properties by Block North to South 18 Figure AV.1: Modelled Traffic Flows: 2013 1 Hour Interpeak with current City Focus 21 Figure AV.2: Modelled Traffic Flows: 2013 1 Hour Interpeak with City Focus Removed 22 Figure AV.3: Modelled Traffic Flows: 2013 Interpeak 1 Hour Change in Volume 23 Table AV.1: Summary Modelled Traffic 2013 1 Hour Interpeak VPH 23 FigureA VI.1: Rotorua City Focus: Aerial View 25 Figure AVI.2: Tutanekai Street: looking South to City Focus 26 Figure AVI.3: Tutanekai Street: looking North to City Focus 27 Figure AVI.4: Tutanekai Street: looking South from City Focus 28 Figure AVI.5: Tutanekai Street: looking South from City Focus 29 Figure AVI.6: Tutanekai Street: looking North from City Focus 30 Figure AVI.7: Hinemoa Street: looking West to City Focus 31 Figure AVI.8: Hinemoa Street: looking West to City Focus 32 Figure AVI.9: Hinemoa Street: looking East to City Focus 33 Figure AVI.10: Hinemoa Street: looking East from City Focus 34 Figure AVI.11: Hinemoa Street: looking West from City Focus 35 ii
ANNEX I PLANS AND MAPS 1
Figure A1.1 City Focus Shared Space Concept Source: Rotorua District Council, September 2014 2
Figure AI.2: Proposed Precincts of the Rotorua Inner City CC1 West CC1 East Source: Draft Inner City0 Revitalisation Strategy, Rotorua District Council 28 May 2014 3
Figure AI.3: CBD Blocks Source: Appendix N of Operative Rotorua District Plan 4
Figure A1.4: Pairs of Pedestrian Count Locations 43 25 Note: The red boxes link the pairs of pedestrian count locations used in Annex II. Source: Property Institute of New Zealand Rotorua City Pedestrian Counts 2013 5
ANNEX II: ACTIVITY IN THE VICINITY OF CITY FOCUS INDICATED BY PEDESTRIAN COUNTS The best indicator of activity across Rotorua s CBD at a detailed spatial breakdown over the long term are pedestrian counts, as a proxy for retail sales information. We have obtained series of Property Institute of New Zealand Rotorua City Pedestrian Counts for the period 1987-2013. Since 2001 the count has been carried out in October; prior to that it was done in May. The counts are of number of pedestrians passing the count location over an hour, comprising of two half hour periods one at 10.30 am and one a 2.30 pm. The map in Figure A1.4 above shows the locations at which the counts are taken. In this analysis, we have summed the counts taken at locations on opposite sides of Tutanekai and Hinemoa Streets. The pairs of count locations used in analysing counts over time in the City Focus area are indicated by red boxes in Figure A1.4. Current Distribution of Pedestrian Activity by Distance from City Focus There is considerable random variation year to year in pedestrian counts. For this reason we have smoothed the data series using four year moving averages of the counts. In the four years to 2013, the highest count for a pair of pedestrian counts locations in Tutanekai Street is 620 per hour, at locations 10 & 4, immediately to the north of City Focus, A little further to the north, closer to the Pukuatua Street intersection, average over the four years to 2013 565. The location pair with second highest count (9 & 3) in Tutanekai Street is immediately to the south of City Focus A little further to the south, closer to the Eruera Street intersection, the four year moving average count is 544 There is no indication in this static view that City Focus is inhibiting pedestrian activity in Tutanekai Street as they approach City Focus from either direction. In Hinemoa Street, the highest pedestrian count is at location pair 17 and 18 immediately to the west of City Focus a four year moving average of 209 ie little more than a third of the count recorded at locations 10 and 4 in Tutanekai Street. Again, there is no indication in that City Focus is inhibiting pedestrian activity in Hinemoa Street as they approach City Focus from either direction. 6
Trends in Pedestrian Activity Figures AII.1 and AII.2 illustrate a dramatic decline in pedestrian activity in Tutanekai and Hinemoa Street over the 1997-2013 period. Average pedestrian counts in Tutanekai Street in the four years to 2013 are typically only around 40% of the level in the four years to 1990. The exception is south of Eruera St; counts at location pair 7&1 are some 75% of their historic level. We interpret this pedestrians moving to and from Central Mall helping to keep counts up in this part of Tutanekai Street. Figures AII.1 and AII.2 show that pedestrian counts were beginning to fall even before the opening of Central Mall, but the decline accelerated after the mall opened in 2000. It is not possible to isolate the effect of development of City Focus on pedestrian counts from that of the removal of Tutanekai Mall (refer Section 1.2). However, there is an indication that the counts at location pair 10 & 4, in what was the Mall immediately to the north of City Focus, temporarily increased following this combined development. The particular effect of the relocation of Farmers from Hinemoa Street to Central Mall is shown in Figure AII.1 (particularly for location count pair 44 & 47). Against this background of declining counts, the question becomes whether City Focus has accentuated the decline or to some extent helped to ameliorate it. In the four years to 2013, counts in Tutanekai at location pair 12 & 6 (between Haupapa and Pukuatua Street) were 56% of their pre-1991 level compared to 42% at location pair 10&4, immediately to the north of City Focus. Prior to being discontinued, counts at location pair 44 & 47 running at 31% of historic levels, slightly higher than the 26% at location pairs 17 & 18. There is therefore weak evidence to support the view that City Focus has accentuated the decline in activity in its immediate area. We conclude that: The combination of development of City Mall and removal of Tutanekai Mall and City Focus helped temporarily reverse the long term decline of pedestrian activity in the area; But the diversion of shoppers due to opening of Central Mall swamped this effect; In more recent times, there is weak evidence that City Focus has aggravated the challenges facing the area. 7
Figure AII.1 Four Year Moving Average Pedestrian Counts Tutanekai Street A) Actual Pedestrian Counts 1900 Count 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 City Focus Developed B) Four Year Moving Average Pedestrian Counts 1900 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Central Mall Year Begins 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Farmers Relocates 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Pairs of Pedestrian Count Locations 12+6 11+5 10+4 9+3 8+2 7+1 1800 1700 1600 1500 1400 1300 Pairs of Pedestrian Count Locations Count 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Note: Solid lines denote pairs of locations closest to City Focus McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 Average 4 Years to 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 12+6 11+5 10+4 9+3 8+2 7+1 8
Figure AII.2 Pedestrian Counts Hinemoa Street A) Actual Pedestrian Counts 1300 1200 Count 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 Pairs of Pedestrian Count Locations 44+47 17+18 26+42 43+25 200 100 0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 City Focus Developed B) Four Year Moving Average Pedestrian Counts 1300 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Central Mall Year Begins 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Farmers Relocates 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1200 1100 Count 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Note: Solid lines denote pairs of locations closest to City Focus McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 Average 4 Years to 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Pairs of Pedestrian Count Locations 44+47 17+18 26+42 43+25 9
ANNEX III: TRENDS IN RETAIL SUPPLY PLY INDICATED BY OCCUPANCY/VACANCY DATA We are examining/testing the hypothesis that City Focus negatively affects the attractiveness of store close to City Focus (and therefore the performance and attractiveness of tenancies to retailer). But this hypothesis/tendency exists in the context of three other patterns/trends: Slow recovery (at best) in retail sales in the District as a whole since the negative impact of GFC of 2008; A continuing shift in comparison goods sales from the CBD to Central Mall (refer Section 1.2); A general trend over time for remaining retail in the CBD to concentrate on Tutanekai Street axis and to atrophy off this axis; This makes identify the particular affect of City Focus challenging. Current Distribution of Vacancy/Occupancy of Retail Space by Distance from City Focus In its December 2013 the TelferYoung occupancy/vacancy database recorded 42 storefront tenancies in Tutanekai St immediately to the north and south of City Focus (ie between its intersections with Pukuatua Street and Eruera Street ) Of these, 4 were vacant giving a vacancy rate (on number of tenancy basis) of 10%. The data does not indicate, within these blocks, any tendency to greater vacancies in storefront tenancies closer to City Focus. This vacancy rates compares with: A vacancy rate of storefront tenancies (by number of tenancies) in the rest in the rest of Tutanekai Street within the Boutique Precinct of 7%; 0% vacancy rate in Tutanekai Street within the Entertainment Precinct A vacancy rate of 20% in the rest the CBD off Tutanekai Street. This indicate that storefront spaces in Tutanekai St remain more popular with retailers than storefront spaces anywhere else in the CBD outside the Entertainment Precinct. At the same time, the TelferYoung occupancy/vacancy database recorded 75 storefront tenancies in Hinemoa St immediately to the east and west of City Focus (ie between its intersections with Fenton Street and Amohia Street). Of these, 25 vacant giving a vacancy rate (on number of tenancy basis) of 33%. The TelferYoung data does indicate a tendency for increasing storefront vacancies in Hinemoa Street tenancies closer to City Focus compared to those further away. This is largely due to the 10 vacant stores in Hinemoa Street 10
identified by TelferYoung as being in Hinemoa Arcade, compared with a total of 18, ie a vacancy rate of 55%. Hinemoa Arcade opened in 2011 and is part the re-development of the Post Office building (which also includes Royal Court Apartments) and includes tenancies in the redeveloped former multiplex on Pukatua Street. The take up of storefront tenancies in this Arcade has been slow. Most of the external shops in Hinemoa Arcade along Hinemoa Street have now been take up (at November 2014) but they do not constitute a high-quality retail offer. Current Distribution of Quality of Retail Space by Distance from City Focus As discussed in Section 2.1, It has been mooted that City Focus has resulted in lack of investment in buildings and tenancies near to City Focus. If that is the case, we would expect to see this reflected TelferYoung s assessments of tenancy quality. In its December 2013 the TelferYoung occupancy/vacancy database recorded 26 of 42 (62%) storefront tenancies in Tutanekai St immediately to the north and south of City Focus (ie between its intersections with Pukuatua Street and Eruera Street as being A grade and only 3 being C grade. The B and C rated storefront tenancies in this part of Tutanekai Street tend to be further from City Focus, not closer to it. The TelferYoung occupancy/vacancy database recorded 51 of 75 (68%) storefront tenancies in Hinemoa St immediately to the east and west of City Focus (ie between its intersections with Fenton Street and Amohia Street) as being A Grade, of these, 25 vacant giving a vacancy rate (on number of tenancy basis) of 33%. This is higher than the percentage of A grade storefront in Tutanekai St, near City Focus. The reason for this high occurrence of A grade tenancies in Hinemoa Street near City Focus is, again, Hinemoa Arcade which TelferYoung rates as A grade. This 2011 development, together with its associated Royal Court Apartment development, counters assertions that City Focus has resulted in a lack of investment. The problem is of finding stable, viable tenants rather than investment per se. Trend in Occupancy over time by Distance from City Focus In this sub-section we examine the relationship between occupied storefront floorspace and proximity to City Focus, in order to see if, over time, proximity to City Focus has a tangible bearing on popularity of tenancies with businesses. Presumably spaces will have been Tutanekai Street Current supply of occupied storefront floorspace in Tutanekai Street blocks 12 & 19 is 3,700 m 2 (20% of the Tutanekai Street total) of which 3000 m 2 is comparison retail floorspace. 11
Tutanekai supply of occupied storefront floorspace in blocks 11 & 19 is some 2800 m 2 (20% of the Tutanekai Street total) of which 2,100 m 2 is comparison retail floorspace. Current floorspace in the most southern section of Tutanekai Street (blocks 13 and 20, between intersections with Eruera and Amohau Street) is 3500 m 2, and it has around 2100 m 2 of comparison retail floorspace. Since 1998, occupied storefront floorspace in Tutanekai St has been in the range of 18,600 m 2 to 20,300 and 2013 supply is similar to that of 1998 (some 18,700 m 2 ). With this, occupied storefront floorspace in Tutanekai has fallen mostly markedly in blocks 12 & 19, where there was a 24% fall between 1998 and 2013. In contrast, supply in the block north of City Focus (block 11 & 18 grow by some 15%, The fall in blocks 12 and 19 is mainly associated with the relocation of Farmers to Central Mall in 2006; the rear part of the space formerly occupied by Farmers (and prior to that, by Deka) is now used for office. Occupied store front space in Blocks 13 & 20 in 2013 is close to 1998 level Since 2001 1, occupied comparison retail floorspace in Tutanekai St in 2013 is, at 8400 m 2, some 30% below 2001 levels. This fall has been more marked in Blocks 12 & 19 (Figure AIII.2) with a 36% fall. But it has been somewhat less in Blocks 11 & 18, with a 25% fall. With this, occupied comparison retail floorspace in Tutanekai has fallen mostly markedly in blocks 12 & 19, where there was a 27% fall between 1998 and 2013. Supply in the block north of City Focus (block 11 & 18) fell only by 8%. Occupied store front space in Blocks 13 & 20 in 2013 fell by some 25% over this period. Clearly, there has been a trend in Tutanekai for storefront spaces formerly use to comparison goods floorspace to be used for other activities. The trend has occurred through Tutanekai Street and its is not more acute in the blocks adjacent to City Focus; indeed comparison retail provision in Blocks 11 & 18 (at one time the Tutanekai Mall) has stood up relatively well. There is a possibility that the fall in occupied storefront supply, and within this comparison retail, in blocks 12 & 19 may have something to do with proximity to the sails of City Focus. We note the site on the corners of block 19 on City Focus was vacant in 2012, but largely tenanted in 2013 by Hannahs. 1 TelferYoung began to record the specific type of activity in storefront spaces in 2001. 12
Figure AIII.1: Total Occupied Storefront Space - Tutanekai Street by Block 5500 5000 Sq m 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 Tutanekai 7 & 14 Tutanekai 8 & 15 Tutanekai 10 & 17 Tutanekai 11 & 18 (by City Focus) Tutanekai 12 & 19 (by City Focus) Tutanekai 13 & 20 1500 1000 500 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year Source: McDermott Miller estimates based on TelferYoung Central Business District Vacancy Survey McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Figure AIII.2: Occupied Comparison Retail Space - Tutanekai Street by Block 5500 5000 Sq m 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 Tutanekai 7 & 14 Tutanekai 8 & 15 Tutanekai 10 & 17 Tutanekai 11 & 18 (by City Focus) Tutanekai 12 & 19 (by City Focus) Tutanekai 13 & 20 1500 1000 500 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year Source: McDermott Miller estimates based on TelferYoung Central Business District Vacancy Survey McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 13
Hinemoa Street There are currently some 11,600 m 2 in storefront spaces in Hinemoa Street, of which 6700 m 2 are in comparison retail businesses. (refer Figures AIII.4 and AIII.5) below. There has been and 18% fall in occupied storefront space in the street over 1998-2013, and a 30% fall in comparison retail space specifically over 1998-2013 The impact of the relocation of Farmers to Central Mall on supply of storefront floorspace is show clearly in Figures III.4 and AIII.5. Figure AIII.4 shows a partial recovery however, partly to a limited take up of retail spaces in the relatively new Hinemoa Arcade (opened 2011). Occupied total storefront, and within this comparison retail space, in Blocks 18 & 19 has held up reasonably well, which tends to counter arguments of negative effects of City Focus. It is clear that the tenanting of Hinemoa Arcade has been very slow, but it is not clear that this is because of the effects of City Focus on sightlines and traffic movements. Figure AIII.4: Total Occupied Storefront Space - Hinemoa Street by Block 10000 9500 9000 8500 Sq m 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Hinemoa 3 & 4 Hinemoa 11 & 12 (by City Focus) Hinemoa 18 & 19 (by City Focus) Hinemoa 25 & 26 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year Source: McDermott Miller estimates based on TelferYoung Central Business District Vacancy Survey McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 14
Figure AIII.5: Total Occupied Comparison Retail Space - Hinemoa Street by Block 10000 9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000 Hinemoa 3 & 4 Hinemoa 11 & 12 (by City Focus) Sq m 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 Hinemoa 18 & 19 (by City Focus) Hinemoa 25 & 26 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year Source: McDermott Miller estimates based on TelferYoung Central Business District Vacancy Survey McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 15
ANNEX IV: VALUE OF PROPERTIES Value of Properties by Distance from City Focus In this subsection we analyse RDC property rating data (current in March 2014) to see if proximity to City Focus has an effect on property values. Figures IV.1 and IV.2 show the average value of improvements (buildings) per m 2 of building area and average value of land per m 2 of land area are shown. Figure IV.1 below shows these average by block north to south along Tutanekai Street (refer map in Figure A1.3 for the blocks these numbers refer to). Figure IV.2 shows these by block east to west along Hinemoa Street. In Tutanekai Street: The average value of buildings in blocks 11&18, immediately to the north of City Focus are, at $1670/m 2 the highest of any in Tutanekai Street. The second highest are in blocks 12 & 19, immediately to the south of City Focus ($1620/m 2 ) Similarly, average land values in Tutanekai Street are highest close in the blocks adjoining City Focus ($1450/m 2 in 11 & 18, and $1750/m 2 in 12 & 19) In Hinemoa Street: The average building values in blocks 25 & 26 area, at $945/m 2, higher than in 11 & 12 (immediately to the west of City Focus) at $858/m 2 and in 18 &19 (immediately to the east) at $560/m 2. However, the average land values in blocks 11 & 12 (at $886/m 2 ) and 18 & 19 (at 710/m 2 ), adjoining City Focus, are the highest in Hinemoa Street. There is no evidence in this block-level assessment that indicates that City Focus is negatively affecting property values. However, it remains possible that it is impacting on building values and condition at a finer spatial level ie on individual building and land values ie along Tutanekai Street within adjoining blocks 11 & 18 and 12 & 19, and along Hinemoa Street within blocks 11 & 12 and18 & 19. We have assessed average values of properties along these sections of Tutanekai and Hinemoa Streets and we conclude that there is no clear pattern on individual values or QV assessments of building condition. We conclude the available property value data does not support the contention that City focus is negatively impacting on condition and values of nearby properties. Neither does the data confirm City Focus has a positive effect. However, it remains possible that City Focus has helped Tutanekai Street in 11 & 18 and 12 & 19 retain its historic status as the prime retail area within the CBD. 16
Figure AIV.1: Average Value of Tutanekai Street Properties by Block North to South $1,800 $1,600 Improvements Value $/sq m building area Land Value $/sq m land area $1,400 $1,200 $/sq m $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $0 7 & 14 8 & 15 9 & 16 10 & 17 11 & 18 12 & 19 13 & 20 CBD Block Blocks near City Focus Source: McDermott Miller estimates based on RDC rating data McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 17
Figure AIV.2: Average Value of Hinemoa Street Properties by Block North to South $1,800 $1,600 $1,400 Improvements Value $/sq m building area Land Value $/sq m land area $1,200 $/sq m $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $0 3 & 4 11 & 12 18 & 19 25 & 26 CBD Block Source: McDermott Miller estimates based on RDC rating data McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 18
ANNEX V: TRAFFIC FLOWS Traffic Flows At McDermott Miller s request, the City Works Manager provided modelled traffic flows for the inner city, under the current road/intersection and with the City focus removed (Option C). The results of this modelling exercise for the interpeak period under 2013 are shown in Figures V.1 to V.3 below. Figure V.1 shows that at present most of the traffic through City Focus flows south along Tutanekai St and turns right into Hinemoa St (some 332 vph), and there is a smaller traffic flow east along Hinemoa that turns left into Tutanekai St. Total traffic entering City Focus is some 580 vph. For comparison, some 1260 vph enter the intersection of Tutanekai and Pukuatua Streets, and 1170 the intersection of Tutanekai and Eruera streets Removing City Focus would result an increase of 659 vph entering the Tutanekai St- Hinemoa Street intersection to new total of 1239 a 114% increase. Table V.1 below summarises the flows along the city blocks that adjoin City Focus, both with and without City Focus. This is an indicator of stores visibility and accessibility to passing traffic. Total traffic, both directions combined along Tutanekai Street between its intersections of Hinemoa and Eruera Streets (ie blocks 12 & 19) is 119 (refer Table V.1) This would increase by 103 vph to 222 vph. Total traffic, both directions combined along the eastern part of Hinemoa Street between its intersections of Amohia and Tutanekai Streets (ie blocks 11 &12 is 178. This would increase by 716 vph to 894 vph. Total traffic, both directions combined along the west part of Hinemoa Street between its intersections of Tutanekai and Fenton Streets (ie blocks 18 &19 ) is 402. This would increase by 951 vph to 549 vph. However, total traffic, both directions combined along Tutanekai Street between its intersection of Pukuatua and Hinemoa Streets (ie blocks 11 & 18) is 461 (refer Table V.1) If modelling is correct, would actually decrease by 50 vph to 411 vph. We conclude that: Removal of City Focus would increase the visibility of retailing in Hinemoa Street to through traffic far more than it will retailing in Tutanekai Street; While increasing visibility of retailing to passing traffic in Tutanekai Street south of the intersection with Hinemoa Street (ie blocks 12 and 19) the reverse would occur north of the intersection (ie blocks 11 and 18). 19
Taking a broader view of the CBD, removal of City Focus (as modelled) is has a smaller net benefit, as traffic flows will be diverted from other streets, in particularly Pukuatua and Erurera Streets (refer Figure V.3). Changes to flows along Amohau Street are minimal and removal of City Focus (under traffic modelling assumptions) will only have a small effect on drawing more traffic into the core CBD. However, the traffic modelling does not take into account additional trips that may be made to the Tutanekai St/Hinemoa St intersection as a result of remove of City Focus: For example, shoppers may diverted from making shopping trips to the suburbs or Central Mall by improved accessibility to vehicles of retailing the Tutanekai St/Hinemoa Street intersection area. Such trips would be additional to modelled traffic flows. Further, it is possible the increase in visibility and accessibility to vehicles may encourage more retail businesses to take up vacant tenancies in Hinemoa Street; if they do so any traffic they directly generate would be additional to the modelled flows. The reconfiguration of City Focus (Option B) would result in some increase in traffic flows along Hinemoa St and to a lesser extent Tutanekai Street; it would improve vehicle-borne accessibility for shoppers whose destination in the area but would discourage through traffic. It is not possible to estimate the number of shopping trips that could be generated by Option B making shops in the area more accessible to vehicles without a marketing research survey. 20
Figure AV.1: Modelled Traffic Flows: 2013 1 Hour Interpeak with current City Focus Tutanekai St Hinemoa St Source: Supplied by RDC Works Manager, 4 November 2014. Model runs performed by TDG. McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 21
Figure AV.2: Modelled Traffic Flows: 2013 1 Hour Interpeak with City Focus Removed Tutanekai St Hinemoa St Source: Supplied by RDC Works Manager, 4 November 2014. Model runs performed by TDG. McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 22
Figure AV.3: Modelled Traffic Flows: 2013 Interpeak 1 Hour Change in Volume Tutanekai St Hinemoa St Note: Red denotes net gains following removal of City Focus, Green denotes net losses. Source: Supplied by RDC Works Manager, 4 November 2014. Model runs performed by TDG. McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 Table AV.1: Summary Modelled Traffic 2013 1 Hour Interpeak VPH With City Focus City Focus removed Shift % Shift Traffic flowing in both directions: Along Tutanekai St: Past blocks 11 & 18 461 411-50 -11% Past blocks 12 & 19 119 222 103 87% Along Hinemoa Street Past blocks 11 & 12 178 894 716 402% Past blocks 18 & 19 402 951 549 137% Total Vehicles Entering Tutanekai St/Hinemoa St Intersection 580 1239 659 114% Note: Traffic flowing in both directions is an indicator of stores visibility to passing traffic. No total is given of these figures as this would lead to a double count of total vehicles entering the intersection. Source: Source: Supplied by RDC Works Manager, 4 November 2014. Model runs performed by TDG. McDermott Miller 12 November 2014 23
ANNEX VI ROTORUA CITY FOCUS STREET VIEWS 24
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE FigureA FigureA VI.1: Rotorua City City Focus: Aerial View 25
Figure AVI.2: Tutanekai Street: looking South to City Focus 26
Figure AVI.3: Tutanekai Street: looking North to City Focus 27
Figure AVI.4: Tutanekai Street: looking South from City Focus 28
Figure AVI.5: Tutanekai Street: looking South from City Focus 29
Figure AVI.6: Tutanekai Street: looking North from City Focus 30
Figure AVI.7: Hinemoa Street: looking West to City Focus 31
Figure AVI.8: Hinemoa Street: looking West to City Focus 32
Figure AVI.9: Hinemoa Street: et: looking East to City Focus 33
Figure AVI.10: Hinemoa Street: looking East from City Focus 34
Figure AVI.11: Hinemoa Street: looking West from City Focus 35
[ENDS] McDermott Miller Strategies 19 December 2014) 36