Motueka's Bypass Blues

December 3rd, 2010
Ian Miller

In 1994 the Motueka bypass seemed to be about to happen. Sixteen years later the bypass is still not in sight with no apparent prospect of it getting built with the next fifteen to 20+ years.

According to a Transit New Zealand document "investigation of the (Motueka traffic) problem and practical solutions (to it) began in 1988". By March 1994 Transit New Zealand had decided that the preferred route for a bypass around Motueka was via Chamberlain Street.

There had been consultation with the public in 1993 and in 1994 a property at 318 Whakarewa Street opposite the northern end of Chamberlain Street was purchased by "Her Majesty The Queen" (according to property ownership records). Presumably she had in mind the continuation of Chamberlain Street through the property and linking, via a new bridge over the Motueka River, to Anderson and Swamp Roads eventually rejoining State Highway One at Cooks Corner at the north western end of Riwaka.

Transit New Zealand has now been incorporated into a new organization called New Zealand Transport Agency. On their website there is a list of roading projects planned through until 2018. Motueka's bypass is not mentioned.

In 1991 the Motueka River bridge was in need of repair and a few years later it was strengthened and a cycle and pedestrian clip-on added. Perhaps this work spelled the end of a bypass road for Motueka for at least 20 years?

The First Four Options

The four options considered by Transit New Zealand in the early 1990's were:
1. Upgrade the existing road and bridge and continue using High Street as State Highway 60.
2. Use Chamberlain Street as a bypass.
3. Use Queen Victoria Street as a bypass.
4. Develop an eastern bypass which presumably would have meant using Thorp Street.

At the time Transit New Zealand concluded that a bypass around Motueka "is highly desirable to improve traffic flows and community safety".

The engineers also concluded that option one would not really achieve any desired improvement to the traffic flow through Motueka. However it seems that the maintenance work required on the Motueka River Bridge has overruled their concerns about improved traffic flows and community safety.

Option four, the eastern bypass was deemed not to be feasible "because of serious engineering, environmental and planning constraints". Getting access onto Thorp Street would require building a new road from the southern entrance round-about along the edge of the Motueka Estuary. This would present an almost impossible Resource Consent hurdle. At the northern end of Thorp Street the road would then be need to be routed across the existing bridge or a new one built nearby. From the north end of the bridge the route would bring the traffic back into Riwaka somewhere. It could go along Umukuri Road into Swamp Road or possibly go cross country to School Road.

Any stop gap deviations using Queen Victoria Street and Thorp Street are not viable in my opinion and their problems are a whole new other story. There is no way routing heavy main road traffic through urban streets will be accepted by the public.

The Only Real Options

The two most practical options are routing a new properly engineered bypass via either Queen Victoria Street or along Chamberlain Street. This would mean retaining the existing Motueka River Bridge for local traffic and building a new bridge further upstream. I do not support using Queen Victoria Street as it is too urban to be considered as main road.

The economic benefits to the region of using either Queen Victoria or Chamberlain Streets are very similar and either option would alleviate the traffic problems identified in 1993. These were:
-  Conflicts between "through" and local traffic.
-  An accident rate higher than the national average.
-  High Street congestion.

The cost of a new bridge and using Chamberlain Street as the bypass route was determined to be cheaper and slightly more economically beneficial to the region than using Queen Victoria Street. Ongoing maintenance for either route would be much the same at about (In 1994) $10,000, a cost that "would largely fall to the District Council".

Either route would affect adjacent property owners and this fact is noted on Council L.I.M. reports on property in the vicinity of the suggested routes.

The Estuary Issue

Access from the causeway across the estuary would be problematic as any interference with a coastal environment is a sure fire way to start a battle with environmentalists and will involve protracted and expensive resource consent arguments.

The original 1990's route using Chamberlain Street would see State Highway 60 turn off onto a new road at the north end of the Moutere Inlet somewhere in the vicinity of the car wreckers. It would then go along Wildman Road and Hursthouse Street turning north into Chamberlain Street near the electricity substation where some land would need to be purchased to allow that corner to be rounded. From there the road could go straight ahead across a new bridge into Anderson and Swamp Roads rejoining the existing State Highway 60 at Cooks Corner.

The Queen Victoria Street option would see the south end of the bypass also start by turning off the existing main road into Wildman Road as far as Queen Victoria Street. From the north end of Queen Victoria Street it would cross the river to Packing Shed Corner and from there it could either go across private land to Cooks corner by one of two proposed routes. It has not been suggested that the road would simply rejoin Riwaka's existing section of State Highway 60 as the right angled corners and adjacent housing would make it unsatisfactory as a main road.

Suggested Alternative Access To Chamberlain Street

It would seem from looking at a map the best bypass route would be via Chamberlain Street starting from the causeway just north of the car wreckers. This link (The map can be enlarged by using the controls in the top left corner of the image) shows my suggestion of the route to gain access to Chamberlain Street and as you will see it affects pretty much only rural properties.

Motueka's Shopping Centre Sure To Thrive

I don't believe that Motueka's shopping centre will fade away as a result of through traffic getting diverted around town. Well planned, attractive and pedestrian friendly town centres are invariably busy vibrant places. In cities planners are designing traffic free shopping precincts and pedestrian malls are very popular. Even streets with one or two way traffic moving slowly through traffic calming islands can work well.

Funding Not The First Hurdle

Funding will of course be an issue but the very first thing is to settle on is a route. Next comes preliminary design and engineering reports while at the same time a start needs to made acquiring the necessary land. With a plan everyone knows where they stand and funding will never happen unless we have a plan.

Who wants a bypass?

It seems almost everybody does. I have heard visitors describe our main street as "diabolical" and say things like, "You've got a big problem with your main street", "It is just terrible" and "It's worse than living in a city". I have had people tell me that they refuse to drive across the main road from east to west unless they absolutely have too. Often drivers use shortcuts through supermarket car parks, the lane beside Decks Reserve, around the back of the clock tower or make other detours so they can turn into the flow of traffic or avoid intersections.

The ambience of Motueka's main street is just plain unpleasant with trucks and a stream of other vehicles passing through. High Street was busy in 1993 when the first serious planning for a bypass was started and it is busier now. Having SH60 as a main street prevents any development of the street to make it more pedestrian friendly with traffic calming and beautification features.

The local business group, Our Town Motueka, reports that the majority of its 300 members in the Motueka CBD "favour a heavy traffic bypass and recognize it as necessary to enhance and grow the retail heart of Motueka". It appears the Community Board is now very keen to see the traffic issue progressed and Transit New Zealand is reputed to be now more interested in finding a solution than it was just a few years ago.

The Bridge Experience - Becoming Tourist Folklore

Tourists hate the Motueka River bridge. They tell of moments of terror when they meet an oncoming truck while driving across towing a caravan and it is well known that most locals dislike the narrow bridge. Many buses and trucks stop and wait for the bridge to clear before driving onto it and trucks will often fold in their side mirrors when crossing. There have been a few scrapes when vehicles touch as they pass. Many travelers to the region from the south, who know the bridge, turn off and cross the Alexander Bluffs bridge on their way north rather than cross the SH60 bridge but this route is now the domain of milk tankers and the West Bank road is narrow and unsuitable for heavy traffic.

Pedestrians dance a dangerous dance

Motueka has three pedestrian crossings and really needs a fourth somewhere between Bowater's car sales yard and the shops opposite. The New Zealand Transport Agency will not allow a fourth crossing to be built but will agree to shift one of the existing ones. Apparently the Agencies main concern is with the flow of traffic through High Street and they think a fourth crossing would hold it up unacceptably. Apparently the flow of traffic is seen as more important than pedestrians.

Editor's comment:
For more comment and information on this topic, read this news item »

Comment by William Cleaver:
[Posted 4 December 2010]

To bypass or not to bypass. We at the grumpy old mans have come to the conclusion that the problem lies with the pedestrians. We have people ruling the traffic.

The Crossings, You stop to allow a person or persons across the road. And 9 times out of 10 you just go to pull away and some other person wanders onto the crossing. This can happen numerous times as has happened to me and others. Thus having the effect of have cars from Richmond or Kaiteriteri start to pull up behind you, then cars from Christchurch and Takaka and now we have a traffic jam.

Simply in a nut shell install traffic lights for pedestrians to allow the flow of traffic. This works in Christchurch along Papanui Rd where a problem like Mot's traffic is a year-long issue.

Further comment by Ian Miller:
[Posted 10 December 2010]

Ian has written a more general article looking out to what Motueka may well look like in 25 years time, including new housing areas and job growth and the likely impact on traffic problems and road planning. Read it here »

Further comment by David Ogilvie:
[Posted 13 December 2010]

Pedestrian lights (& traffic lights) have been requested but always with a negative. The difference between Papanui Road & Motueka's High Street is that Papanui Rd. is not a State Highway - traffic control comes under the local authority - but for Motueka traffic decisions re High St come from the NZTA. Up to now, it has been difficult to persuade NZTA to regulate traffic flow with traffic signals, either for pedestrians or for vehicles.

A pointed comment was made to me recently, that it is much easier to travel north-south along High St than it is to travel east-west across High St.

Further comment by Jim Butler:
[Posted 17 December 2010]

The Bypass/Bridge meeting held in the Memorial Hall on 30th November was a very informative and I learnt a lot. The only clear decisions the meeting came to was for the bypass should be via Chamberlain St and Anderson Rd with the bridge in between. And secondly, the meeting was pretty solidly against the temporary one way routes through Motueka township, as proposed in NZTA's Motueka Transport Study.

However, complaints about heavy traffic using the Motueka High St traffic won't go away and a potential alternate route for through traffic, in particular for heavy vehicles, has to be found soon.

If a flood seriously damaged or destroyed the Motueka Bridge, it is pretty obvious that the NZTA wouldn't want to mess about with resource consents and land purchases, they would rebuild the bridge on its present site or very close by.

It is also reasonably certain that if it wasn't for the cost of the bridge, according to Cr Inglis, it would cost $30 million now, NZTA, or whatever it was called then, may have gone ahead with its 1994 proposal. So a Motueka bypass could have been in operation for some years.

King Edward St was once a State Highway and has a lot of commercial properties along it. And it may get more, if the proposed commecial development between it and Whakarewa St proceeds. Queen Victoria St between King Edward St and Pah St has only a few residential properties along it. If only Queen Victoria St was extended on to join High St North in the vicinity of the bridge, there would be a obvious route for heavy through traffic.

Based on the cost per kilometre of the Ruby Bay Bypass, the present cost of constructing this extension, somewhat less than 3 kilometres, would be about $8 million. The upgrading of Victoria St and some intersections would likely double this amount to $16 million at present costs. But it has to be pointed out that a good part of this proposed extension will run along the top of the stopbank which protects Motueka from flooding. This is the stopbank TDC is intending to reconstruct at considerable cost by means of a targeted rate on Motueka ratepayers. By placing a road on top of this stopbank, this should attract a considerable subsidy from NZTA.

In my opinion, the advantages to NZTA of this proposal is that it separates the costs of construction of a new bridge from the remainder of the roading. Also it should result in considerable savings even if a subsidy is supplied for the extension. The disadvantages is a limited speed zone through parts of Motueka.

The advantage to Motueka residents is that heavy through traffic should be removed more quickly from the High St, hopefully before year 2020 if planning started soon. The disadvantages, more traffic in King Edward and Queen Victoria Streets and the proposed Chamberlain St/ New Bridge/Anderson Rd Bypass could be delayed still further from its present estimated completion between years 2025 to 2030, perhaps by a further 20 years or forever.

Is this proposal worth investigating ?

Comment by the Grumpy Old Men, written by William Cleaver:
[Posted 21 February 2011]

Pretty much a foregone conclusion. Build a Bypass close the town. Retailers and the public can moan as much as they like but with out the congestion the CBD of Motueka is doomed. Without the tourists jamming up the roads strugling to find a park and shop in Mot, the town would only cater to the locals and every business in town will tell you that if it were not for the tourists they would go bust. Then the only place open will be a supermarket or corner dairy. The decisions made need to be, How do we cater for the infux, not how do we divert it.

>> , to be added to the page. [If this link doesn't work, use this form instead]

Or if you want to communicate with Anita directly or in private on this issue, email

[ Return ]