Divisive Wellington transport project faces legal threat

Wednesday, 20 September 2023

Hamish Vance, co-owner of Vance Vivian on Lambton Quay, supports the possible court case against the project.

A business-backed group is demanding a rethink on plans to upgrade the streetscape from Lambton Quay to Courtenay Place – or it will take the city council to court.

Guardians of the Golden Mile will seek a judicial review of the council’s decision to fund the work, according to an email sent to the council by Morrison Kent partner Michael Wolff.

The project, which falls under the Let’s Get Wellington Moving umbrella, removes most private vehicle access along much of the Golden Mile. Footpaths will be widened and a cycleway constructed, along with more space for street furniture and trees.

The project has already passed the final hurdles of funding from the city council and Waka Kotahi, although final contracts have not been signed, according to council spokesperson Richard MacLean. Early work has started.

The legal letter asks the council to promise that construction will be paused until the judicial review is heard. If not, the group will go to court and ask for an injunction.

The group was open to discussions to “potentially avoid” the need for the court case, the letter said.

Retired lawyer Barry Wilson, who organised the SOS Courtenay Place campaign against the same project, is involved in the proceedings. He described the council’s economic analysis as “nonsense”.

The judicial review was being launched by an organised group of retailers and property owners in opposition to the change, he said.

Let’s Get Wellington Moving images showing the detailed designs for the plan to pedestrianise Wellington’s Golden Mile.

The project was “civic disaster”, he said, and the councillors who voted for the project were “out of their depth”.

Hamish Vance, a retailer on Lambton Quay who has been staunchly opposed to the upgrade project, supports the legal case but is not a part of the so-called guardians group.

Footpaths will be widened and a cycleway constructed, along with more space for street furniture and trees.

He believed the proposal was based on flawed information and that removing cars would have a serious negative impact on retailers. He also questioned how the council would pay for the project.

“Things need to be done to tidy the place up, but not to the extent that they’ve proposed.”

The draft statement of claim says the council’s economic assessment of the project is wrong, leading to several problems, including a breach of the council’s duty to manage its revenue prudently under the Local Government Act.

It also claims the decision to fund the project was unreasonable because of these errors.

Most of the claims centre around a report by Ian Harrison at Tailrisk Economics, which public submitter and retailer Nicola Cranfield attached to her submission. The report claims the project had a benefit cost ratio of just 0.38 as opposed to 3.9.

The procedural problems listed were that this report was not considered by the council, not investigated and not sent to the public for consultation.

Another report from Tailrisk Economics was brought as evidence in the Thorndon Quay judicial review, which the council won. (There the judge noted that Harrison was not a traffic expert and gave greater weight to the council’s experts, who were).

Council spokesperson Richard MacLean said the council could not comment as legal staff had not yet had time to consider the letter and statement of claim, which were sent at noon on Wednesday.