Against

Aside from the fact that there is I understand no central government funding available and this project would cost many millions and burden rate-payers for decades, I dont think it solves the problems we will face over the next few years, let alone for decades to come. Spending tens if not hundreds of millions to move the problem rather than solve it seems pointless.

Nelson faces two traffic issues - the first is that of total traffic volumes is mild and I believe that even if we did nothing, that problem would eventually go away, as motoring costs become more and more expensive and peoples ability to travel one person one car is compromised.  Travel Demand Management and public transport will speed and smooth the transition to less-fuel dependant lives easier. In short, flow can be reasonably easily controlled.

The other problem is that of the heavy traffic along Tahuna/Rocks Road which is of course undesirable, and has undeniably got worse in a short time. The   changes at the Tahuna Traffic Lights & the majority of those around our beach area seem to cater not for the Tahunanui Community or others living within walking or cycling distance, but for those in vehicles either wish to simply pass through or drive from elsewhere to the beach - all in all, an expensive mess.

In trying to find the solution to heavy-goods traffic, we need to focus on the problems we will face in the future, not keep looking at the ones we have faced in the past, because I think we are in a time of change. I don\\\'t think extrapolating the last five or ten years gives a meaningful prediction of what is to come.  Firstly, all of the projections for traffic volume increase and heavy traffic increase contained in the arterial study are based on oil price assumptions that are about as rosy as you can get and if even slightly more realistic numbers are used the volume figures would look quite different. There were many solutions on the table some time ago (18 I believe) and one of the criteria for picking which options were pursued was that they had to cope with increased flow - I wonder then if some good options were prematurely discarded at that time, and if we are even asking the right questions now.

Secondly, nowhere during this whole roading debate has there been any discussion about the impact that the ongoing credit crunch and peak oil will have on all our primary industries  They are already adjusting to complex changes in world trade, and all these factors are likely to radically change the dynamics of their business because they are all so dependent on cheap fuel (heavy machinery and transport) - bearing in mind that it is these very industries that are responsible for the bulk of our heavy traffic, I would have thought that was an important point.   Does it mean these industries will disappear? No it doesn’t, but it does mean they will have some massive headwinds to contend with, so to assume they will continue to grow in some linear fashion based on what we have seen in the past is just plain wrong. We might for example better focus on exporting value added goods rather than selling cheap \\\'logs\\\' for processing overseas.

If we get the transport question wrong in this town by looking backwards instead of forwards we will spend a huge amount of money that we need not have, and do a good job of dividing our city in the process.  I don’t want that to happen, and I don’t believe anyone else does either.

Awaiting response

I think that strategically this route has to be developed ultimately at a scale that can provide additional roading capacity as well as having a good cycleway and walkway integrated with it. It has been planned for many years and still is shown on the District Plan maps as an indicative principal road. The Rocks Road section of SH6 cannot physically accommodate the haevy traffic it has to and will have to increasingly carry. it is not just an amenity issue, it is a safety issue (cliff and sea and rock bed structure) that is a risk to smooth flow of freigtht traffic.

Short answer is that I am \"against\" this proposal, for a number of good reasons. However, the more debate we have on this topic, the more complexity emerges, and the more I am convinced that no decision ought to be made until all the facts are on the table, and Council and the public can consider and debate them properly.

My personal view on transport and the future is that we might very likely not need any new roads, depending on how soon we start to see the effects of peak oil production. I would like to see if we can\'t spent those many millions on options that might serve us better in the future, such as a better public transport system.

Awaiting response

For if there is govt support and funding and the outcome of the arterial study suppots this.

For

Awaiting response

No to a road on the railway reserve.

The current process through the arterial study has yet to be completed.  So far, it appears to confirm, that the cost : benefit ratio does not stack up for any new road building.  This means, that even if Nelson wants a new road, NZTA are unlikely to pay for it.  Therefore, if Nelson still wants a new road, the people of Nelson will have to pay for it, plus maintain it.  Those costs would need to be fully disclosed to the Nelson ratepayers for them to make an informed decision.

Personally, I don\'t not support a southern arterial route.  I believe the cost of fossil fuel will increase through energy depletion.  As such we need, as a community to work together to develop solutions which mitigate this.  Option 5 provides a combined solution for our whole community.

Awaiting response

Hi John

Thank you for your query.  I do not support any new road building anywhere and I do not support any 4 laning, if we can help it.  It is not really necessary until we have tested proper traffic management and improved public transport (without increasing number of buses but just extending bus routes) and change people\\\'s mindset on self convenience, i.e. driving their cars to the city when they have option to carpool or bike or bus.  Best wishes,

Marie Johnstone

This is not a simple Yes No question. There are compelling arguments being put forward by parties with vested interests to make this happen and I have some sympathy with a few of those arguments but they are based on the assumption of economic expansion which in my view is presently unlikely. Conversely these arguments are not accepted by Victory residents and option 5 supporters. If the funding hurdle is not met for the Southern Arterial Route then do we want the status quo i.e. Rocks Road? That would not be my choice. I see this as a complex question which I continue to explore and I have not yet reached any conclusion except that Rocks Road is not the answer. I am analytical and will continue to research this. Having attended the Mayors discussion it has become apparent that we should all await the outcome of the transport study then move forward from there.

No

But we may need Government and Tasman assistance to make it happen.

Existing artery roads into Nelson must be retained and modified to improve traffic flow and avoid a bottle neck situation at the Nelson exit otherwise it will be a wasted exercise.

It allows holiday makers and our Stoke / Richmond counterparts a direct route back home or to their holiday spots in the Tasman Region and vice versa with out congesting Rocks Road and Waimea Road.

Awaiting response

This issue is fair more complex than a yes or no answer.

We are part way through the Arterial Study and I have committed as part of the current council to seeing this process through. The next council will have to address the results of the study and it is very important that we approach that task with an open mind. Obviously there are pros and cons in many of the changes that are under discussion. Funding any change will be a challenge. Information on this and other issues is still being gathered.

I have talked about the values of Rocks Rd and our waterfront on my website along with comment on transport see www.rachelreese.co.nz under the section Our City.

I have been very clear that I do not favour an increase in traffic on our waterfront link and I do not favour any change that would adversely impact on the values there that I see as heritage, landscape and recreational.

I am not a single issue candidate. I have been asked by various lobby groups to endorse or promote proposals in return for voter support  including promising that there will be a southern arterial and promising that there won\\\'t be a southern arterial !!  I cannot give you any more than my commitment to follow due process and respond to this issue with fairness and good quality information so we can make decisions for the long-term well being both economic and social - of Nelson

The Environment Court ruling was fairly clear when it stated that a road could not be put through the Railway Reserve to Victory Square.

I favour using existing roadways with enhancements, if needed. This is mainly due to the indicative cost estimates.  I have read  the NCC Stage 2 Report on the Best Arterial Route options dated May 2010.  Environmental factors and changing working and social patterns are  quite fluid.  A new road could cost $50 m and because it is under $100 m there is no guarantee costs will be  shared 50/50 with the government. The report also indicates a new road with a $50 m price tag  will mean an 8.3 % increase on rates for many decades.That is based on current interest rates so it will go up as interest rates rise. These reports are also indicating more growth south of Annesbrook. Research is also showing that people are now wanting to work closer to home and have shorter commuting distances. I used to work at the Port and I now know  5 people who in the last 12 months have  left management  jobs at the Port and who   now work in the  Richmond area. Another factor to watch are  the changes in the forestry industry. The forest cut will come more from the Rai Valley side with a sawmill in Blenheim also due to double it\'s  production. Log prices also drive logging truck activity around the Port. Currently the Port Gate price for logs is strong, providing better returns for our forestry industry by shipping logs overseas. If that  price drops and there is a better  Mill Gate price logging trucks will drop their loads off at sawmills, and you won\'t see those trucks on Rocks Road. We have to be cautious about locking in ratepayers money into permament new roads when things are changing and we are not getting huge population upswings. One question we need to ask ourselves is ...How bad is our  traffic congestion compared to other cities in New Zealand? I understand we are now awaiting a more comprehensive Stage 3  roading  report which will  need to be  studied carefully.  The challenge for the new Council is to make the best decision in the interests of the whole community. I don\'t think we need to focus on a new road right now as I believe the duplicate Maitai water pipeline project is a more pressing priority.  Regards Patrick        

For but with conditions to address the Victory community