110km/h Speed Limit Consultation Begins For SH1 Transmission Gully And Raumati Straights
Transport Minister Chris Bishop is encouraging New Zealanders to have their say in public consultation that begins today on increasing speed limits for SH1 Transmission Gully and Raumati Straights to 110km/h.
'Boosting economic growth and productivity is a key part of the Government's plan to rebuild the economy and this proposal supports that outcome by reducing travel times and increasing efficiency on this vital route between Wellington and the lower and central North Island,' Mr Bishop says.
'With around 22,000 vehicles using the road daily, it provides important regional resilience and a safe, modern, reliable route for all road users. Transmission Gully is one of the first Roads of National Significance (RoNS) announced by the former National Government in 2009 and is the main gateway to Wellington.
'Transmission Gully was designed and constructed to a high safety standard. This is reflected in the low crash numbers on the road since opening in 2022. It has safety features that greatly reduce the risk of death or serious injury in a crash, like two lanes in each direction, and flexible median barrier between opposing lanes. Since opening, there have been over 150 barrier strikes but no deaths
'Along with Transmission Gully, the NZ Transport Agency will also be consulting on Raumati Straights, which connects Transmission Gully with Kāpiti Expressway. By consulting on this section now, we can finalise a decision on appropriate speed limits quicker, ahead of possible safety improvements on the section.
'This is all part of the Coalition Government's agenda to deliver the infrastructure needed to grow the economy, reduce travel times and increase the productivity of our transport network. We're committed to providing state highways that help people get where they need to go quickly and safely.'
Consultation on raising the speed limit for SH1 Transmission Gully and Raumati Straights to 110km/h begins on Friday 30 May and will last six weeks. You can find more on the NZTA website here: www.nzta.govt.nz/tgspeed.
Using Scoop for work?
Scoop is free for personal use, but you'll need a licence for work use. This is part of our Ethical Paywall and how we fund Scoop. Join today with plans starting from less than $3 per week, plus gain access to exclusive Pro features.
Join Pro Individual Find out more
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
5 days ago
- 1News
Rural Tasman highways drop speed limits to 80km/h
Several key rural roads across Tasman have had their speed limits dropped. Lowering speed limits around the district has been difficult for Tasman after its regional speed plan was largely invalidated by a Government rule change. However, as of Monday, the Motueka Valley and Moutere highways, as well as Dovedale, Edwards, and Neudorf roads, have fallen from 100km/h to 80. In Richmond, McShane Rd has also lowered to 50km/h from 80, while Lower Queen St immediately northeast of McShane saw sections drop to 50 and 60km/h from 60 and 80km/h. These reductions come after speed limits were reduced and variable limits installed around several schools in late July and earlier in August. ADVERTISEMENT The lower speed limits are expected to reduce the number of crashes in the district, especially on the two local highways, which are some of Tasman's most crash-prone roads. Reducing speeds on targeted roads around the district has been a challenge for the council after the Government rule change largely invalidated its original speed plan, forcing it to re-consult on the changes and frustrating many local communities who have been wanting the changes for years. 'It's great to see that these important changes are finally in place to help keep our communities safer,' said Jane Murray, Tasman District Council's transportation planning advisor. She likened road safety to Swiss cheese. 'Each safety measure – like road design, vehicle safety, or driver behaviour – acts as a layer of protection, but no layer has no holes. Crashes happen when the holes in the layers line up,' she said. 'Safe speeds are a vital layer. They help prevent crashes and reduce harm when crashes happen. Even if other safety measures fail, safe speeds can save lives.' Drivers should watch out for the new speed signs, especially near schools where 30km/h speeds now applied during pick-up and drop-off times, she added. ADVERTISEMENT About 300 signs needed to be replaced for the speed limit reductions. While the council aimed to align the changing signs with the official implementation dates, some were put up earlier which led to confusion and anger from some residents. 'We've been working with police on this and appreciate everyone's patience,' Murray said. Senior sergeant Christopher Brooks, Tasman District road policing manager, warns motorists to drive to the conditions and take particular care of the changed speed limits. 'The posted speed limit is just that – a limit – not a target,' he said. 'Even a small change in speed makes a big difference to injury severity in a crash – for you and everyone else involved. Motorists should expect to be stopped by Police anytime, anywhere.' Brooks added that there was an increase in the number of roadworks happening locally after the recent severe weather and reminded drivers to follow directions and respect workers. ADVERTISEMENT 'Reduced speed limits are a warning that there is a hazard on or near the road approaching. Whether you're heading out of town or staying local, we want you to get to your destination safely.' The council will be considering a second phase of speed limit reductions on Thursday, which would affect narrow or winding unsealed roads, rural residential and peri-urban streets, urban roads without footpaths, along with other specific roads around the district. If approved, those changes will be made between 2026 and 2028. Local Democracy Reporting is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air
Otago Daily Times
6 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Will axing petrol tax be a game-changer?
Scrapping petrol tax may, or many not, be transformative, Angela Curl and Caroline Shaw write. The way we get around is unfair, and unhealthy. Some people travel a lot, creating disproportionate harms on people and the planet, such as pollution, injury risk and physical inactivity. Others cannot afford to travel enough, missing out on things that are important, such as catching up with loved ones or healthcare appointments, or end up having to forego expenditure on other important things, such as food. Replacing fuel excise duty (or petrol tax) with electronic road user charges for all vehicles — as announced by Transport Minister Chris Bishop last week — offers an opportunity to transform the way we fund and pay for our transport system in a way that works for people and the planet by reflecting the true costs imposed when we use the roads. Bishop said "it isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often." On the whole, we agree. We know that those households with the lowest income drive far less (about 100km a week less) but also have to spend a much greater proportion of their income on getting around (16% of income compared with 9% for higher-income households). Those on lower incomes are also far less likely to be able to afford an electric vehicle with cheaper running costs, instead paying the relatively more expensive petrol tax. However, Bishop's proposal represents a narrow view of the harms, or wider costs, of driving to society. It is largely based on the assumption all vehicles should contribute "fairly" (based on weight and distance travelled) towards road maintenance, operations and improvements. But a pricing structure that also accounts for the costs to our health system of injuries, pollution and physical inactivity caused by the transport system, might also include differential charging for different types of vehicles. For example, we know that SUVs cause more severe injuries to those outside of the vehicle, and while EVs reduce tailpipe emissions, they still contribute to congestion and injury risk. The proposal does suggest that weight, as well as distance travelled, will be factored into pricing; however, it should also consider the damage that heavier and larger vehicles do to people and the environment. A change in the way we are charged for using the roads offers a real opportunity to design a progressive charge that alleviates costs pressures for those already struggling to pay for the driving they need to do, while reducing levels of driving overall. One way to achieve this would be through increasing the rate per km, above a certain amount of kilometres driven. Given the costs involved in running and operating the scheme, and that this needs to be revenue-generating for government, it seems unlikely there will be a reduction in the cost of travel in real terms for everyone. However, if the government is committed to fairness, it needs to ensure costs do not escalate for those who can least afford it and who have few alternatives. The proposed changes to road user charges are most likely to be successful and acceptable if they are accompanied by investment in public transport, walking and cycling and alongside strategic urban planning that supports local access to the things we all need such as shops, schools and sports grounds. The most straightforward way to ensure that charging for using the roads does not force people into situations where they have to forego other essentials is to ensure that it is easy and safe to get around in other ways, or that we do not need to travel as much. For both fairness and health and wellbeing we need to continue to improve travel options other than driving. Bishop presented this as a new way to fund our roads, but we should be taking a more holistic view — this is an opportunity to think about how we fund our transport system. Using revenue raised to reduce the need to drive can make charging for driving more acceptable. Bishop said: "This is a once-in-a-generation change. It's the right thing to do, it's the fair thing to do, and it will future-proof how we fund our roads for decades to come." This policy has the potential to be truly transformative and be part of creating a transport system (not just roads) that is fairer, and healthier for everyone. It can be done. The question is, will it? — Newsroom • Dr Angela Curl is a senior lecturer in the University of Otago department of population health, Christchurch; Caroline Shaw is a lecturer and researcher in the department of public health, University of Otago, Wellington.
Scoop
6 days ago
- Scoop
Tolling Proposed For Belfast To Pegasus Motorway And Woodend Bypass
Press Release – NZ Transport Agency Physical work on the B2P project is due to begin next year. The Government Policy Statement on land transport 2024 requires NZTA to consider tolling for all new Roads of National Significance. Proposed tolling for Canterbury's new Belfast to Pegasus Motorway and Woodend Bypass (B2P) strikes a balance between helping pay for much-needed infrastructure and minimising impacts on local communities, says New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA). When built, the B2P project – one of the Roads of National Significance prioritised by the Government – will provide a 10km four-lane motorway extension north of Christchurch and a bypass that reduces the heavy traffic burden on State Highway 1 through the town of Woodend. The tolling proposal would see two tolling points (or gantries) introduced as part of the project, each charging $1.25 per passing light vehicle, and $2.50 for heavy vehicles. Physical work on the B2P project is due to begin next year. The Government Policy Statement on land transport 2024 requires NZTA to consider tolling for all new Roads of National Significance. The investment case for the B2P project confirmed tolling was possible and the revenue would support the construction, maintenance and operation of the road. 'Six tolling options were considered when assessing tolling suitability for this project, and these included placing tolling points either north or south of the proposed Williams Street interchange at Pineacres, or at both sites,' says NZTA System Design Regional Manager, Rich Osborne. 'Our analysis showed a single tolling point charging $2.50 for light vehicles would generate higher revenue than two tolling points each charging $1.25. However, the single tolling point had greater potential for diverting significant volumes of traffic onto local (and untolled) roads and impacting local communities. The single tolling point options also raised issues of fairness, where residents of Woodend would either avoid paying a toll altogether, or paying the same toll as those using the entire length of the road.' 'The proposal we settled on of two tolling points, one on each side of the Pineacres interchange, provides a balance between raising revenue to pay for the roading and managing the diversion of traffic into local communities.' The tolling proposal will be subject to public feedback from today and open until Tuesday 9 September. People can visit here to read more about the tolling proposal and have their say. 'If this proposed tolling proceeds, we'll work with the Waimakariri District Council and Tuahiwi, Kaiapoi and Woodend communities on how to discourage that additional traffic being diverted into those communities,' Mr Osborne says.
