From:
Rob Napier
To:
Chris Gasson
Cc:
Sarah Downs; Coral Aldridge; Shaun Titus; Raewyn Pudsey
Phil;
Selwyn
Subject:
RE: Shared Path and Bridleway
Date:
Thursday, 20 August 2020 2:47:47 PM
Attachments:
image002.png
Yes thanks Chris.
We are moving forward with an agreed position, which is that the bridleway is not within our scope and we will therefore not be doing any
further assessments on it. Our DBC will simply state this.
We recognise this will be a disappointment to some community groups and may attract submissions and/or media coverage but we will
address those appropriately at the time.
Nga mihi
Rob
Rob Napier
Programme and Project Manager
From: Chris Gasson <[email address]>
ACT 1982
Sent: Thursday, 20 August 2020 1:23 PM
To: Rob Napier <[email address]>
Cc: Sarah Downs <[email address]>; Coral Aldridge <[email address]>; Shaun Titus <[email address]>;
Raewyn Pudsey <[email address]>;
Phil
@stantec.com>;
Selwyn
@stantec.com>
Subject: RE: Shared Path and Bridleway
Hi Rob
I think the discussion with Emma and Robyn this morning has now set the scene for the bridleway.
INFORMATION
They were unequivocal.
Chris
Chris Gasson BE/System Design Manager - Inter Regional Journeys
System Design and Delivery DDI
E [email address]/ w nzta.govt.nz
Auckland /Level 5, AMP Tower,
29 Customs Street West, Auckland 1010. New Zealand
_________ _____________________________________________
From: Rob Napier <[email address]>
Sent: Tuesday, 18 August 2020 7:46 PM
To: Chris Gasson <[email address]>
Cc: Sarah Downs <[email address]>; Coral Aldridge <[email address]>; Shaun Titus <[email address]>;
Raewyn Pudsey <[email address]>;
Phil
@stantec.com>;
Selwyn
<
@stantec.com>
Subject: FW: Shared Path and Bridleway
Hi Chris, for your info/note.
Some early and basic information below in relation to the shared user path (SUP) on the adjoining PP2O, but especially in relation to the
bridleway add-on.
Main points that stand out for me are:
1. No immediately apparent body of evidence or decision trail which justifies the decision to include the bridleway as part of the SUP,
from a business case perspective. It appears that the decision was based on strong feedback and support from local equestrian
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
groups. To me, the implication for our business case is that we will need a “first principles” approach (assessing demand from
anecdotal evidence) to confirm the business case for the SUP, unless there is a methodology readily available from elsewhere. We
will work with Shaun Titus to clarify the approach.
2. For PP2O, the ROC for the bridleway is approx. $250k/km (excluding property). The NZUP scope suggests the SUP will be continuous
along the 24km alignment. So, if the business case for the bridleway was to be established, then at 24km this is an additional $6M
potentially. Obviously we would need to look at the fixed NZUP budget through the incremental cost/benefit lens, but also note the
supporting drivers from the GPS (mode neutrality) and NZUP (mode choices).
Will come back to you once we have further discussions with Shaun and of course the interest groups during our engagement programme.
Nga mihi
Rob
Rob Napier
Programme and Project Manager
From: Dunlop, David
@wsp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 18 August 2020 6:21 PM
To: Rob Napier <[email address]>;
Phil <
@stantec.com>
Cc:
, Jamie <
[email address]>; Simon Prosee <[email address]>; Otaki to Levin Info <[email address]>
Subject: Shared Path and Bridleway
Hi Rob and Phil,
As discussed, I can confirm the following points have been identified in discussion with the PP2O MQSA team.
SUP was added to he project post the RMA and Design Phases of the project – largely consistent with the approach for O2NL.
Decision to include Bridleway based on strong feedback and support from local equestrian groups / individuals – no evidence of he
decision making criteria which lead to the decision that it would be included (between M2PP to Otaki River) -
Action DD to check with Glen
Prince and Jetesh on Friday.
ACT 1982
SUP Design Criteria documented in the PP2O Shared Path Design Report – V2, Nov 2018. Key points of note:
Eastern side of he Expressway North of Mary Crest, then wi hin Otaki town centre and eastern side of the existing SH1 north of
Otaki.
3m sealed width
0.3m clearance to obstacles
Minor Bridleway Design Criteria included in the SUP Report:
No horse provision north of the Otaki River (no provision on the bridge)
1m grassed area adjacent to he SUP
3.7m overhead clearance
No provision on bridge paths – will be applicable at the north Levin Rail Crossing point if it was to be provided within corridor.
No separate facility at rail crossing points (therefore hey would be combined with vehicles) – unlikely to be applicable to O2NL.
INFORMATION
Assumed cost of bridleway based on a crude per km = $250k (excluding property).
I suggest we just run through these quick points with Jetesh / Glen when we catch up on Friday to check we have them correct.
Cheers
David Dunlop
Head of Transport Planning and Advisory
T: +
M:
@wsp.com
WSP
Level 9 Majestic Centre
100 Willis St
Wellington 6011
New Zealand
wsp.com/nz
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
NOTICE: This communication and any attachments ("this message") may contain information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise subject to restricted disclosure under
applicable law. This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on, this
message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you are not an authorized or intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message,
delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies.
