Good idea bypassed

The cost-benefit performance of the inner-city bypass (ICB) would surely improve if it carried both directions of State Highway One. It seems ridiculous that this expensive asset has done nothing to by-pass the southbound dog-leg via Vivian St and Kent Terrace, nor to remove state highway traffic that is totally inappropriate in these city streets.

The Terrace Tunnel carries twoway traffic, the bypass trench does not, and yet they are of similar width. Anyone inclined to doubt this can easily measure the wallwall width of the trench at the Buller St overbridge. It is 12.7m — wide enough for the same 2+1 lane configuration as the Terrace Tunnel. The rest of the Karo Dr route and the Arras Tunnel are also wide enough to accommodate both directions of SH1.

Focusing on the ICB route as the main traffic-artery would also assist in de-trafficking the Waterfront Route – an aspirational plan that has faltered in recent times, as reported a few days ago by

The Dominion Post. Is there any good reason why has NZTA not done this? Or is it simply holding out for ‘‘four lanes to the planes’’ and doesn’t actually want to improve things in the meantime? David Bond, Ngaio

Inner-city bypass – Worth it? (March 12), on a report by Nadine Dodge, neglected to point out the original intention for the bypass was to have the road lowered and the cross traffic to move overhead.

However, once Wellington’s legendary naysayers got wound up they managed to convince an environment court judge that some old houses may fall apart if the road was lowered. The result was the bypass was not lowered, and the traffic bottleneck moved one street south. The good intention of the plan was messed up and the old houses stayed empty for years.

It wasn’t until the government of the day passed a special act that allowed the Arras Tunnel to be built, bypassing the naysayers, that the traffic flow was improved.

John Joseph, Tawa