Tags

  • RSS geotagged newsitems feed

Geotagged / Basin Reserve flyover


Near me
    • Taking The Wheel: The Government Makes More Moves To Rebalance Transport
      • As Wellington waits for an announcement in its transport future, the Government is continuing to make moves to reshape transport in New Zealand away from over-reliance on the private car and towards a balanced system that gives as many people as possible options for getting off the roads: The new Government Policy Statement on Land Transport represents a significant change away from the previous Government’s motorway-dominated transport priorities, as Isabella Cawthorn explains on Talk Wellington. On Newshub, Thomas Coughlan says that public transport is the big winner in the new strategy. The previous National-led Government was completely impervious to the well-accepted research finding that adding new capacity encourages more people into cars. The news that the Government is considering tolling Transmission Gully to help prevent this is an encouraging sign that the feared flood of additional cars into Wellington from the North may not materialise. While we wait to see whether the Government’s new, balanced approach will succeed in cutting Wellington’s motorway-building cabal off at the pass, why not find out how another seaside city, Vancouver, has succeeded in making its transport system work for people, not the other way around?
      • Accepted from Save the Basin posts by feedreader
      • Tagged as:
      • transmission-gully

        • Transmission Gully Motorway, Kenepuru, Porirua, Porirua City, Wellington, 5022, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Sore Losers: Nick Smith and the Government Water Down the Environmental Legal Assistance Fund
      • The rules of the Ministry for the Environment’s Environmental Legal Assistance Fund, which groups including Save the Basin have used to help fund legal challenges to infrastructure projects, have now been changed so that such applications can be arbitrarily declined, by: The inclusion of a new criterion to consider whether providing ELA funding to the applicant for its involvement in the legal proceedings, will contribute to impeding or delaying the ability of people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural well-being in relation to important needs, including employment, housing and infrastructure.   I was rung by a Stuff journalist about this and responded on behalf of Save the Basin: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/94323541/quiet-change-to-public-fund-for-environmental-legal-challenges A subsequent exchange in Question Time (see below) makes it very clear that Nick Smith had the Government’s Basin Reserve flyover defeat in mind when he made this move. Nick Smith and the Government appear to think that fits of pique make good public policy. We beg to differ. Question Time 9. EUGENIE SAGE (Green) to the Minister for the Environment: By how much has annual funding for the Environmental Legal Assistance Fund been cut since 2013/14? Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): The budget this year is $600,000 per year, as it was last year and the year before. For the 4 years prior to that the budget was $800,000 per year but was repeatedly underspent. The spend in 2013-14 was $555,000, and the average actual spend was $520,000. As much as I like the Minister of Finance, I do not like under-spending my vote so I reduced the budget in 2015-16 and transferred it to increased support for collaborative processes. This is also consistent with our blue-green philosophy of supporting people to find solutions rather than spending it on legal aid to fight disputes. Eugenie Sage: Can he confirm that he created a new criterion for the fund recently so that community groups wanting to challenge council decisions in the courts are likely to be denied funding if their case might “impede or delay” a development project? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yes, I have changed the criteria. A new consideration is the issue of housing and infrastructure. The Government makes no apologies for making it harder for groups to get Government money to stop houses and infrastructure from being built. It does not prevent funding being provided in those sorts of cases, but it requires the panel to give consideration to the broader public interest. It simply does not make sense for the Government to be using public money to stop transport projects being built and stop houses being built with legal aid funding. Eugenie Sage: Does he believe that Forest & Bird would have received funding to mount a legal challenge to Bathurst Resources’ proposed coalmine on the Denniston plateau if this new criterion had been in place? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: There is an independent panel that makes the decisions on the issue of the legal aid. What I have added to the criteria is that, alongside the environmental things, issues like infrastructure, jobs, and housing have to be a consideration. But it still will be an independent consideration for the panel. Eugenie Sage: Can he confirm that last year he gave himself the power to decide which cases and which community groups would get environmental legal aid, stripping this power away from the Ministry for the Environment’s chief executive? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Each year Ministers make a decision about the level of delegations. In this particular case, I decided not to delegate to the Ministry for the Environment, albeit I note that I followed the panel’s advice in every case. In the event that I do not follow the panel’s advice it will be a matter of open public record. Eugenie Sage: Why will he not just own the fact that his Government is trying to stop legal challenges that might impede environmentally destructive development, like the coalmine on the Denniston plateau, the Ruataniwha Dam, and the Basin Reserve flyover? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I know of many Wellingtonians who would be concerned that the Government was spending money on stopping roading through to the airport being constructed with legal aid funds. So the Government has deliberately put into the environmental legal aid criteria that the panel needs to consider issues like infrastructure and housing. To quote the Minister for Infrastructure: “We are the infrastructure Government.”, and we want to see New Zealanders being able to get around and have a roof over their heads.9. EUGENIE SAGE (Green) to the Minister for the Environment: By how much has annual funding for the Environmental Legal Assistance Fund been cut since 2013/14? Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): The budget this year is $600,000 per year, as it was last year and the year before. For the 4 years prior to that the budget was $800,000 per year but was repeatedly underspent. The spend in 2013-14 was $555,000, and the average actual spend was $520,000. As much as I like the Minister of Finance, I do not like under-spending my vote so I reduced the budget in 2015-16 and transferred it to increased support for collaborative processes. This is also consistent with our blue-green philosophy of supporting people to find solutions rather than spending it on legal aid to fight disputes. Eugenie Sage: Can he confirm that he created a new criterion for the fund recently so that community groups wanting to challenge council decisions in the courts are likely to be denied funding if their case might “impede or delay” a development project? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yes, I have changed the criteria. A new consideration is the issue of housing and infrastructure. The Government makes no apologies for making it harder for groups to get Government money to stop houses and infrastructure from being built. It does not prevent funding being provided in those sorts of cases, but it requires the panel to give consideration to the broader public interest. It simply does not make sense for the Government to be using public money to stop transport projects being built and stop houses being built with legal aid funding. Eugenie Sage: Does he believe that Forest & Bird would have received funding to mount a legal challenge to Bathurst Resources’ proposed coalmine on the Denniston plateau if this new criterion had been in place? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: There is an independent panel that makes the decisions on the issue of the legal aid. What I have added to the criteria is that, alongside the environmental things, issues like infrastructure, jobs, and housing have to be a consideration. But it still will be an independent consideration for the panel. Eugenie Sage: Can he confirm that last year he gave himself the power to decide which cases and which community groups would get environmental legal aid, stripping this power away from the Ministry for the Environment’s chief executive? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Each year Ministers make a decision about the level of delegations. In this particular case, I decided not to delegate to the Ministry for the Environment, albeit I note that I followed the panel’s advice in every case. In the event that I do not follow the panel’s advice it will be a matter of open public record. Eugenie Sage: Why will he not just own the fact that his Government is trying to stop legal challenges that might impede environmentally destructive development, like the coalmine on the Denniston plateau, the Ruataniwha Dam, and the Basin Reserve flyover? Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I know of many Wellingtonians who would be concerned that the Government was spending money on stopping roading through to the airport being constructed with legal aid funds. So the Government has deliberately put into the environmental legal aid criteria that the panel needs to consider issues like infrastructure and housing. To quote the Minister for Infrastructure: “We are the infrastructure Government.”, and we want to see New Zealanders being able to get around and have a roof over their heads.
      • Accepted from Save the Basin posts by feedreader
      • Tagged as:
      • water
      • government
      • airport
      • wellington
      • art
      • housing
      • sport
      • people

        • Wellington International Airport, Coutts Street, Rongotai, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6023, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Transport Minister Simon Bridges: NZTA Intends To Enter Into “Open And Collaborative Process” Over Basin Flyover Aftermath
      • In a letter to the Save the Basin Campaign (in response to one we sent to John Key soon after the High Court decision was announced), Transport Minister Simon Bridges says some encouraging things: The NZ Transport Agency advises me that … it intends to enter into an open and collaborative process with councils and the community to spark new conversations and ideas about the best way to deliver substantive solutions to the congestion at the Basin and other pinch points in the network. I appreciate that you have had a strong interest in this issue over a period of time, and thank you for the time that you have already committed to developing and presenting alternative solutions for consideration. This is great to hear – but there are concerns that the process adopted so far is neither open nor collaborative, and furthermore that the experts who have developed alternative solutions which the Board of Inquiry said deserved further consideration have not been consulted in the wake of the flyover decision. Let’s hope that Minister Bridges’ views, as expressed in the letter above, result in the Regional Transport Committee, City and Regional Councillors, and NZTA officials demonstrating a new openness and willingness to genuinely and widely consult on the Basin, and on the best options for Wellington’s transport network.
      • Accepted from Save the Basin posts
      • Tagged as:
      • basin-reserve-flyover

        • Basin Reserve, Dufferin Street, Mount Victoria, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6021, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Wellington Journalists Ask: Can Former Flyover Fans Be Trusted To Evaluate Basin Flyover Alternatives?
      • As Wellington Scoop reported on 10 September, a small group of local body politicians and NZTA officials has taken it upon themselves to make decisions about the future of the Basin Reserve – and all but one of those local body politicians was in the pro-flyover camp: At yesterday’s regional council meeting, three councillors sought an integrated approach to deciding on at-grade roading improvements around the Basin. Paul Bruce and Sue Kedgley were supported by Barbara Donaldson. But Paul Swain refused. He said that a small governance group of himself, Fran Wilde, Celia Wade Brown and Andy Foster, plus two Transport Agency staffers, would make the decision, and would then report back. In a comment on this article, Councillor Helene Ritchie christened this group the “Secret Six”. This group subsequently promised to work with the community, but there remain concerns about how well this work will in practice given the composition of that group, and whether they will be prepared to take a fresh and unbiased look at non-flyover options they had previously rejected out of hand. In the Dominion Post, columnist Dave Armstrong came up with a memorable analogy: It’s like getting the Keep Our Old Flag Society to design a new flag. Will this group report back with recommendations that are the urban design equivalent of three boring silver ferns and a koru that looks like a cow doing number twos? Wellington Scoop has dug further into the track record of the members of this “governance group”, and what it has found does not inspire confidence. For its part, Save the Basin hopes that NZTA’s decision not to pursue its flyover plans through the courts will enable even the most entrenched flyover supporters to think afresh, and we are pleased that the New Zealand Transport Agency has indicated it will take a new and more genuinely consultative approach to post-flyover discussion and decision-making. But we’re mindful of the point the preceding Wellington Scoop report makes in its final paragraph: No doubt there’s no way of excluding Transport Agency representatives from the next round of road planning for the Basin. But the Agency should consider its past bad behaviour and find some new faces who have the ability to listen, rather than to threaten or dictate or just misrepresent. As both Wellington Scoop and the Dominion Post have pointed out in these articles, there are real alternatives on the table at the Basin, including the BRREO, Option X and tunnelling. As Dave Armstrong points out, it makes sense to focus on approaches which are low-cost and don’t foreclose other options if they become necessary: Some critics say that BRREO is only a short-term solution. Even if that is true, wouldn’t it be worth giving it a go? If it works, keep it; if it doesn’t, start digging for a longer-term alternative. When you look at the time and money already been wasted by myopic officials intent on a flyover, BRREO and Option X deserve some serious consideration, not just by sore losers. What’s more, Wellington transport needs much more than a rethink at the Basin. FIT Wellington and Generation Zero have made a valuable and timely contribution to this debate with their revamped light rail (modern trams) proposal for Wellington, released last week.
      • Accepted from Save the Basin posts
      • Tagged as:
      • basin-reserve-flyover

        • Basin Reserve, Dufferin Street, Mount Victoria, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6021, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Architects Draw: history
      • Hugh Ferriss “Metropolis of Tomorrow” (c.1929) Drawing has been a staple of an architect’s profession for longer than architecture has been a profession … … and given we are about to  have another exhibition of architects’ (and others’) drawings with the upcoming Charity Auction to raise funds for our involvement in the Basin flyover High […]
      • Accepted from Architecture Centre news
      • Tagged as:
      • basin-reserve-flyover

        • Basin Reserve, Dufferin Street, Mount Victoria, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6021, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Undercroft
      • Debates about the Flyover proposed for Wellington still ringing in our ears (the Basin Bridge Board of Enquiry is ongoing as we speak), it seemed like an appropriate time to examine what the underside of a Flyover actually looks like. The answer seems to be: often Not Very Pretty. This one is typical. People living [...]
      • Accepted from Architecture Centre news
      • Tagged as:
      • basin-reserve-flyover

        • Basin Reserve, Dufferin Street, Mount Victoria, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6021, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


Who, What, When and Where.

Relevent newsitems are geotagged with location information.

Geotagged newsitems are indicated using the geotag icon.

Geotags are also export in RSS feeds using the GeoRSS standard. A GeoRSS tagged feed item has this format:

<item>
<title>Can you replace the Hilton?</title>
<geo:lat>-41.284896</geo:lat>
<geo:long>174.778531</geo:long>
</item>

A feed containing only the geotagged newsitems is also available:

  • RSS geotagged newsitems feed

The location information which makes this possible is provided by OpenStreetMap and the Nominatim AC auto-complete tool.

Latest Newsitems

The latest newslog items.