The flyover, the tunnel and the bulldozers

The New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has released their plans for a flyover next to the Basin Reserve, a second Mt Victoria tunnel and the widening of Ruahine St and Wellington Rd up to seven lanes.

Despite clear opposition to the flyover, the NZTA have offered Wellingtonians two options of the same 8 metre high behemoth – a sham consultation between Flyover A and Flyover B. Other options were considered but have never been put to the public for consultation, perhaps in fear we might prefer better public transport and cleaner air.

So now is the time to put in a submission and let them know what you think of a flyover running next to the iconic Basin Reserve. Let them know what you think of a motorway that will displace the historic Mother Aubert Creche and Hataitai Kindergarton. Tell them what you think of the loss of Badminton Hall, a large section of the town belt and 25 properties (including an apartment block) on Wellington Rd. Perhaps you could also tell them about the loss of access to the Hataitai shop and the increased air and noise pollution.

All the information you need to do this can be found here on our submission guide. If you’re pressed for time you can send in our automatic submission here.

Wellington does not need an uneconomic, expensive and polluting urban motorway. It is vital Wellingtonians make their voice heard and demand affordable and sustainable transport solutions.

Option A
Option B

8 Comments Posted

  1. What seems scarier is they only plan to do most of the work one the Kapiti and Transmission Gully motorways are built! I’m pretty sure this project would be further up the list than that, considering it is cheaper and the road receives twice the traffic that those two projects would!

  2. I agree, Gareth, but can you define what you mean by “sustainable transport solutions”? How would you determine sustainability?

  3. This is the travesty that comes from NZTA having a couple of high-ups with vested interests in finishing the motorway plan that began in the 70’s with bull-dozing much of Thorndon & re-interring half of Bolton St cemetary. After shoving the By-pass through Te Aro under a storm of controversy by local residents, the gains there have been much less at peak time than projected. Actually, I swear sometimes that by-pass looks more congested than the old route along Viv St used to be …

    This is another piece of madness by NZTA officials, who act like roading despots, and refuse to acknowledge the changes the past four decades have wrought since the plan to take the motorway all the way from Ngauranga Interchange to the Airport was first mooted.
    The snappily named ‘N2A’ corridor went through the quickest consultation process possible a couple of years ago, and despite vociferous opposition from residents of Mt Victoria (including sitting WCC Councillor Iona Pannett).

    Trucking lobbies feature heavily in this decision – think Robert Jones and friends.
    Infratil is also cozy with the decision-makers, wanting to see a broad and inviting highway to their doorstep.
    Even if it does only carve 3 minutes off the journey, they want the prestige of an enormous road from their Airport to the CBD and beyond.
    If this was a middle-aged man, I’d be suggesting Viagra, rather than the red sportscar & taking off with the girl from accounts; instead, NZTA have a lust for a ‘mid-life crisis’ roading budget.

    It’s time for the old heads at NZTA to acknowledge that the future just doesn’t run on abundant cheap oil, not here; not with the USA fighting wars in geopolitically sensitive regions to ensure their continuing access to the lion’s share of the world’s dwindling oil supplies.

  4. I was kind of hoping that the “Green” mayor we elected would be leading the charge on opposing this, any idea why not?

    Probably because there’s much more to the council and everything it coordinates with than just the Mayor.

  5. Looking at the artist’s impression of Ruahine Street on page 12 of their pamphlet (wow they’ve put a lot of cyclists in a tiny space), and having now lived in Melbourne for 6 months, it’s easy to imagine a couple of tram lines running down the centre of the road.

    Not to suggest that Melbourne’s a fantastic example of encouraging people to stay away from cars.

  6. Not to mention that the plan expects an increase in traffic volumes, while at the same time admitting that the most recent Annual Monitoring Report (2006) showed an 8% decrease.

    Or that they rely on an assertion that airport usage will double by 2030 (in the face of increasing fuel prices and carbon taxes).

    Or that Wellington has the shortest CBD/airport run in NZ and the second shortest in Australasia.

    Or that this motorway will cut a whole three minutes off the Basin/Rongotai journey.

    I was kind of hoping that the “Green” mayor we elected would be leading the charge on opposing this, any idea why not?

  7. Can anyone comment off-hand what’s expected to happen to the Wellington Airport in a significant earthquake? I notice that NZPA put out this story after the September Christchurch quake, but I can’t find anything more recent. Surely that airport must have been on a list of liquefaction candidates for a long time, even if those who matter only just got a kick in the guts about it in the past year or so, and presumably Civil Defence has earmarked a list of alternatives for flying stuff in and out.

    Longer term, though, especially in light of recent events further south, it doesn’t seem sensical to encourage so many people to live in places like Kilbirnie and Lyall Bay and Seatoun that will probably be subject to liquefaction, or the Hutt Valley for that matter but that’s yet another problem.

  8. Its appalling that NZTA is pushing ahead with this scheme which cost NZTA much more than it receives from Wellington’s road users whilst refusing to spend all it’s revenue from road users in Christchurch and Canterbury on repairing their damaged roads or reconfiguring their roads and PT to accommodate the emerging new travel patterns from relocated home and businesses. NZTA is insisting on doing things by the book even though the book (the NZTA Funding Manual) doesn’t mention what to do after an earthquake so they’re actually applying the rules used for flood and storm damage!!

Comments are closed.