Below is the Save the Basin Campaign (STBC) submission to the Let’s Get Welly Moving (LGWM) engagement process on its four proposed scenarios for Wellington transport. Thanks to all the individuals and groups who submitted in favour of a modern, sustainable transport system for Wellington, and against a transport system which would perpetuate the failed proposals of the past – such as one or more Basin Reserve flyovers.
As you’ll see, Save the Basin’s submission focuses on the role of the Basin Reserve as a valued part of Wellington heritage, identity and urban design, and supports transport proposals that do not imperil that role, and enhance Wellington’s status as a liveable city designed to meet the needs of people, not cars.
In supporting Scenario A, STBC also urges that it be accompanied by additional actions such as transport demand management and serious option development and assessment of public transport options such as light rail. This could be called Scenario A+.
Submit before 15 December. You don’t have to go through the whole LGWM form. You can just comment on Scenario A (Step 1, near the bottom of that page), then skip to Step 6 to fill in your details and submit the form.
Tell LGWM something like:
Scenario A may be acceptable. However, I need more detail of what Scenario A involves before I can be sure. I reject Scenarios B, C and D.
or
Scenario A+ from FIT Wellington looks very promising and improves on Scenario A. I want to see Scenario A+ developed further. I reject Scenarios B, C and D.
This is it. At long last, the NZTA transport planners who were defeated over the Basin Reserve flyover are going to put their new plans on the table. Be there to have your say – see below for when, where & how!
RSVP by Tuesday. If the invite links below don’t work for you, urgently email info@getwellymoving.co.nz for an invitation, or just tell them you plan to attend the event. Be polite, but be resolute.
Don’t let the short notice or the bad timing of this ‘consultation exercise’ stop you. NZTA have refused to rule out proposing another flyover at the Basin Reserve. Are you going to let them get away with that?
Be there if you possibly can: Prefab, this coming Wednesday, 15/11, 6.30pm.
Tim Jones
Co-Convenor
Save the Basin Campaign Inc.
To make Wellington more liveable and support the region’s growth we need to change the way we move in, around and through the city. Last year we asked the people of Wellington what they think about Wellington’s transport.
Now we’re back with some possible future scenarios that aim to move more people without more traffic. We’ll be seeking the public’s feedback on these in late November and early December to help us develop a preferred scenario.
We’d like to invite you to the launch of our public engagement on the 15th of November, so we can share with you our ideas to Get Wellington Moving.
Wednesday 15 November 2017 6.30 – 7:30pm Prefab 14 Jessie Street
The long-running “Let’s Get Welly Moving” process that was set up after NZTA failed to get approval for its proposed Basin Reserve flyover is beginning to produce some results – and that means that supporters of sustainable transport options need to get involved to ensure a good outcome.
First, here’s how you can do that:
Let’s Get Wellington Moving have announced they plan to run some half-day workshops with the public in February to help them test and evaluate the draft ’scenarios’ they’ve been working on for Wellington transport – which will be the first sign we get of the next round of proposals for transport near the Basin Reserve.
LGWM say that they will select participants who represent a “balanced sample of interests”. But to give ourselves of the best chance of a good outcome, as many Save the Basin supporters as possible should sign up and say they want to attend.
But Let’s Get Welly Moving has also been making presentations to the City and Regional Councils – and we’ve learned that they have adopted the following five objectives for Wellington’s transport system:
A transport system that:
Enhances the liveability of the central city
Provides more efficient and reliable access for all users
Reduces reliance on private vehicle travel
Improves safety for all users
Is adaptable to disruptions and future uncertainty
We understand that the City and Regional Councils have signed up to these objectives, which you can find in this public document:
These objectives look encouraging. Two of our key arguments against a Basin Reserve flyover were that it reduced the liveability of the central city and increased reliance on private vehicle travel, so the first and third objectives would make it very difficult for a flyover proposal to be put back on the table as an outcome of the Let’s Get Welly Moving process.
More generally, these look like good transport objectives for Wellington to follow – though the second objective could conceivably still be used by the four-lanes-to-the-planes crowd to argue for more roading, so they’re not an automatic win.
But – and it’s a big but – there are still substantial pockets of political opposition to those objectives, and to the third objective in particular.
That’s why we need to make sure that there’s a strong voice at the February workshops in favour of a more liveable city and reduced reliance on private vehicle travel. Sign up now to make sure sustainable transport voices are heard loud and clear!
But what principles and what process will be used to assess those proposed solutions? Given NZTA’s approach to the Basin Reserve flyover project, in which the movement of cars was prioritised above all else, it’s vital that the assessment process acknowledge that moving cars from Point A to Point B is neither the only, nor the most important, priority.
With many other groups, Save the Basin took part in a process in 2015 to develop engagement and assessment principles under the aegis of Grant Robertson MP. These principles were agreed upon and delivered to the Governance Group before the engagement process started. The Save the Basin Committee has recently reviewed them, and we still think they are the best basis on which to conduct the assessment. Here they are:
THAT transport solutions at the Basin precinct are developed as part of tangible steps to reduce the City’s carbon footprint.
THAT the cultural, heritage, recreational and amenity values of the Basin Reserve precinct are protected and enhanced.
THAT public access to and use of the Basin precinct is preserved and improved.
THAT access planning balances the needs of all transport flows – walking, cycling, and public transport, as well as private vehicles.
THAT public access and traffic improvements are robustly informed.
THAT the focus for improvements start with simple at-grade solutions.
THAT conflict between different access modes is minimised.
THAT a transparent and replicable approach is adopted to the sharing of data and information, enabling all parties to understand bring expertise to the table.
THAT alternatives / future options are kept open (future proofed).
Principles 1 and 9 are of particular note. With the Government now having committed to greenhouse gas reduction targets under the Paris Agreement, and with Wellington City Council’s recent CEMARS certification, it is now even more critical that whatever solution is developed needs to actively contribute to meeting greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and targets – and should certainly not make greenhouse gas emissions worse, for example by inducing traffic.
As for Principle 9, the rapid changes in both transport behaviour and transport technology to which attention was paid at the Basin Bridge Board of Inquiry, have since continued and intensified. This means that this would be a particularly bad time to be committing Wellington to major new roading infrastructure that might rapidly become a stranded asset. This provides further support to Principle 6, which is where we believe the focus for solution development in and around the Basin precinct should be placed.
The first phase of the Ngauranga to Airport Governance Group’s Let’s Get Welly Moving process, which is designed to find out what principles people in the Wellington region think should underlie Wellington transport planning, draws to a close at the end of May.
The next phase will be a call for proposals to rethink Wellington transport. We encourage you to put forward proposals that enhance Wellington role as a city for people, not a city for cars – and that ensure the Basin is not again put at risk.
Basin Reserve rainbow. Photo: Patrick Morgan.
Save the Basin Campaign Inc: Submission in response to the “Let’s Get Welly Moving” Engagement Phase
Introduction
As set out in its Constitution, the Save the Basin Campaign Inc has the following purposes:
(a) Promote, preserve and protect the historic character of the Basin Reserve area
(b) Promote high quality urban design and environmental management of the Basin Reserve area
(c) Promote an appropriate role for the Basin Reserve area in the development of a high quality, sustainable transport network, recognising the importance of the Basin to the public transport spine, and the importance of walkability and public transport for the users of the area
(d) Do anything necessary or helpful to the above purposes.
These purposes both explain why our Campaign was completely opposed to the proposed Basin Reserve flyover and took part in two successful rounds of legal action to prevent it gaining resource consent, and why we will oppose any future attempts to build a flyover or other transport infrastructure at the Basin Reserve that threatens the character, landscape, urban design or heritage of the Basin precinct – whether or not such infrastructure is presented as part of a larger package of resource consent applications.
Equally, however, these purposes allow us to participate in discussions about appropriate, sustainable transport developments that involve the Basin Reserve precinct, and thus we are pleased to see the breadth of the engagement process that the Ngauranga to Airport Governance Group has chosen to engage in as the first phase of its Let’s Get Welly Moving process.
Our submission covers three broad areas: the wider transport context, our comments and concerns about the rest of the planned consultation process, and our views on what should be done at the Basin Reserve.
Save the Basin took part in the development of the engagement and transport planning principles for the post-Basin environment submitted under the aegis of Grant Robertson MP, and those principles should also be regarded as part of our input to the engagement process.
The broader transport context
The present engagement process is being carried out at a time of rapid and disruptive change in transport thinking, transport behaviour and urban design – change which means that business-as-usual thinking is no longer appropriate.
These changes include:
the Government’s signing of the Paris climate change agreements and its commitment to an associated greenhouse gas emissions reduction target, meaning that serious steps will need to be taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport
increased readiness by both central and local government to fund and provide infrastructure for active modes and public transport
the increasing acceptance that building new roads induces further traffic congestion, as amply demonstrated by many local as well as overseas examples
the post-2007 breakdown of the previously accepted correlation between population growth and growth in VKT, as notably seen in changes in young people’s transport thinking and behaviour
the advent of disruptive technologies such as the wider uptake of car-sharing arrangements; electric vehicles; and driverless cars, with their associated requirement for far less road space
a refocusing of urban design, in cities as diverse as Seoul and New York, to put people first rather than cars first.
In our view, a prudent response to these developments by the Governance Group should be to focus on transport behaviour change while also looking to make incremental improvements in transport infrastructure that do not commit the city to major infrastructure developments which may well be rendered redundant by transport behaviour changes, and which would foreclose other, more appropriate responses.
The engagement process: comments and concerns
While we welcome the change in approach represented by the “Let’s Get Welly Moving” (LGWM) process, we still have some concerns about how this is being carried out, and suggestions for improvement:
Methodology and weighting of responses received
The first phase of the LGWM process has been carried out region-wide. However, given the potentially competing interests involved, we submit that there should be a methodology which gives most weight to those most directly affected by potential infrastructure changes along the Ngauranga to Airport Corridor: that is, those who live closest to them.
Calling for proposals
The next stage of the process includes calling for proposals. As such proposals can be both time-consuming and expensive to develop, especially for community groups with limited access to professional resources, we submit that the Governance Group should make available independent advice to assist those who wish to make proposals to do so – similar to the role the “Friend of the Submitter” plays in complex resource consent hearings.
Modelling: assumptions and processes
The modelling tool(s) chosen, and their underlying assumptions, will be of crucial importance in assessing the proposals received and developing scenarios based on them. Therefore, we submit that an “open Government data” approach should be taken to the development and use of these modelling tools. This approach should both
allow and encourage the involvement of those in the wider community with expertise in the analysis and use of Government and modelling data to engage with the modelling process and challenge modelling assumptions and processes, with the aim of producing a modelling process that truly reflects the realities of the rapidly changing transport environment, and
take account of the range of ways in which the Wellington transport system may develop.
Consultation on scenarios
This is currently scheduled for January to March 2017. However, our experience is that it is extremely difficult to get people engaged in consultation processes during January and early February due to family commitments over the summer holiday period. Therefore, we submit that this consultation period should not begin until February 2017.
The future of the Basin Reserve: Save the Basin’s position
We believe that the starting point for consideration of the Basin Reserve’s future needs to be the final report of the Basin Bridge Board of Inquiry. We are disappointed that, so far, this does not appear to have been the case. While the immediate response of the applicant was to comb the report for possible grounds for appeal – an approach which proved unavailing in the High Court – the Governance Group should instead pay careful attention to the Board’s findings, which make clear the significance of the Basin Reserve and its environs for Wellington and its residents.
As those findings make clear, a narrow, transport-only focus on the Basin won’t work. What is needed is a long term vision and plan to protect and enhance an iconic cricket ground, create more open and green space, end urban blight and develop a transport space that accommodates pedestrians, cyclists, public transport users and cars.
The Board identified that the following options were worthy of further consideration:
the Basin Reserve Roundabout Enhancement Option (BRREO) – an at-grade option that doesn’t involve bridging or tunnelling;
Option X proposed by The Architectural Centre; and
a tunnel option suggested but then discarded by NZTA.
Given the rapid and disruptive changes to transport outlined above, we believe that the best option for the Basin is the one which involves the least infrastructure development and provides the most flexibility for future developments. This is the BRREO, or a similar at-grade option. However, the other options foregrounded by the Board should also receive careful consideration.
What should happen next? Here is our 7-point action plan, some of which is now underway:
Reframe the Basin as a sporting, urban development and heritage area as well as a transport corridor.
Create a master plan for the whole area. Its national significance needs to be given appropriate recognition: instead of seeing the Basin, Pukeahu National War Memorial Park, the Governor General’s residence, numerous local schools and the heritage of Mt Victoria as isolated pieces, the rich history of the whole area should be celebrated.
Go through a robust process to evaluate transport options. Start by carrying out small improvements to bring relief to frustrated transport users, and evaluate these before considering whether a more expensive option is justified. Ensure that, following the Wellington City Council’s “transport pyramid” approach, the needs of walkers, cyclist, and public transport users are given precedence.
Upgrade the Basin and strengthen and preserve the Museum Stand.
Prioritise a Reserve Management Plan for the Basin (as already agreed by the City Council) that will establish key principles on how the ground should be preserved.
Put in place heritage protection for the whole ground in the City Council’s District Plan.
Re-develop Kent and Cambridge Terraces as grand public and private spaces, well connected to the Basin
The Basin Reserve is a place of local, national and (especially in its role as an international cricket ground) international significance. We support options that preserve and enhance its status. We do not support options that put that status at risk.
It’s been a quiet first few months of 2016, at least in the public eye, as far as post-Basin Reserve flyover transport planning for central Wellington goes. But a burst of articles, presentation and comments in the media signal that this intermission is almost at an end.
Before this post-Christmas intermission, the previous act finished with the drama of the defeat of the New Zealand Transport Agency’s appeal to the High Court, and the news that the Ngauranga to Airport Governance Group, consisting of representatives from Wellington City Council, Greater Wellington and NZTA, had been given official responsibility for determining what should happen next. In December, representatives of Save the Basin and a number of other groups involved in the High Court action met with the Governance Group. Since then, at least in public, the curtain has been down on developments.
But now the players are taking their positions and the next act is about to begin. We understand that a public engagement process designed by the Governance Group, which we hope has taken into account input from Save the Basin and other community groups, will be launched in April. After Andy Foster had a quick say, Ngauranga to Airport programme manager Jim Bentley made a presentation to Wellington City Council earlier this week.
In its article reporting on this, the Dominion Post repeated two common errors: firstly, it assumed that an expensive piece of infrastructure was needed to “fix” congestion at the Basin, and second, it assumed that congestion in central Wellington’s roads stemmed from the Basin itself.
In Wellington Scoop, Lindsay Shelton succinctly debunks both arguments. The Transport Agency themselves have said that incremental at-grade (ground-level) improvements can be made around the Basin – while we believe a wider engagement process is necessary, we support short-term incremental improvements as well.
There are grounds for hope that NZTA may be moving away from the “bigger is better” approach that has bedevilled their transport planning in the past. A focus on making simple, readily affordable changes around the Basin would be a good start – and you can see what other steps we proposed for the Basin in the aftermath of the High Court decision.
In response to the defeat of their Basin Flyover proposal in the Board of Inquiry Hearing, NZTA commissioned a Lessons Learnt Review (PDF) from Synergine Consulting. Now, as a result of an Official Information Act request, that November 2014 review has been released. It makes interesting, but depressing, reading – because it look as though NZTA has learned the wrong lessons from their failure of their flyover proposal.
What makes us say that? This quote on p. 7 sums it up:
In all the interviews the LLR (Lessons Learnt Review) team has carried out and in the LLR workshop there was strong support for the bridge option, Option A.
Option A is the flyover NZTA was so keen on building along the Basin Reserve’s north-western boundary. In its detailed analysis of NZTA’s review, which is well worth reading, Wellington Scoop says:
The report indirectly acknowledges opposition to the flyover, but seems to believe that this could somehow have been overcome if the Transport Agency had done more communicating.
Of course, NZTA’s high-handed, arrogant communication and “consultation” process didn’t help matters – but the real problem is that building a flyover at the Basin Reserve is a really, really bad idea – and no amount of improved communication or better coordination between project partners is going to change that. Some lessons, it seems, will take a while to learn.
But when the six-member Governance Group is ready to listen, we’re ready to talk. Here is our set of proposed next steps:
Reframe the Basin as a sporting, urban development and heritage area as well as a transport corridor. The politicians and the NZTA need to grab the opportunity to engage the community in thinking about the future of the Basin and its surroundings.
Create a master plan for the whole area. Its national significance needs to be given appropriate recognition: instead of seeing the Basin, Pukeahu National War Memorial Park, the Governor General’s residence, numerous local schools and the heritage of Mt Victoria as isolated pieces, the rich history of the whole area should be celebrated.
Go through a robust process to evaluate which of the transport options highlighted by the Board will have the most benefits. Start by carrying out small improvements to bring relief to frustrated transport users, and evaluate these before considering whether a more expensive option is justified. .
Upgrade the Basin and strengthen and preserve the Museum Stand.
Prioritise a Reserve Management Plan for the Basin (as already agreed by the City Council) that will establish key principles on how the ground should be preserved.
Put in place heritage protection for the whole ground in the City Council’s District Plan.
Re-develop Kent and Cambridge Terraces as grand public and private spaces well connected to the Basin – which could include uncovering Waitangi Stream that flows between them.
