MacKays to Peka Peka Expressway Proposal. UNDER The Resource Management Act 1991

Transcription

1 BEFORE A BOARD OF INQUIRY MacKays to Peka Peka Expressway Proposal UNDER The Resource Management Act 1991 IN THE MATTER of: Notice of requirement for designation and resource consent applications by the NZ Transport Agency for the MacKays to Peka Peka Expressway Proposal APPLICANT NZ Transport Agency STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF JAMES LUNDAY (Urban Planning and Design) for Save Kapiti Dated: 8 th October 2012

2 INTRODUCTION Expert Witness 1. My name is James Lunday. I hold the qualifications of Diploma of Architecture, Bachelor of Arts with First Honours, Bachelor of Planning with First Honours, a Diploma of Urban Design and a Masters of Urban Design (Distinction) both from Oxford Brookes. I have 35 years experience in Architecture, Strategic Planning, Heritage Planning, Urban Regeneration and Urban Design having worked in Government, Academic and Private Sector roles. 2. I have held the positions of Architect for City of Glasgow, Urban Designer/Landscape Planner for the State Government of Victoria, Australia, Director of Urban Regeneration for the Civic Trust, UK, Executive Director of the Auckland Heritage Trust, Senior Lecturer at University of Auckland, and Principal of Common Ground Studio. 3. I have been a practicing Urban Designer since 1982, when I was appointed to the position of Urban Designer and Landscape Planner for the Ministry for Planning and Environment, Victoria, Australia. During this time I was involved in the restructuring of Melbourne with a focus on infrastructure / land-use led economic recovery with aim of creating Melbourne as the most Livable City in Australia. 4. In 1985 I returned to Europe from Australia to take up the position of Project Director of Regeneration for the Civic Trust, London, in charge of Urban Renewal Projects. Whilst in this position the Civic Trust became a founder of the Urban Villages Forum, established to develop new settlements to absorb growth in the United Kingdom. In 1989 I left Europe I was appointed to the position of Executive Director of the Auckland Heritage Trust and accepted an Academic position at the University of Auckland. I have an academic and working history of creating masterplans and urban renewal strategies for historic areas and conservation plans for historic buildings. I have had a long involvement and specialisation in waterfront environments, coastal, lake and river. 5. In 1993 I had a short study leave from the University of Auckland to the offices of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Palter-Zyberk who had at the time 1

3 developed the Traditional Neighbourhood Design theory in the pioneering developments of Seaside, Boca Ratan, Windsor and Kentlands. 6. I was a lecturer at the University of Auckland between , within the School of Architecture, Property and Planning, lecturing in landscape planning, urban design, economic development and heritage planning. I have published extensively in my field, particularly with respect to achieving sustainable urban development. In 2000 I co-authored a book Manual for Sustainable Neighbourhood Development (Christina du Plessus, James Lunday and Pierre Swanepoel Pretoria, ISBN ). I have appeared on radio and television as an urban design commentator and recently in a feature documentary about the Christchurch earthquake, When a City Falls. I am the recipient of several National and International awards related to Urban Design and urban regeneration. 7. I am a past member of the Auckland Council, Manukau, and Queenstown Urban Design Panels. 8. I am the principal and founder of Common Ground Urban Design and Architecture Ltd (Common Ground Studio) and manage a multi-disciplinary practice focused on Urban Design and Development. 9. In New Zealand I have completed a number of large-scale strategic planning exercises resulting in Masterplanned or Urban Design led Plan Changes and Variations. These include Pegasus Town, Homestead Bay, Jacks Point, Albany City, Waikanae North, Ngarara Farm and Taupo Eastern Urban Lands, New Lynn TOD, and Tamaki TOD. I am also involved in consulting work in China, Sri Lanka, Australia and Kuwait. Code of Conduct 10. I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Consolidated Practice Note (2011) and I agree to comply with it as if this Inquiry were before the Environment Court. In that regard I confirm that this evidence is written within my expertise, except where otherwise stated, and that I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions expressed. 2

4 Direct Relevant Experience 11. During 2008/2009 I was appointed the Project director of the re-design of the Western Link Road (WLR) for Kapiti (McKays Crossing to Peka Peka) from a four lane arterial which was deemed to cause separation issues for the community and destroyed the dune environment to a more sensitively designed local arterial that respected the environment, character of settlements, topography, created permeable local movement network and was also fit for purpose of relieving state Highway from local traffic and in budget. I led a design team composed of Common Ground Studio, Opus International and Kapiti District Council. The Kapiti Coast District Council ( KCDC) and NZTA were the clients for this project. We were successful in achieving our brief. 12. The WLR designation was a legacy of the abandoned Sandhills Highway (now resurrected as the Expressway Proposal) There was a decision made 15 years previously to concentrate on the existing State Highway as the national network and relieve that network from local traffic by completing the local network through the construction of much awaited local arterial and second Waikanae River crossing along the designation. This was a project fully supported by NZTA and KCDC. By 2009 we had a fully designed, and consented local arterial which had approval of KCDC, NZTA officers, local community and Hapu/Iwi and had been supported by Board until the final board meeting. It had a completed and complying SAR and had been peer reviewed successfully. It was within budget and fit for purpose satisfying aims of facilitating a better national network and enhancing the local network (whilst reinforcing the character of coastal settlements, supporting and enhancing land use, expansion of Paraparaumu town centre and stimulating the local and national economy). We also investigated improvements to the State Highway, which involved completing the four laning of Highway, adjoining road closures and grade separating junctions at Paraparaumu and Waikanae. Even without further improvements to State Highway the WLR removed sufficient local traffic from state Highway to ease the flow of freight trucks from wellington North (which in fact mainly move at night when there islittle congestion or conflict with local traffic congestion). 13. In addition I have led two major plan changes in Waikanae. I therefore have a good understanding of the Coast, its community, environment, economy 3

5 and its land-use/infrastructure issues. I have access to a large amount of detailed work that was produced for the Western Link Road, which I am happy to make available. Background and Position Statement and Summary 14. As I have covered, I am highly conversant with the wider Kapiti Coast environment and context. My company has undertaken a number of projects related to infrastructure and integrated land-use and transport initiatives in the Kapiti Coast for both KCDC and private investors over a number of years. 15. I have extensive understanding and experience of the Western Link Road and Expressway developments and possible configurations, including: Design Review of Expressway Proposal (KCDC, 2008) Alternative Scenario Testing (KCDC 2008) WLR Design and SAR with Opus (KCDC & NZTA, ) State Highway Expressway Review (KCDC, 2009) State Highway Expressway: Impacts and Land-Use Implications (KCDC, 2009) SH1 Review: Concept Plan and Guidelines post Expressway with Flow Transportation Specialists (KCDC, 2010) 16. I am here to present evidence on behalf of the Save Kapiti, a non-profit community advocacy group who oppose the presented Expressway scheme whilst supporting the need for an integrated movement and landuse outcome for the Coast communities. 17. It is my professional opinion, based on a deep knowledge of the issues, that the option promoted by NZTA consultants is not the best outcome for either the SH 1 network or the local community, and that the core definition of issues and analysis of options has been flawed. In fact the numbers of vehicles along the State Highway are relatively low and congestion is caused by local traffic using State Highway as a local arterial. The creation of a new arterial along the designation solves this issue. This was an Option too easily dismissed in the pursuit of a theoretical National solution. 18. That there were insufficient options investigated by NZTA including the omission of the option of the WLR which eased traffic on the State Highway 4

6 sufficiently to achieve NZTA traffic improvement targets on National network without further improvements to State Highway. Of course this could be improved further by continuing improvements to existing State Highway and grade separating town centre junctions at Waikanae and Paraparaumu. 19. I consider the work undertaken to justify the expressway is fundamentally flawed, particularly in analysis and therefore choice of alternatives and in some instances bordering on mischievous. The landscape and urban design team I single out as being particularly light in contextual analysis and defining principles to objectively assess options, this leads to perverted outcomes in studies such as the AEE report. In their alternative eastern options they appear to go out of their way in route selection to cause most inconvenience and expense to existing properties and overcomplicate a long term strategy of upgrading the existing State Highway. The simpler route would be to grade separate at Kapati/State Highway crossing rail line from west to east then follow rail line. This route avoids housing and affects rural. There is little recognition on the effects of infrastructure. Given the poor and limited election of options, lack of quality analysis and questionable conclusions I cannot support the expressway project in its current location. Or indeed the concept of an expressway through the Kapiti urban district. 20. It is beyond comprehension from an Urban Design and Land-use position to think that the addition a further barrier into the Coastal community will not negatively effect that community. The Coast has the eastern hills as a barrier to growth, the rail corridor and State Highway corridor as a barrier and the sea to the west. The introduction of the expressway does not take these away but introduces another barrier, it demolishes the dune environment, it diverts local traffic off the existing State Highway onto the new expressway(as well as passing traffic), starving existing centres of trade (70% of trips on current State Highway are local trips), it does not facilitate a permeable local movement network, creates visually poor and possibly unsafe overpasses and underpasses on expressway to connect existing east/ west roads, it opens up opportunity for commercial development that is car focused adjacent to expressway grade separated intersections at Poplar, Kapiti Road, Te Moana and Peka Peka, It brings local traffic onto the Expressway (national network). Anyone that has observed what this has done to the M1 as it goes through Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow 5

7 will question why introduce an expressway to the roll of local arterial. It also has a low BCR which is unacceptable given its social, land-use and environmental negative effects For these reasons I recommend that the Expressway Proposal be dismissed in total. A fundamental flaw was not properly investigating the upgrade of existing SH1 along rail corridor; grade separation at Kapiti Road, taking State Highway at this point to east of rail, and traffic underpass at Te Moana ; the construction of a local arterial along the existing designation from Raumati Road to Te Moana Road ( Stage 1 of WLR) ; incrementally closing access to State Highway as necessary. NZTA URBAN DESIGN AND LANDSCAPE FRAMEWORK EVIDENCE OF MARC BAILY AND AEE Review of Evidence Presented by NZTA 21. Whilst having a wider view on the Expressway I will confine my evidence on the whole to my specialist areas of expertise. It is not my intention to deeply critique the NZTA urban design consultants but will look at what I consider their major thrust. 22. It is my opinion that the NZTA Urban Design and Landscape Framework is fundamentally flawed in its methodology and rigor. It does not assess the forces that have shaped the coastal communities, hills, sea, rivers, dunes, beach, rail corridor, State Highway corridor, indigenous culture and historical precedents. The study is focused only on the proposed alignment and is not the architect of that alignment. Surely context is the foundation of deciding land use and infrastructure decisions. At best the study is a dressing applied to a meal already prepared? It does not address land use form, integration of land use and infrastructure, community dislocation, economic, environmental and social impact, local road and network connectivity sufficiently. 23. Evidence of Mr. Marc Baily seems to focus only on two Urban Design Principles at the exclusion of others. He considers Connectivity and Centres but I believe this is insufficiently as urban design and form is an integrated 6

8 construct and relies on internationally defined principles that are reflected in the New Zealand Urban Design Protocol (Seven C s). Urban design is dependent upon an integrated approach to design decisions. Due to this his evidence relegates Urban Design to an afterthought, it is not the brief for intervention but a mitigation tool. Core to the flaw is the lack of contextual analysis, permeability studies or options, land-use impacts, vitality of centres, walkability and safety, resilience (ecologically), character and identity as tools to both define and critique alignment options. 24. As part of RoNS the function of the expressway is to By-pass Kapiti coast communities. However, because of constraint of the Hills to the east there is not an easy by-pass route. Mr Baily states that the designation avoids residential area. This is just not true. The bulk of Kapiti residential land sits between the rail corridor/ State Highway barrier and the Sea. The designation cuts through the middle of this. His evidence avoids the fact that the rail corridor is a barrier reinforced by State Highway. Removing State Highway function does not remove the barrier. Instead the expressway splits the community into three districts (Lynch), Hill, Middle and Coast. Any alternative that creates another Bridge across the Waikanae River improves north/south connectivity out of and within district therefore can be dismissed in assessment. However, east/west connectivity is not enhanced by expressway as implied, merely maintained but in a lesser form relying on overpasses and underpasses. This is at the expense of permeability that a local road along the designation corridor would provide. The issues surrounding Paraparumu/Waikanae and State Highway/rail corridor can only be resolved by grade separating traffic, regardless of the expressway. The rail splits the town centres not the State Highway. The barrier of rail becomes more serious as frequency of rail trips increase. I suppose cost of resolving this issue will be left to KCDC if expressway is built. 25. When it comes to Urban Form there seems to be confusion around connection and dislocation. If we start at a higher level of urban design analysis (i.e. Lynch, McHarg) we look at what has shaped the environment and settlements, nature, culture, topography, and interventions. Baily fails to look at or give recognition to shapers of urban form. The designation has also given form to Coast communities by creating separation and creating a level of planning blight along its alignment. It has restricted formal (but not informal) east west permeability. However this is not irrecoverable if a 7

9 local road is built along they corridor but is lost if it is a barrier like the expressway. The built environment has defined itself along the rail and State Highway corridor. It is largely degraded urban outcomes focused on the rail and highway. The shopping mall and supermarkets feed off the State Highway. The conditions that have shaped the land use have been there for a long time and have evolved to cope with that environment. This is not true for land uses adjacent to proposed expressway which are largely residential and coastal in nature with the exception of the airport they are all losers with expressway option. 26. In the evidence there is a focus on connectivity at expense of permeability. The coast has developed to a large extent west of rail corridor. The existing Town centres of Parparaumu and Waikanae sit largely to the west of the rail corridor. And to a large extent turn their backs to the State Highway. They depend on passing trade. The expressway is not a permeable connection. It takes passing trade out of coast but more importantly focuses local traffic to move along route between Waikanae (Te Moana) and Paraparaumu (Kapiti Road). There is no filtration of traffic or pedestrians continuously east west and therefore this will encourage strong pull for commercial development around the grade-separated interchanges. His hope of a renaissance of the existing centres is unlikely in these circumstances. On a detailed level the uses of underpasses and overpasses to create east west connections on existing at grade roads is a poor solution not an improvement. The rail corridor is ignored by Mr Baily in his assessment, why? It is an impermeable barrier yet its effects ignored. There are limited development opportunities along existing State Highway that would merit changing its status. It is certainly not in the environments or communities favour to change the status and insert another barrier, a four lane, minimal connected fast truck route. 27. Introduction of another barrier that is not permeable limits walkability and reinforces a car based society. There is no real assessment of this and no commitment to modal shift. 28. The existing Town Centres will not flourish through the intervention of the expressway. The commercial focus will follow his spine (Baily) (Hilliers Space Syntax theory) The bulk of land open for development lies to east and west of Paraparaumu grade separated intersection on expressway and in the newly designated commercial centre near Te Moana in Waikane. We 8

10 will also see pressure on Peka Peka to the detriment of Otaki when it is bypassed. This has been demonstrated internationally as a result of by pass roads. 29. Again little real information on the effects on the economics of land use is covered. The motorway proposal splits a large part of land from beach. This has an image effect and therefore a branding issue, therefore amenity and value issues. There is little attention to placemaking, the costs involved in turning state highway into local road or how to resolve issue of railway as a barrier. 30. Bailey does not consider the character of the environment or urban areas before or after intervention. There is no mention of the effect of dislocating neighbourhoods or the wholesale removal of the remnant dunes. 31. In the Consideration of Alternatives, Assessment of Environmental Effects there is a statement that NZTA demonstrated an assessment of alternatives. It only looked at a small number. 32. The constraints mapping failed to properly analyse the structure of the Coastal communities otherwise it would never have suggested inserting a barrier through the core of the settlement and in fact was a study of proposed expressway routes. 33. It strangely ignores the full design process undertaken for the WLR arterial road. The concept of using the designation for a four-lane motorway was abandoned in 1995 with the advent of a more enlightened approach to transport planning. 34. The report does not accurately depict the situation in Up until a Ministerial move to introduce the Sandhills Expressway there was full support for the WLR from Urban Design Review, NZTA, KCDC, and Board. From my understanding even at final board meeting it was narrowly rejected. In addition I do not believe that the expressway is in anyway the cheapest option and that there was not an extensive exploration of alternatives. The WLR was costed at $65.755m constructed including two bridges (WLR SAR report, page ). Even with other costs, property, fees, and a very large contingency of over $11m it would cost $123m approx for stage 1 from Raumati Road to Te Moana. This gave a PM peak 9

11 travel time reduction in local network of 26% by 2026 and a 25% saving on regional/national trips. This scheme conservatively returned 1.8 BCR. Stage 3 and 4 was deemed unnecessary for National purposes and would be delivered as part of private sector development. Given this cost it leaves a very large amount of money compared to costs of expressway for upgrading of existing State Highway( grade separated at Kapiti, re-align along east of rail from Kapati, underpass at Waikanae. The WLR was deemed to be fit for purpose, was consented and ready to move to full design and tender. It could have been operational much sooner than expressway, probably by now. Most of State Highway is already four lane and on firm ground very suitable for upgrading, the most expensive upgrades are grade separation at Parparumu and tunnel at Waikanae which both have conceptual designs completed. Major issues of Waikanae and Paraparaumu centres will still have to be resolved particularly in regards to rail corridor and level crossings. The expressway costs do not include the redesign and reconstruction of State Highway as a local collector or resolving conflicts at Paraparumu and Waikanae. By excluding investigating the option of WLR and upgrading State Highway the alternatives assessment is fundamentally flawed. Scope of Evidence 35. My evidence will concentrate on the Urban Design aspects that should have influenced the analysis of the coast and choice of alignment and movement corridor. URBAN DESIGN ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK Urban Design Protocol 36. We hear in evidence about the Urban Design Protocol, so what is Urban Design Protocol. The Protocol is a voluntary commitment to specific urban design initiatives by signatory organisations, which include central and local government, the property sector, design professionals, professional institutes and other groups. NZTA, KCDC and the Alliance consultants are signatories. The collective actions that individual signatories take make a significant difference to the quality and success of urban design in our towns and cities helping them become: 10

12 Competitive places that thrive economically and facilitate creativity and innovation Liveable places that provide a choice of housing, work and lifestyle options Healthy environments that sustains people and nature Inclusive places that offer opportunities for all citizens Distinctive places that have a strong identity and sense of place Well-governed places that have a shared vision and sense of direction 37. The Urban Design Protocol identifies seven essential design qualities: Context: seeing that buildings, places and spaces are part of the whole town or city Character: reflecting and enhancing the distinctive character, heritage and identity of our urban environment Choice: ensuring diversity and choice for people Connections: enhancing how different networks link together for people Creativity: encouraging innovative and imaginative solutions Custodianship: ensuring design is environmentally sustainable, safe and healthy Collaboration: communicating and sharing knowledge across sectors, professions and with communities. 38. These are derived from urban design principles as expressed by a range of leading urban design philosophers and practitioners. The common thread between these authors and practitioners is that although they span from 1901 till the 1980 s, they are describing compact traditional mixed use settlements largely demonstrated by towns and cities laid out and built before the advent of the automobile. Context: above all urban design is about understanding and designing for the context of the host environment. Connectivity: how an area connects or stitches into the wider environment- the large movement networks or collectors/arterials Permeability: the ability to move freely and unhindered throughout a centre. Provides access through integrated street networks- arterials, local, access way and lanes, that provide appropriate block structure Vitality: provided through a people friendly mixed-use environment that is well connected to the residential catchment with sufficient 11

13 concentration of residents and visitors to generate a mix of retail, entertainment and recreational uses Robustness: creation of an environment that can adapt to change over time without compromise Concentration: an appropriate density and intensity of use, set within an integrated permeable grid with a population mass to ensure vitality Regenerative: creating environments and buildings that are resource efficient and environmentally responsive that have the ability to adapt to changing needs and uses over time Identity: a place needs to be distinctive in character and that allows people to experience, and take ownership of, their unique community 39. The focus of urban design when looking at options should be the retention and enhancement of the area s character by the careful placement of infrastructure and development within and as part of the landscape in a way that it preserves the amenity and enhances the value of existing lad uses. The settlement has been structured around character features (natural and built) and the job of urban design is to enhance not only the experience of the built environment, moving around it, but also the existing natural and cultural values in the landscape. 40. Urban Design envisages a low impact approach to infrastructure that has at its heart four sustainable development cornerstones. These are: Natural systems Connectivity/Permeability Equity Character 41. Simplistically Urban Design is the science of urban structure - it is about: How we move around and through environments (connectivity, permeability) Sense of place (vitality, feel, sociability, vibe) Democratic environments (safety, tolerance, freedom of movement and loitering) Creation of, or reinforcing, identity (heritage, setting, landscape) Sustainable outcomes (ecology, biodiversity, resilience) 42. Above all Urban Design is about Contextual Structure and Design that reflects, enhances and respects natural, social, cultural and economic values and capital. 12

14 Sustainable Development 43. The term sustainable development has gained increasing recognition in recent years emphasising the role of the environment in providing for social and economic health of present and future generations. It is also one of the foundation tenants of the urban design profession and the RMA. 44. The philosophy and practice of Urban Design is based on interdisciplinary practices. Urban Design is often described as a bridge between Community Development, Architecture, Landscape Planning, Environmentalism, Planning and Development (Refer Figure 1. below Urban Design Theory). Figure 1. Urban Design Theory 45. The basis for good urban design is context and it is context that separates Urban Design from the other built environment professions. Today best practice urban design is founded on the principles espoused by Colin McHarg (Design with Nature), Kevin Lynch (Image of the City) and Ian Bentley (Responsive Environments). In all cases the base position is a deep understanding of the site including environmental, historical, social, cultural and economic factors within context. 13

15 46. Key to the development of any site in a responsive fashion therefore is the analysis and assessment of what exists at present. This requires that the complete context of a site is evaluated and understood so that accurate and informed design decisions can be made. What this requires is a process commonly referred to as Sieve Mapping, where the information that informs design is overlaid graphically in an objective and transparent way. This process is also known as Constraints Analysis, Site Analysis or a range of other names but most importantly it needs to include the relevant elements I will outline below to truly meet the original intent of this process. 47. When this context is established we are then able to create an approach that is suited to the site, not one that is imposed on it at the behest of its innate features. Such a process may find areas suitable for development, areas that require absolute protection and a number of options in between. Ultimately it will provide a framework for further refined design to occur and the quality and robustness of the design/planning solutions are in direct correlation to the diversity and quality of input. 48. Bottom line inputs required for a sieve mapping process to support Contextual mapping are: Topography, geology and soils Hydrology Ecosystems Archaeology Landscape Sun and wind patterns Land uses and connectivity Aspect and slope Hazards Morphology Visual Analysis Planning context Stakeholder input Cultural associations Socio-economic factors 49. This information, or series of overlays, becomes the basis for the urban design process. This process acknowledges and respects the existing 14

16 exposed and hidden landscape, attempts to harmonise development within it and stitches the site to its existing hinterland. 50. This information should be used in an iterative process to guide development of design options. It represents a best practice approach to ensuring that a strong base for sustainable development is set. 51. There is little evidence of this approach being used to identify the route for the expressway (or need for it) or the alternative options being tested by Urban Design and Sustainable development Principles. SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL ANLAYSIS Part 1 Previous Analysis 52. Initiated in 1949, the first alignment of the second north/south throughroad for the Kapiti Coast was set in Ongoing work resulted several changes to the alignment and the project over the next four decades. The most profound of these was in 1995 when Transit and KCDC decided from in-depth analysis that the appropriate function of the road was as an internal arterial as part of the local road network and that the national arterial function would be best served through development of the existing State Highway corridor. 53. For 15 years therefore, land uses and the expectations of landowners have developed around the designation on the basis that the road within the designation would be of the nature of a local road. 54. Detailed technical work and analysis was undertaken over the next decade to develop the design, which was shaping up as a 4-lane high-speed design with minimal connections. A design review initiated by KCDC in 2008 resulted in a dramatic change to the conceived nature of the road. The analysis that underpinned the following work was consistent with a shift in government policy (the New Zealand Transport Strategy (NZTS) and the 2009/ /19 Government Policy Statement (GPS)) that emphasized a shift in scope and priorities towards: Reduction in vehicle dependency Modal shift in freight transport Modal shift in people movement 15

17 Focus on economic growth Increased investment in Roads of National Significance (RoNS) Value for money Safer travel Environmental sustainability 55. In practice this means the adoption of an Integrated Land-use Approach (ILA) with enough depth and detail of analysis of the whole holding environment sufficient to enable accurate and robust predictions of economic growth, transport, environmental and social outcomes. 56. From my involvement in the process leading up to the selection of a preferred route for the Expressway (Dec 2009) I am aware that none of this analysis work was done by NZTA or their consultants. 57. From my reading of the subsequent consultant reports particularly concerning the review of Options and the MAC process, no analysis that would indicate an ILA has been undertaken. 58. Despite a great deal of technical data and analysis being made available to the NZTA consultant team, on no occasion did they avail themselves of the benefit of that work and they proceeded without what I would consider professionally to be a necessary level and breadth of enquiry. 59. The selection of route and subsequent design appear to be driven entirely by engineering concerns and a pre-determined preference for one of the Options that does not meet the stated objectives of the Alliance, nor does it meet the stated objectives of the GPS and NZTS. 16

18 Part 2 The Shape of the Kapiti Coast (Existing) 60. Primary Urban Design Analysis for an Integrated Land-use Approach Figure 2. Settlement Shape Kapiti Coast - Existing 61. The central Kapiti Coast economic unit is comprised of three semicontinuous settlement units Raumati, Paraparaumu and Waikanae, separated and contained by open-space green areas QE Park, Waikanae floodplain, rural/lifestyle blocks and the Tararua foothills to the east. 62. Urban Design identifies a number of shapers to understand the form of a place and to help explain and predict how it will change and develop under the influence of any growth scenario or intervention. Primarily, these are: Edges Barriers Gateways Attractors Nodes 17

19 KAPITI ISLAND SHORELINE Raumati West Paraparaumu West Development encroaching on river Waikanae West RURAL (QE II) WLR DESIGNATION RURAL RURAL Raumati East Paraparaumu East Waikanae East SH & RAIL Isolated development Isolated development COASTAL ESCARPMENT WAIKANAE RIVER Gateway Nodes Edges Barriers Features Figure 3. Kapiti Coast (Existing) - Lynch Analysis Edges 63. A number of small edges (QE Park boundary, dune structure, Waikanae floodplain, etc) divide the community into smaller neighbourhoods. Edges: Connect fully permeable, they allow free movement between neighbourhoods Define and reinforce distinct character and identity (define homogenous land-use parcels) Contain effects from spilling from one land-use parcel to its neighbour 64. Permeability at the edge enables the smaller neighbourhoods to combine and attain the critical social mass sufficient to develop, sustainably, a prosperous economic centre. 65. Strong edges (shoreline, base of the foothills) have a more profound effect on land-use. 66. The WLR Designation imposes two weak edges. Their permeability has stimulated a great deal of pedestrian/cycle activity for which the designation functions as a Collector. With no road present the edges have created a separate and contained natural open-space amenity corridor. 18

20 67. Development inactivity within the designation has (fortuitously) preserved the last examples of dune landscape in Paraparaumu, providing the opportunity for genuine multi-modal uptake. Barriers 68. Barriers are impermeable edges, either natural or applied, and unless endowed with particularly natural and attractive qualities they tend to attract degraded and low value land-uses. 69. An important principle when dealing with large pieces of infrastructure such as the rail corridor and State Highway is that as much as possible they should follow strong natural edges and existing barriers (hence the State Highway alignment roughly follows the rail). The reason for this is not only so that the negative effects of such interventions can be better contained and mitigated against, but also when in such positions they can more efficiently serve multiple environments. 70. There are two major and barriers on the coast: Waikanae River Rail corridor (reinforced for much of its length by the State Highway) 71. There is one minor artificial barrier on the coast: WLR Designation 72. That the barrier of the Waikanae River is broached only once at the Waikanae Bridge creates a situation of vulnerability for both the National Arterial Network as well as for the Local Network and communities. 73. Perhaps the single most important outcome of the single crossing is the necessary superimposition of the Local and National networks for the connection of Waikanae and Paraparaumu. Separated by greater distance and with more potential for Waikanae to spread and achieve a critical population mass the communities may have been able to develop as independent self-sustaining towns. In that situation the barrier would have reinforced their unique identities. However, the present settlement forms and the issues around the State Highway functionality demonstrate the extent to which dynamic urban processes are only (mis)shaped and not controlled by environmental constraints. 19

21 74. Historically the rail corridor has aligned itself for the most part along the strong natural edge of the Tararua foothills. In places that edge is also a barrier (the escarpment to the east of Raumati). The barrier is further strengthened where the State Highway alignment coincides with the rail. The initial flurry of development on the coast was on both sides of the road corridor. However, over time the severity of the combined barrier has pushed almost all growth to the west. 75. Where the State Highway aligns with the rail, the level of constraint is largely determined by the railway corridor rather than the State Highway. 76. Both in Paraparaumu and in Waikanae a small amount of development has elected to cross a barrier it does so at a cost (of reduced connectivity) but for a gain in higher amenity (the view), a heightened sense of identity (independence) and proximity to the recreational estate of the bush and ranges. If those advantages are not forthcoming, then development exhibits lower values more consistent with the normal barrier effect (e.g. some parts of Paraparaumu East). 77. Connectivity back to the rest of the town for this population is determined primarily by the number and frequency of rail crossings rather than State Highway constraints. 78. The barrier effect can also be seen from the long-standing indecision surrounding the use of the WLR Designation. As explained above, the Designation is not a real barrier but rather two artificial and imposed edges contained within the community. It is fully permeable, perhaps most accurately described as an absence. It does, however, illustrate the extent to which such planning blight can create a very real barrier effect. The effects are: The development of a broken Local Road Network several large megablocks with very few cross connections The secondary effect of the arterialisation of the few connecting roads there are (with subsequent increased congestion Lower value uses attracted to the barrier edge Creation of an unsafe environment as any uses turn their back on the void of the corridor 20

22 Figure 4. Incomplete Road Network Existing 79. In relation to movement networks, the critical points will always be where the barrier is broached or, if the network is using the barrier/edge as a route, where and how this connects to the land-use parcels on either side. Issues are avoided to the extent that dissimilar functions and environments are kept separate from each other. The current situation at the lights of Kapiti and Elizabeth/Te Moana Roads is as good an example as you could get of the mismanagement of these relationships. Gateways 80. A community needs strong gateways in order to form an identity sufficient to develop a centre capable of supporting strong and sustainable economic growth. As well as defining the community, the gateways help to constrain the settlement footprint and intensify internal activity and relationships. 81. The coast communities are plagued by a series of weak primary gateways to all three settlements (Raumati, Paraparaumu and Waikanae) through: No strong topographic edge Multiple entries to the communities off State Highway 1 James Lunday > Evidence > Board of Enquiry. > 8th October 2012 > MacKays to Peka Peka Expressway Proposal 21

23 82. As well as reducing legibility and weakening the sense of centre, these dissipated gateways have a negative effect on the functioning of the State Highway by increasing friction and creating conflicts between the Local and National Networks. Summary of Primary Analysis 83. Issues a) The superimposition of the Local and National Road Networks b) The superimposition of SH/road/rail/community connections at single point intersections both in Paraparaumu and in Waikanae c) Only one connection through the barrier of the Waikanae River: o Local Network constraint (Waikanae/Paraparaumu) o State Highway constraint o Network vulnerability d) Lack of permeability between east and west neighbourhoods across the Rail/SH barrier e) Limited and slow commercial growth due to the indecision around the designation f) Incomplete and unhealthy Local Road Network due to the indecision around the designation g) Incomplete and unhealthy Open-space and Ecological Networks due to the indecision around the designation 84. Urban Design Objectives In UD design terms the objectives drawn from the Primary Analysis are: To convert barriers to edges To improve permeability To strengthen identity To strengthen legibility To preserve and strengthen landscape character To enhance and strengthen ecological and environmental connections 85. Aims To physically separate Local from National Road networks To increase the separation by creating Attractors to draw activity away from the National Network To improve the efficiency and resilience of the National Arterial Network 22

24 To improve the efficiency of the Local Network through increased connectivity and de-arterialisation To stimulate sustainable economic activity and growth by concentrating activity around the most internally connected nodes To reduce vehicle dependence To enable and stimulate modal shift To create safer transport and public realm environments URBAN DESIGN ANALYSIS M2PP 86. The nature of the road within the WLR Designation is all important. An expressway forms a barrier not only to the Local Network. It creates an environment hostile to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore, the primary effect of the M2PP in Urban Design terms is that it introduces a third real barrier with all the attendant barrier effects into the Coast communities. Worst of all, it introduces the barrier into the middle of the communities rather than following an existing edge or barrier. KAPITI ISLAND SHORELINE RAUMATI PARAPARAUMU WEST WAIKANAE WEST RURAL EDGE RURAL EDGE (QE II) PARAPARAUMU CENTRAL RURAL ZONE WAIKANAE CENTRAL node node SH & RAIL node COASTAL ESCARPMENT WAIKANAE RIVER Gateway Nodes Edges Barriers Features Figure 5. Expressway Option Lynch Analysis 23

25 87. The Coast communities are already heavily constrained by poor connectivity. The existing connections: Are insufficient Have contributed to poor efficiency and low levels of commercial activity Have created poor urban form Figure 6. Settlement Shape Kapiti Coast With Expressway 88. The severance created by the expressway barrier makes this much worse. Although maintaining the vehicle connections it almost completely removes permeability. The effect of this is to divide and shrink the two main communities into four smaller neighbourhoods. Importantly these divisions don t occur along natural edges. The Expressway breaks and shifts the relationships between existing neighbourhood centres but leaves populations too small to compensate and compete against the massive commercial pressures that will build around the interchanges. 89. The remnant neighbourhoods are constrained simply by being too small. With no permeability and critical mass for their own commercial development, the few connections there are become even more James Lunday > Evidence > Board of Enquiry. > 8th October 2012 > MacKays to Peka Peka Expressway Proposal 24

26 arterialised, exacerbating internal network issues as well as compromising the efficiency of the National Network at the intersection points. 90. The extra barrier and community severance are additional and particularly serious negative issues introduced into the Coast communities by the proposed Expressway. Common sense suggests that these outcomes alone would normally exclude this option. The M2PP needs to be measured against the Issues and Objectives drawn from the Basic Analysis (above). Summary of Analysis 91. Issues a) Fails to separate the Local and National Networks. In many ways it reproduces the existing conditions on the State Highway it just shifts them further west into the middle of the communities b) Does separate the local access to the rail from the National/Local Network intersections c) Provides network resilience through a second Waikanae River crossing d) Only partially alleviates congestion issues at the National/Local Network intersections (grade-separated as opposed to lights, intersections are Local Network as well as National Network connectivity points) e) Only partially alleviates State Highway inefficiency (Expressway still used as part of the Local Network) f) Does nothing for permeability across Rail corridor g) Slightly improves permeability across detuned State Highway (still a high speed road) h) Greatly increases impermeability within existing communities i) Large-scale, low value, car-based, big-box commercial activity stimulated around grade-separated intersections (see economic development notes, following) j) Degrades value and land-use along barrier edges k) Provides not only no improvement to the Local Network, but degrades it due to the arterialisation of the east/west connectors brought on by reduced permeability and overpass/underpass configuration l) Removes any potential for completing the open-space network by imposing an impermeable barrier 25

27 92. Urban Design Objectives Increases the number of barriers Decreases permeability Weakens identity (communities split, no gateways/entries) Reduces legibility (alignment doesn t follow natural edges) Weakens landscape character (destroys natural topography, doesn t respond to landscape values) Will add to the eco estate (natural revegetation of edges) but will fail to provide sufficient environmental connection (no permeability) 93. Aims Fails to separate the Local from National Road networks Provides no incentive for local traffic not to use the National Network for local trips in fact, stimulates the sort of commercial growth around the interchanges that will attract local traffic onto the Network Improves the resilience of the National arterial Network (second crossing of Waikanae River) Gives some improvement to the efficiency of the National Network (grade-separated interchanges, 4-laning), but doesn t maximise efficiency (maintains a considerable level of Local Network function on the Expressway) Balanced Growth / Sustainable Growth 94. The general principle that operates in all communities is that commercial development will always follow the most direct and most connected routes. Connections become primary Attractors therefore their placement and configuration is critical in terms of shaping the extent and nature of commercial growth. 26

28 KAPITI ISLAND SHORELINE RAUMATI PARAPARAUMU WEST WAIKANAE WEST RURAL EDGE RURAL EDGE (QE II) PARAPARAUMU CENTRAL node RURAL ZONE WAIKANAE CENTRAL node SH & RAIL COASTAL ESCARPMENT WAIKANAE RIVER Stimulated Commerical Development Nodes Edges Barriers Features Figure 7. Predicted Growth Pattern - Expressway Option 95. Two basic growth effects can be predicted for the proposed M2PP alignment and configuration. 96. Vehicle centred big-box type development will be stimulated around the Expressway interchanges particularly Kapiti, Te Moana and Pekapeka. Development opportunities will be more constrained at Poplar because of the proximity of the rail and Escarpment barrier. 97. The effects of these Attractors will be to: Pull activity away from the existing centres at Paraparaumu and Waikanae Confound KCDC s growth strategy by applying pressure at Pekapeka, outside the urban limit Degrade residential values on the approaches to the Expressway 98. The weakening of the existing town centres is the second predictable effect of the Expressway as proposed. The centres are out-competed in their ability to drive major anchors and therefore to develop balanced and sustainable growth. This effect is not acknowledged by the M2PP proposal. A detuned State Highway is suggested as beneficial addition and in principle may be able to lighten the effect of less functional centres. However, the detuned State Highway will never be an Attractor because it: 27

29 Is an Edge rather than a Collector Has a small population catchment Is a rural road (isn t placed where people are) The Obvious Alternative That Was Never Considered - WLR + SH1 Upgrade KAPITI ISLAND SHORELINE 1. RAUMATI reinforced as a district node 2. PARAPARAUMU contained as one district with the corridor used as a connector entry entry 3. WAIKANAE unified and contained as a district entry RURAL EDGE (QE II) node RURAL ZONE protected as edge node RURAL EDGE gateway node gateway SH & RAIL node COASTAL ESCARPMENT WAIKANAE RIVER Gateway Nodes Edges Barriers Features Figure 8. Western Link Road + SH Upgrade Lynch Analysis 99. Using the same language of analysis and derived set of objectives, the following result is obtained from the WLR and State Highway Upgrade Option The advantage of being able to use this alternative as a comparison is that the results are particularly robust, being based on a great deal of data (particularly in regard to economic benefits) that was developed as part of the detailed analysis and design for the WLR. A full summary and overview of the Integrated Land-use Approach and the WLR design is provided in Appendix 1 Final Scheme Assessment Report (SAR) The part of this alternative that was not covered by the WLR design was the isolation of the State Highway from the Local Network and the State Highway upgrade. While several solutions were explored to determine practicality and to get a feeling for cost, it was inappropriate to make this 28