Town bypass controversy gets big hearing

December 2nd
[by David Armstrong]

The seemingly endless controversy over when and where a Motueka town bypass is built took a step forward on Tuesday at a well-attended public meeting to thrash out options and opinions.

The meeting at Memorial Hall, hosted by community board chairman David Ogilvie and West Coast Tasman MP Chris Auchinvole, allowed the 90-plus audience to hear something of the long history of planning for a bypass road (first mooted in the late 1930s), to hear and offer several viable options for its placement, and to express their opinions on those options or just to sound off about traffic problems. NZ Transport Agency had been invited to attend but there had been no response.

Also integral to most of the discussions and options was what should be done about the Motueka River bridge - retained, rebuilt and/or relocated - and related engineering issues around flood prevention.

And although no radical new ideas emerged that gained much acceptance, the meeting voted strongly against certain proposals and options, providing a clear steer on local preferences.

David said that the idea for the meeting arose from the recent opening of the Ruby Bay Bypass, when he and Chris were chatting and asking the question, "Where to from here?". Chris said that at the time his reaction to the excitement of the day was that it was "one bridge too few".

David said that over the years the focus on a town bypass wavered over a few options and until relatively recently the Chamberlain Road option had been the preferred one. However, in the recent Motueka Transportation Study by NZTA there was no preferred option. That Study stated that a new bridge and bypass will not be completed within 20 years, and the meeting was told that this was the reality that we would have to work within.

NZTA accepted that High Street as it stands satisfies neither of its two purposes - transit for through traffic and serving local traffic. However, despite bypasses are being planned for two comparison towns with similar problems (Otaki and Dannevirke), Motueka is so far off the radar.

David Ogilvie said that we need to accept that, plus the fact that even if the idea was accepted now getting resource consents could take up to 16 years anyway (as was the case for Ruby Bay), and get on with sorting out exactly what we as a community want and communicate that to planners, so we can start planning our long-term futures now. If local ideas are firmed up within a year, this will give clear indications to planners.

Paul Heywood reminded the meeting what can happen if we never get beyond debating best options - Nelson's long-running arguments over how best to spend the roading money that was allocated to them way back when Tasman's Ruby Bay Bypass was chosen. They are still arguing, and Motueka's hopes for a bypass will suffer the same fate if we simply keep arguing. Paul called on the Motueka Ward councillors (all present) to take a leadership role in the process.

Chris said cost is not the big issue at present, although no funds are there at present. It's more important to decide what needs to be done right now and then the money issues can be worked on using a cost/benefit study. He outlined the options that have gained traction so far.

A temporary arrangement whereby all through traffic, or just heavy traffic, be sent north via Queen Victoria Street and south via Thorp Street.
The long-term bypass along King Edward and Queen Victoria streets and across a new bridge to River Road in Riwaka.
As for option 2, but using Chamberlain Street rather than Queen Vic and a bridge to Anderson Road.

This kicked off general discussion from the floor, some commenting on aspects of these options, others suggesting new options. One clear message rapidly became clear: Option 1 was not acceptable to anyone.

Cliff Satherley suggested Option 4 - the use of Queen Victoria Street and a new linking road north of Parker Street back to High Street near Staples Street. That was followed by an Option 5, which would be a brand new road for the north-south section running between Queen Victoria and Chamberlain streets, using land purchased for the purpose and creating new rural titles, but also impacting on the aerodrome.

One speaker urged no bypass at all, fearing loss of custom to High Street businesses. This drew angry responses from many corners but some applause; however when it came to the straw poll at the end of the meeting no-one voted for "no bypass".

A few speakers reminded the audience of the need to get sound engineering advice when it comes to placement of any new bridge, to ensure that flood protection is not weakened by placing new structures in the river course.

Several speakers spoke about the unacceptability of current congestion on High Street, but David urged that this issue should be considered separately from the bypass placement and planning issue. The long term problem is moving through traffic from High Street, and the decision making and initial planning to be made soon, while the short term problem of ameliorating current congestion is another issue.

In a straw poll conducted after more than an hour of discussion and speeches, a large majority of those attending voted for Option 2. David summarised the findings that he could take to the community board and council as follows:

Temporary bypasses using Thorp Street and Queen Victoria Street (option 1) was unacceptable and not wanted
Decision making on the location of a bypass be completed soon so that long term planning can commence within a year
In the meantime, separate studies and actions need to advanced to ameliorate High Street traffic congestion over the coming 20 years.

For more information about these issues, follow these links:
- Motueka Transportation Plan »
- High Street congestion »

And if you want to contribute further ideas to debate on the bypass, visit Ian Miller's post on the discussion forum here »

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

[ Return ]