Wellington Scoop

E-Mail 'Council reconfirms opposition to Basin flyover, wants an alternative option' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Council reconfirms opposition to Basin flyover, wants an alternative option' to a friend

* Required Field

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...


  1. Sridhar, 20. December 2012, 7:05

    Good work council. Keep it up. Mayor Brown and her colleagues who opposed the flyover should be given full credit for this.

    I hope the councillors who support this nonsense are able to understand the reason and accept the reality – unless they want to remain on their path of self-destruction.

  2. Maximus, 20. December 2012, 8:08

    Sounds sensible to me… When buying a new car, wouldn’t you want to check out what models are available, other than just taking the word of the car dealer that this is the only car made, and it only ever comes in grey? You walk down the block, and – ooh look, a nicer car, and it is a different colour, and it costs less!

  3. Alana, 20. December 2012, 9:02

    And NZTA continues to ignore the change of circumstances resulting from the government’s decision to build the road in a cut-and-cover trench under the War Memorial Park – which makes an at-grade option like Option X more practical and less costly than a noisy, ugly flyover.

  4. Chris, 20. December 2012, 10:50

    Congratulations to the councillors who sensibly voted for alternative options to be considered rather than supporting the drastic and flawed NZTA solution to traffic around the Basic Reserve.

  5. Nora, 20. December 2012, 11:17

    Well done those councillors who listened to Wellingtonians….I am a car owner, I also ride the buses, and walk around our walkable city. Over the years I have enjoyed cricket at the Basin and have great memories of all the other entertainment that used to be there, like soccer, marching girls, school sports. For these and other reasons I am totally opposed to the flyover with the noise and pollution it would cause and which most cities in the world are pulling down. For those who are in a hurry, suggest they leave home a little earlier to get to the airport or join the truckies and go via Oriental/Evans Bay.

  6. paul bruce, 20. December 2012, 15:46

    NZTA justifies the flyover by noting benefits to public transport, when its primary purpose is to facilitate vehicle movement eastwards (one way). The negative impacts of new induced traffic on Wellington’s streets will easily override any small advantage to public transport (PT), whereas the equivalent expenditure ($100 million) on attractive PT and safe cycle ways would result in some commuters leaving their cars at home with resultant benefits to everybody!

  7. Nick, 20. December 2012, 18:41

    It really is sad seeing councillors towing the line of effectively a Transport Agency dictatorship. We’re New Zealanders and we should be doing the best we can to get the best outcome for this city. McKinnon, Wilde and Co are jeopardising this city’s future, not the people who want to wait and rethink our options.

  8. Liz S, 20. December 2012, 18:46

    Thank you Wellington city councillors! Apart from the health costs of the flyover, aesthetically it was going to slice apart our city and ruin the lovely Basin which is an oasis for walkers and cyclists. Have a relaxing Christmas and thank you for listening to Wellingtonians and reason, not the ideological fixation of the NZ Transport Agency.

  9. Paula Warren, 20. December 2012, 19:04

    There have been alternatives to the flyover around for a long time. Trouble is, NZTA didn’t want to look at them, and ran a totally sham process in deciding that they wanted their “bridge”. And now that the councillors have finally had the guts to say “surely we can do better,” Mr Dangerfield has threatened to take all his toys out of the sandpit and play on his own.

    And surely we can do better. The flyover will cost $100m (or rather is estimated to cost $100m, which means it will cost a lot more), while the alternatives I’ve seen both cost less. In one case a lot less (like around $1m). The flyover addresses only two of the four agreed (by NZTA as well) corridor plan objectives, and will be damaging to the other objectives. The alternatives I’ve seen both address all four objectives.

    It’s time NZTA went back to designing transport projects with high benefit cost ratio (the Kapiti Expressway has reached a new low of 0.2) that actually do the job needed, and gave up their fixation on building a few uneconomic roads because someone somewhere thought it was a nice idea.

  10. John M, 20. December 2012, 21:49

    The someone who “thinks this is a nice idea” is Stephen Joyce, the quiet dictator of this National administration. All these roads are his misbegotten children. Somehow he has managed to convince his cabinet colleagues, though perhaps people like Gerry Brownlee needed little persuading, that this cash-strapped country could forge its way into a prosperous new century carrying with it the baggage of the last. Canal builders in the UK in the early 1800s thought much the same thing. They bankrupted themselves and nearly the entire country.

  11. Gavin McG, 22. December 2012, 0:39

    Thank you, the flyover is a horrible idea, thank you so much for opposing it and protecting our wonderful city. Merry Christmas and keep up the good fight

  12. Peter M, 22. December 2012, 9:28

    I think out of all the Roads of National Significance projects, the Wellington Northern Corridor is probably the worst – for a variety of reasons:
    Wellington’s population is hardly growing so there is unlikely to be massive future demand for transport improvements, unlike Auckland which may grow by up to a million extra people over the next 30 years.
    The cost-benefit ratios for sections of the Wellington RoNS are simply terrible: 0.6 for Transmission Gully and 0.2 for the Kapiti Expressway.
    The urban impact of many sections of the Wellington RoNS are horrific, with the Basin Reserve flyover being the worst example of this.