Item 9.pdf

ŌTAKI TO LEVIN ROAD OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE
IMPLICATIONS OF ROUTE OPTIONS NC4 & NC5
ON LEVIN EASTERN GROWTH AREA
LANDSCAPE + URBAN DESIGN
ACT
INFORMATION
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL

2

Client:
MWH on behalf of NZTA
Project:
Ōtaki to Levin ‘Roads of National Significance’
Code:
2923
Report:
Implications of Route Options NC4 & NC5
on Levin Eastern Growth Area
Status:
Final
Date:
8 May 2017
Author:
Gavin Lister
ACT
Isthmus
PO Box 90 366
Auckland 1142
+64 9 309 7281
+64 27 435 7844
[email address]


INFORMATION

RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
No.
Date
Details
Author
QA
1
14/03/2017
Draft 1
Gavin Lister
GL
2
21/03/2017
Draft 2
Gavin Lister
GL
3
18/04/2017
Draft 3
Gavin Lister
GL
4
08/05/2017
Final
Gavin Lister
GL
170508_2923_GL_Implications of Route Options NC4 and NC5 on Levin Eastern Growth Area

ACT
INFORMATION
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL

6

1.6
The  RoNS  standards  require  high-speed,  dual-carriageway  expressways  with  limited-
access.  These  standards  lead  to  the  following  characteristics  that  are  relevant  when
considering future development:
  The expressways have limited crossing points – and therefore potential impacts on
connectivity;
  The  expressway will  potentially  form  a  barrier  between  different  landuses  – which
can be  an advantage if one  is seeking a defensible boundary  between,  for instance,
urban  and  rural  areas,  but  can  also  be  a  disadvantage  if  seeking  to  integrate  areas
with the same landuse; and
ACT
  Areas immediately adjacent to the expressway will be exposed to adverse noise and
visual amenity effects.
1.7
The  following  memo  is  a  commentary  on  the  implications  of  the  NC4  and  NC5  route
options  for  each  of  the  development  scenarios  discussed  above  in  light  of  these
characteristics.
2
IMPLICATIONS OF ROUTE OPTIONS FOR THE EXISTING STRUCTURE
INFORMATION
PLAN
NC4
2.1
NC4 would be in keeping with the existing structure plan:
  The  expressway  alignment  follows  the  transportation  corridor  identified  on  the
structure plan, except that it is transposed approximately 100m to the east to avoid
the  stand  of  bush  adjacent  to  Arapaepae  Road  and  some  300m  south  of  Queen
Street;
  The  alignment  is  square  to  the  cadastral  and  road  pattern  (both  the  existing  and
proposed pattern), making for efficient subdivision;
  The expressway would form a clear and defensible boundary between Levin’s urban
area and the type of semi-rural development envisaged by the structure plan;
  There would be no impacts on features of the structure plan, such as the local road
network,  the  green  network  (‘landscape,  stormwater,  pedestrian  and  cycling
connection with open spaces’), central reserve, and ‘future local commercial’; and
  The  100m wide  strip of  land  that  would  be  left  between  Arapaepae  Road  and  the
expressway  could  be  realistically  developed  for  2000m2  lots  accessed  from  a  re-
purposed Arapaepae Road.
NC5
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
2.2
NC5 would disrupt the pattern of development provided for by the structure plan for the
following reasons:
  The  expressway  would  bi-sect  the  structure  plan  area.  It  would  divide  what would
otherwise be a coherent area, compromise some features of the structure plan (i.e.
170508_2923_GL_Implications of Route Options NC4 and NC5 on Levin Eastern Growth Area

7

the  location  of  the  central  reserve  and  ‘future  local  commercial’),  and  require
reconfiguration of the proposed local road network and green network;
  The  alignment  is  diagonal  to  the  cadastral  pattern,  making  for  less  efficient
subdivision;
  The alignment would result in some land sandwiched between the expressway and
transmission  line  corridor  where  they  converge.  It  is  likely,  though,  that  the
expressway and transmission line design would be integrated so that they are parallel
with other where they come together, which would reduce the degree of impact on
land development.
ACT
MCA Scoring
2.3
NC4  (as part of ‘Route 2’) received a more favourable  ranking  (for landscape  and visual
matters) in the MCA process for reasons that included:
  Its alignment adjacent to the eastern edge of Levin, reinforcing the existing boundary
between urban Levin and the more rural or rural-residential character area; and
  Its square alignment with the cadastral and street pattern.1
INFORMATION
2.4
NC5,  on  the  other  hand,  received  a  less  favourable  ranking  (as  part  of  ‘Route  1’)  for
reasons that included:
  Its bisecting of a rural and rural-residential area; and
  Its diagonal alignment to the cadastral and street pattern.2
3
IMPLICATIONS OF ROUTE OPTIONS FOR PROJECTED URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
NC4
3.1
On the other hand,  NC4 would be  less preferable for  the  projected  urban development
being investigated east of Arapaepae Road for the following reasons:
  A new urban residential area in this location would be separated from Levin’s existing
urban area by the expressway: the urban development would be forced to leap-frog
the  expresseway.  Such  effects  would  be  compounded  by  the  width  of  the  existing
Arapaepae  Road  corridor  and  the  100m  offset  between  Arapaepae  Road  and  the
expressway;
  The two points of access across the  expressway at Queen Street and Tararua Road
would  be  less  suitable  for  urban  development  than  for  a  lower  density  semi-rural
type of development envisaged by the existing structure plan. The expressway would
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
also hinder a possible new connection from Arapaepae Road to Liverpool Street;

1 Ōtaki to Levin Road of National Significance, MCA Combined Routes and Interchanges, Urban Design + Landscape + Visual, Isthmus,
16 November 2016, paragraph 4.18
2 Ibid, paragraph 4.2
170508_2923_GL_Implications of Route Options NC4 and NC5 on Levin Eastern Growth Area

8

  The 100m offset of NC4 from Arapaepae Road is an inefficient dimension for urban
development  because  it  is  too  deep  for  single  urban  lots  and  too  shallow  for  three
rows of lots and a street. (It is noted though, that the actual alignment of the future
highway  could  be  fine-tuned  to  fit  development  patterns  given  that  the  route  is
nominally 150m wide at this point and the highway footprint may occupy in the order
of 60m or thereabouts). The relatively narrow width would also restrict choices as to
the  future  character  of  Arapaepae  Road  after  it  is  divested  as  a  State  Highway  (for
instance, opportunities to develop it as a wide boulevard entrance to Levin); and
  The  expressway would  be  exposed  to  urban  residential  lots  on  both  sides – which ACT
may  require  such  measures  as  set-backs  (i.e.  it  would  reduce  efficient  use  of  land
made available for urbanisation) or noise walls (with potential visual amenity effects).
NC5
3.2
NC5 could result in a more favourable outcome for projected urban development east of
Levin – potentially forming a logical boundary between urban development  on one side
of the expressway and semi-rural type of development on the other side. However, such
an  outcome  would  require  the  urban  development  area  being  adjusted  to  fit  the
INFORMATION
expressway:
  At  Tararua  Road  route  NC5  is  approximately  450m  from  Arapaepae  Road  and  the
projected area for urban development is approximately 1km wide; and
  At Queen Street East NC5 is approximately 1km from Arapaepae Road and the area
projected  for urban development is approximately 600m wide.
3.3
Such  an  adjustment  would  bias  the  urban  development  area  towards  Queen  Street,
which is Levin’s central east-west axis.
3.4
Subject to such an adjustment, NC5 would have the following benefits:
  It would enable the new urban development area to be contiguous and integrated
with Levin’s existing urban area. Arapaepae Road could be effectively re-purposed as
an urban collector road, connecting directly with a hierarchy of streets within the new
urban area, and providing for effective distribution between the new urban area and
Levin’s street network. Creating a connection to Liverpool Street would also be more
straightforward exercise than NC4;
  The new highway would form a defensible boundary between Levin’s urban area on
the one hand, and large-lot semi-rural development on the other;3 and
  Only one side of the highway would abut  urban residential lots, reducing potential
requirements  for  measures  such  as  noise walls  or  off-set  buffers.  Larger  lots  to  the
east would provide more opportunities to address noise by way of setbacks.
RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
3.5
It  is  worth  noting  that  urban  development  east  of  Levin  would  require  new  structure
plans  regardless  of  the  expressway  option  selected: The  new  urban  area would  require

3 For instance, the two points of access across the expressway at Queen Street and Tararua Road would be more suitable for the lower
density area east of the highway
170508_2923_GL_Implications of Route Options NC4 and NC5 on Levin Eastern Growth Area

9

master-planning,  and  the  structure  plan  for  the  balance  of  the  large-lot  semi-rural  area
would require reconfiguration.
4
CONCLUSIONS
Existing Structure Plan
4.1
Option NC4 would have a better fit with the pattern of development envisaged under the
ACT
‘Greenbelt Residential Deferred’ zone and the existing structure plan. The NC4 alignment
is consistent with the location of the transport corridor depicted on the structure plan –
except for its offsetting by 100m to avoid a stand of bush. The alignment  reinforces the
existing  boundary  between  urban  Levin  and  the  large-lot  semi-rural  development
envisaged to the east, and it is square with the cadastral and street pattern allowing for
efficient development.
4.2
Option  NC5,  in  contrast,  would  bi-sect  the  semi-rural  area  east  of  Levin,  disrupt  key
features of the structure plan, and would be diagonal to the cadastral and street pattern.
INFORMATION
Projected Urban Development
4.3
On  the  other  hand,  Option  NC5  would  be  better  suited  to  the  projected  urban
development currently being investigated, subject to such an urban area being fine-tuned
to  match  the  expressway  alignment.  NC  5  would  enable  the  new  urban  area  to  be
contiguous  and  better  integrated  with  Levin’s  urban  area.  It  would  provide  a  logical
boundary between the urban area on one side of the expressway and the large-lot semi-
rural area on the other.
4.4
By  comparison,  Option  NC4  would  be  less  preferable  for  such  projected  urban
development.  The  alignment  would  force  the  urban  development  to  leap-frog  the
expressway.  It  would  result  in  the  new  area  being  separated  from  and  less  strongly
integrated  with  Levin.  It  would  also  result  in  an  inefficient  strip  of  land  between  the
expressway  and  Arapaepae  Road,  and  would  expose  both  sides  of  the  expressway  to
urban residential lots.

Gavin Lister
Isthmus
8 May 2017

RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL
170508_2923_GL_Implications of Route Options NC4 and NC5 on Levin Eastern Growth Area