School Resources

Disclaimer

Transit and the Bypass project team are frequently asked by students for detailed information on the decision-making processes followed in the Wellington Inner City Bypass as part of their studies. This information can now be sourced from the webpage.

The information provided on this page is designed to provide information for specific school assignments, and should not be read as a complete summary of all approval processes undertaken for this project.

^ Back to top

Project History

The proposal for an Inner City Bypass has had a lengthy history of public debate and been investigated in a number of studies.

Here's a brief timeline:

1960s Original plan for the Bypass

The Wellington Urban Motorway was planned, and partially built, up to the northern end of the Terrace Tunnel. The original plan for the motorway was to extend it through the Terrace Tunnel to the Mount Victoria Tunnel. The designation for this route was first proposed in 1966 in the Wellington City District Scheme and subsequently included in the Transitional District Plan notified in 1979.

1990s Motorway option reviewed

In 1990 there was much public debate about this route, as part of a review carried out by the Independent Review Panel appointed by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.

^ Back to top

1992 Covered trench design investigated

Transit and the Wellington City Council (the Council) approved in principle a covered 'trench' design for the Bypass. This means the road would have been beneath ground-level, with fly-overs taking people over the top of the road.

This option was dropped in 1994 after a thorough review where it was found to be unlikely to be funded in the foreseeable future.

Transit and the Council agreed that a safer and more efficient link between the Terrace Tunnel and the airport/hospital was needed and decided to consider other alternatives.

1993-1994 Investigations into other options

Transit investigated and considered 34 alternative routes. These were judged against various outcomes, including the effect on cross-town and local traffic, pedestrians, cyclists and environmental impacts.

As a result, the 34 options were reduced to seven. These seven options went through to a more detailed economic and environmental evaluation including traffic modelling and benefit/cost analysis, and were presented to the Council.

The Council agreed to support the Stage 1 option (the current state highway route), on the basis that the Stage 2 option would be implemented.

Stage 1 was implemented in October 1995 - it is the existing one-way system where traffic travels south along Ghuznee Street. Stage 2 is the proposed Inner City Bypass route.

^ Back to top

April 1996 Designation of the Bypass route lodged

Transit lodged a Notice of Requirement with the Council, under the Resource Management Act, to designate the land for the state highway route.

September 1996 Designation hearing

Independent Commissioners were appointed to hear evidence and submissions. The hearing was one of the biggest and longest held in Wellington on a single planning issue. A total of 1795 submissions on motorway/bypass related matters were filed and at least 84 submitters were heard in person.

^ Back to top

November 1996 Designation decision

The commissioners confirmed the project could go ahead, subject to a number of conditions relating to issues including:

the physical extent of the road designation
further consideration of the use of Abel Smith Street
provision for cycling, noise attenuation, pedestrians, environmental aspects and retention or relocation of heritage buildings.
December 1996 Designation decision appeal

Transit largely accepted the Commissioners' recommendations (including 50 conditions) with some minor alterations.

Four appeals were lodged against this decision.

^ Back to top

1997 Resolution sought for designation

A total of 13 meetings, chaired by an independent facilitator, were held between representatives of Campaign for a Better City (the main objector), City Councillors, Council officers, Transit and its consultants, to see if they could find agreement and avoid the expense and delay of a court hearing.

No agreement was reached on the project - so the Notice of Requirement was to be heard in front of the Environment Court.

August-September 1998 Environment Court Hearing

The Environment Court heard evidence for and against the project. This evidence included details of the engineering design and construction, town planning implications, and heritage and urban design issues. The Court was presided over by Judge Kenderdine, assisted by three Commissioners.

^ Back to top

May 1999 Environment Court decision

The Environment Court decided to dismissed appeals against plans for the construction of the Inner City Bypass.

Two of the four appeals lodged against the proposed designation were resolved prior to the Court hearing. The remaining two were the subject of a detailed hearing in August-September 1998.

The main objections to the Bypass were based on opposition to roads as a solution to transport problems, and concerns about the effects on the environment and heritage buildings.

In 1998 the Environment Court approved the Inner City Bypass to be included in the proposed Wellington City Council District Plan. The Court's decision was released on 30 April 1999 and, subject to some detailed conditions, the designation of the route was approved.

Having considered all of the detailed evidence of the parties concerned, the court approved the designation, subject to specific conditions. In brief it was noted by the Court that:

"There has been a great deal of confusion about what is encompassed by these proceedings. The Transit proposal is not to build a major motorway at the edge of Te Aro. The proposal involves altering and redefining the existing roading, with the addition of 700 metres of new road, to create two one way, two lane arterial roads, as part of the State highway network. In this sense it is important to appreciate that Te Aro already contains two pairs of one way two lane arterial roads traversing Ghuznee Street, Vivian Street and Taranaki Street."

"There further seems to be a misconception that the Bypass will markedly increase vehicular flow through Te Aro. This is not the case. Transit's intent is to relocate existing principal traffic flows. The project will not result in any large increases in traffic movements overall. What is intended is to re-route the approximately 24%-25% of all traffic approaching the city which has destinations for areas other than Te Aro. That is not an inconsiderable draw off of the traffic which would otherwise penetrate the inner city streets."

"The worth of the project is not to be measured just in one benefit (such as time savings). It is made up of a combination of inter-related benefits ranging from relief of traffic congestion in the Terrace Tunnel, to better pedestrian environment in Ghuznee Street and elsewhere, to preservation of heritage buildings, and to reduction of traffic flow along the waterfront. The Bypass proposal therefore needs to be regarded as part of the overall traffic network providing benefits throughout rather than focusing on localised "benefits" or perceived disadvantages to Te Aro."

"A number of heritage buildings of Te Aro are to be relocated to make way for the Bypass. This is a major adverse effect of the proposal. But the mitigating circumstances (their restoration and relocation to sites very close to the originals) is of considerable importance to the retention of the heritage values of Wellington. For there is nothing which affords their protection otherwise."

"We are left in no doubt that the Transport Strategies endorsed by Wellington Regional Council and Wellington City Council with their emphasis on the importance of the need to develop an alternative to private vehicles should be implemented."

^ Back to top

July 2001 Bypass design began

Transfund NZ approved design funding and work began on this immediately.

May 2002 NZ Historic Places Trust archaeological approval

The NZ Historic Places Trust gave Transit archaeological approval for the Bypass to be built through Te Aro.

Appeals were lodged soon after with the Environment Court, by the Te Aro Heritage Trust and Campaign for a Better City.

^ Back to top

October 2002 - February 2003 Appeals were heard in Environment Court

The court found in favour of Transit's proposal to build the bypass but this decision was appealed by Campaign for a Better City.

December 2003 The High Court dismissed the appeal on the grounds that Campaign for a Better City (CBC) was not a directly affected party.

May 2004 – Funding approved

Transfund NZ approved construction funding for the Wellington Inner City Bypass project. Tenders for construction advertised.

August 2004 – Tenders close

Tenders for the construction of the bypass closed.

September 2004 – Construction contract let

Contract for construction awarded to Fulton Hogan (includes work on Te Aro stormwater culvert). Work commenced in January 2005.