Tunnel vision feedback

Posted by 897sc on January 15, 2026

https://www.cyclewellington.org.nz/tunnel_vision_feedback

The following is the feedback sent in by Cycle Wellington to the engagement on SH1 Wellington Motorway Expansion sought be NZTA late last year.

Key points

Cycle Wellington wishes to register our strong opposition to the proposed “SH1 Wellington Improvements Project”, including the second Mt Victoria tunnel, widening of Ruahine Street and Wellington Road, and associated intersection enlargements. This project represents outdated 1960s planning thinking that will make Wellington less livable, less healthy, less climate-aligned, and less financially resilient without improving transport significantly for Wellingtonians.

This project will make Wellington significantly worse, not better

The proposal will:

  • induce more driving and increase traffic volumes
  • degrade safety for people walking and cycling
  • worsen local noise, air pollution and carbon emissions
  • shift congestion rather than resolve it
  • funnel more traffic into the central city
  • sever neighbourhood connections along SH1
  • damage Town Belt land and reduce access to nature
  • inflict almost a decade of severe congestion and transport chaos during the lengthy construction period
  • permanently worsen Wellingtonians’ freedom to choose how to get around in their own city

The idea that expanding a highway through the middle of this compact city will “relieve congestion” is not credible. International evidence is unequivocal: most instances where cities have tried to address congestion with widened roads have seen congestion return, and often worsen, after a few years of such projects being delivered.

The benefits are likely overstated and based on discredited assumptions

The brochure claims 5–10 minutes of peak-hour time savings and “up to 40%” improvements in travel-time reliability. We remain skeptical of such estimates as they generally:

  • rely on models that do not properly incorporate induced demand
  • assume continued growth in traffic volumes that is not evidenced in Wellington
  • ignore downstream bottlenecks that will absorb supposed gains
  • disregard the fact that wider roads simply attract more driving trips
  • are presented in a misleading way by listing ‘40% improvement in reliability’ after ‘Up to 10 minutes timesaving.’ Readers will naturally conflate these sentences. The ‘40%’ has nothing to do with the ‘10 minutes’.

Meanwhile, the mean expected cost–benefit ratio of 0.8 (tolled) or 0.95 (untolled) means the cost isn’t justified on its own narrow terms even before climate, health, local amenity and induced-demand effects are included.

Saving some time for some people at some times of the day in some forms of transport is an incredibly limited and unimaginative benefit set. It belies a disconcerting disconnect of what people in Wellington are really aspiring to see in their future by the project proponents. It has been decades since there has been any real consensus that more road building represents visionary progress.

People nowadays aspire to make Wellington a thriving, inclusive, resilient, and regenerative city. Saving a little time on some car trips (supposedly) is an utterly woeful measure of progress.

The cost is indefensible and fiscally irresponsible

The proposed $2.8–$3.8 billion budget is almost certain to blow out substantially.

Transmission Gully was budgeted at $850 million and ultimately cost $1.25 billion to build, with a total project cost likely to exceed $2.5 billion over 25 years. A tunnel project of even greater complexity, with enormous geotechnical uncertainty, is at extremely high risk of similar, even larger, overruns.

This is a terrible use of public money when Wellington faces urgent needs:

  • stable and safe water infrastructure
  • public transport frequency and reliability
  • climate adaptation
  • housing affordability
  • maintaining basic council services

Investing billions in “gold-plated holes in the ground” is not sound governance.

This project undermines climate goals and locks in higher emissions

The proposal’s complete failure to quantify embodied carbon, operational emissions, or induced traffic growth is alarming. Building a multi-kilometre tunnel, widening roads, and encouraging more driving is fundamentally incompatible with:

  • New Zealand’s emissions budgets
  • the Government’s climate obligations
  • Wellington City Council’s Te Atakura / Zero Carbon targets

It is irresponsible to advance a project of this magnitude without publishing full emissions modelling.

There is no credible provision for public transport, walking, or cycling

Despite the claims in the brochure, this is overwhelmingly a driving-expansion project. Active transport is treated as an afterthought and in some places fares worse than today:

  • Shared paths remain unsafe, conflict-prone, and too narrow for projected volumes.
  • Connections to Wellington East Girls’ College and other schools will require crossing four lanes of fast traffic — a clear safety downgrade. It is likely people will attempt to cross this road without waiting for the (car-oriented) traffic lights to change.
  • The project breaks the well-used cycle lane on Rugby Street connecting Adelaide Road to Tasman St, and appears to downgrade the crossings between Adelaide Road and the Basin. Without a central island these will require a dedicated crossing phase with all traffic flows stopped. Such a phase is likely to be short and infrequent to benefit motor traffic flow.
  • The project causes people walking and biking north of the Basin to wait for two additional signalised crossings compared to today. These could add up to 4 minutes to this 100m stretch of the journey as they cannot operate during the same traffic phases. This will cause some to abandon this cycle route or cross dangerously without waiting.
  • Newtown, Kilbirnie, Hataitai and Mt Victoria will face years of construction disruption with no reliable alternatives.
  • The project increases Moxham Avenue traffic by 47%, when this road has no bike lanes and most riders must use this road to get to and from the tunnel on the Hataitai side.
  • The project documents predict a significant increase is cycling numbers. A 3.6 metre wide path through the Mt Victoria tunnel will not safely accommodate the projected number of cyclists (our calculations suggest 100 during a peak hour) alongside pedestrians and other micromobility devices. These flows will be terrible for anyone trying to use the tunnel contra-peak. And further conflict will occur by virtue of the shared configuration, making the experience inefficient and uncomfortable for everyone not in heavy vehicles.
  • No mention is made about management of crowds going in and out of The Basin for events. Cycle Wellington understands that a new entrance has been suggested off Duffin Street. This is also where a separated path is shown. That space is not enough for large numbers of patrons queuing; walkers, runners, those riding bikes. e-scooters, skateboards, etc; car drivers expecting to drive to and from SH1 this way. Particularly after an event, it appears that Basin patrons (many of whom will have been drinking alcohol, and might be upset at Black Caps bowling) will be exiting onto the only safe path for active transport users. 

Public transport is not meaningfully prioritised. Buses remain stuck in congestion elsewhere, and the sequencing contradicts years of consultation under Let’s Get Wellington Moving, where mass rapid transit was to be built before any second tunnel.

This project overrides that community-led, evidence-based process.

The proposal damages the Town Belt and local communities

Town Belt land will be lost permanently, reducing ecological, recreational, and health value for thousands of Wellingtonians. The widening of Ruahine Street and Wellington Road will create a high-speed barrier separating Mt Victoria, Hataitai, Kilbirnie, Rongotai and Newtown.

This reduces community connectivity, contradicting the District Plan, spatial plan, and decades of Wellington planning principles.

A congestion charging system would deliver better results at a fraction of the cost

Wellington now has legislative authority for time-of-use congestion pricing. A well-designed scheme could:

  • reduce peak traffic volumes 10–30%
  • improve travel-time reliability
  • raise revenue for public and active transport
  • reduce emissions immediately
  • avoid years of disruptive construction
  • cost less than 5% of the proposed tunnel budget

To proceed with a $3.8 billion roading expansion without first implementing congestion pricing is financially and environmentally negligent.

Addendum - New York is enjoying the benefits of congestion pricing already - and loving it!

This project contradicts Wellingtonians’ stated preferences

Wellingtonians have consistently voted for councils and MPs who support:

  • better public transport
  • safer cycling and walking
  • climate action
  • compact, connected neighbourhoods

This proposal does the opposite. It represents a top-down override of local democratic priorities, ignoring years of input through LGWM and local planning processes.

The project engagement lacks essential information for meaningful consultation

The engagement materials omit critical information:

  • induced-demand modelling
  • net emissions impacts
  • construction disruption timelines and severity
  • traffic diversion modelling
  • Public Transport priority effects
  • active transport safety assessments
  • full Town Belt land-take details
  • scenario comparisons (e.g., congestion charge vs road widening)

A meaningful consultation would require this information to be considered robust or legitimate. Embarking on a project that would be among the most costly in our country’s history deserves a comprehensive consultation process at the very least.

What Wellington actually needs

If the goal is a thriving, productive, resilient, and sustainable city, then investment should prioritise:

  • mass rapid transit first (as previously agreed through past consultation) 
  • reliable, frequent bus services
  • comprehensive and safe cycle networks
  • walkable streets
  • neighbourhood upgrades
  • congestion pricing to manage demand
  • climate-resilient water and transport infrastructure
  • consideration of roading solutions if evidence shows the measures above are not enough

These investments move more people with fewer vehicles, strengthen the economy, and support health and wellbeing.

Summary - This project should not proceed

This project is a backwards-looking, high-cost, high-risk, low-benefit proposal that will worsen congestion, undermine climate goals, degrade the Town Belt, and permanently damage the livability of Wellington.

Wellington deserves a future-focused transport system that:

  • reduces car dependency
  • improves public transport
  • supports active travel
  • strengthens communities
  • aligns with climate science
  • uses public money wisely

We strongly urge Waka Kotahi to withdraw this proposal and redirect investment toward healthy, modern, resilient, community-supported transport solutions.

This project should not proceed.