This afternoon (2 September), the Waimakariri District Council passed the following resolution:
That the Council adopts the modified Short Eastern bypass alignment as generally indicated by the Transit NZ consultation process as its preferred option, subject to NZTA acknowledging that the existing designation on the current alignment will not be used for four laning of the state highway and subject to a route being adopted that, (i) avoids New Zealand Historic Places Trust registered buildings and sites, and (ii) minimises the destruction of existing houses.
Those who voted for this were Neville Atkinson, Roger Blair, Robbie Brine, Peter Farrant, Kevin Felstead and me. Against were Elaine Cole, Neil Cruickshank, Sandra Stewart and the Mayor. Dan Gordon declared a conflict of interest and abstained.
This has been a difficult decision and we all knew that we would not make everyone happy. Although there has been plenty of passion on both sides of the debate, there have also been rational and valid points of view on both sides. The councillors who voted for the motion cited a range of reasons for their doing so, including:
- The evidence that this is what the overwhelming majority of the Woodend people wanted.
- The need to think in the long term beyond those who are current residents.
- Personal canvassing done by two councillors.
- The need to keep Pegasus traffic out of central Woodend.
- The splitting of the town by a wide four-lane highway and its traffic.
Those opposed included in their arguments:
- Scepticism that Transit NZ (now the NZ Transport Agency) would ever adopt an eastern bypass.
- The severe impact on properties and businesses in the path of the bypass.
- The future of road transport is murky, given Government targets for rail and coastal shipping, the advent of peak oil, etc.
- Loss of custom for central Woodend businesses.
There were suggestions that we could “park” the matter for five years or so, given that work is unlikely to start for 10 years, with 15 years being more likely. The argument against that was that “parking” would leave the Woodend community in the state of uncertainty that has existed for many years and by not protecting the corridor, potentially close-off future options.