This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Official Information request 'Auckland Harbour Bridge - supporting evidence for a 17,000 vpd reduction to facilitate an Active Mode Lane'.
From:
s 9(2)(a)
To:
James Kaye
Cc:
Hannah Saggs; Jurgita Klein; Lydia Haigh; Norman Collier; Kevin Stevens; Graham O"Connell
Subject:
Re: URGEWNT- follow up - For review and further input please: re OIA-10263 and OIA-10279 re ASM traffic
impact assessments
Date:
Wednesday, 20 July 2022 2:13:55 PM
CAUTION: The sender of this email is from outside Waka Kotahi. Do not click links, attachments, or reply
unless you recognise the sender’s email address and know the content is safe.
Hi James,
Sure thing.  I looked into this 2 weeks ago for Graham O'Connell.  I provided him with my
answer, which he was running past s 9(2)(a)
 to confirm.  I've cc-ed him to see where
that's at, so hopefully he can provide an update!
Cheers,
s 9(2)(a)
From: James Kaye <[email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 2:11 PM
To: s 9(2)(a)
@resolvegroup.co.nz>
Cc: Hannah Saggs <[email address]>; Jurgita Klein <[email address]>;
Lydia Haigh <[email address]>; Norman Collier <[email address]>; Kevin
Stevens <[email address]>
Subject: Re: URGEWNT- follow up - For review and further input please: re OIA-10263 and OIA-
10279 re ASM traffic impact assessments
Hi s 9(2)(a)  
Can you please help with below?
From: Lydia Haigh <[email address]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 2:03 PM
To: Norman Collier <[email address]>; Kevin Stevens
<[email address]>; James Kaye <[email address]>
under the Official Information Act 1982
Cc: Hannah Saggs <[email address]>; Jurgita Klein
<[email address]>
Subject: FW: URGEWNT- follow up - For review and further input please: re OIA-10263 and
OIA-10279 re ASM traffic impact assessments
Hey Norm / james / kevin,
Released 
I just got s 9(2)(a) out of office – do you know anyone else at Resolve that we can reach out to ASAP
on this?
Thanks,

Lydia.
From: Lydia Haigh 
Sent: Wednesday, 20 July 2022 2:01 pm
To: s 9(2)(a)
@resolvegroup.co.nz>; James Kaye <[email address]>;
Kevin Stevens <[email address]>; Norman Collier <[email address]>
Cc: Jurgita Klein <[email address]>
Subject: FW: URGEWNT- follow up - For review and further input please: re OIA-10263 and OIA-
10279 re ASM traffic impact assessments
Importance: High
Hey s 9(2)(a)
We are trying to finalise an OIA response to s 9(2)(a)
 but its proving tricky as he has
queried where we got a figure of 17,000 vehicles per day and s 9(2)(a)
 said its not from
him… could you please take a look at the attached ASAP (this is due back today & still needs legal
review!) and let us know if you recall if Resolve did the calculation?
Thanks,
Lydia.
From: Jurgita Klein <[email address]
Sent: Monday, 18 July 2022 5:24 pm
To: Norman Collier <[email address]>; Kathryn King <[email address]>;
Graham O'Connell <[email address]>; Lydia Haigh <[email address]>
Cc: Hannah Saggs <[email address]>; Kevin Stevens <[email address]>
Subject: URGEWNT- follow up - For review and further input please: re OIA-10263 and OIA-
10279 re ASM traffic impact assessments
Importance: High
Hello all
Just following up on this request which is also due to go to the Minister for noting on
Wednesday. I had some comments provided by ASM’s s 9(2)(a)
 – they are on the
attached draft. Kathryn’s email is also attached. I have not heard back from anyone else.
under the Official Information Act 1982
Could we please finalise this response as it also needs to go to Robyn for her approval
ASAP.
Graham, have you had any luck in finding more about the 17,000 vehicles number from
the Nov 2021 I&D paper?
Our draft is attached and the two new ASM traffic analysis reports which we will be
releasing are in the links below (the June 2021 one is there for your reference only – s 9(2)(a)
already has it).
Released 
AHB_Active_Mode_Provision_–_Traffic_Impact_Assessment,_June_2021.pdf 
Out of Scope
Attachment 1 - ASM-AHB_cycle_traffic_analysis_Phase 1_v2.pdf 
Out of Scope
Attachment 2 - ASM-AHB_cycle_traffic_analysis_P2_v3.2.pdf 
Out of Scope

 
Kind regards
 
 
Jurgita
 
From: Jurgita Klein 
Sent: Thursday, 7 July 2022 5:32 PM
To: 's 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; Norman Collier
<[email address]>; Kevin Stevens <[email address]>; Kathryn King
1982
<[email address]>
Cc: James Kaye <[email address]>; Lydia Haigh <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; Hannah Saggs <[email address]>; Graham O'Connell
Act 
<[email address]>
Subject: For review and further input please: re OIA-10263 and OIA-10279 re ASM traffic impact
assessments
Importance: High
 
Hello all
I attach our draft response to both OIAs 10263 and 10279 concerning the Traffic Impact
Assessments produced by ASM.
Responses provided by ASM are incorporated into the response. My comments questions
Information 
are on the draft.
Some questions require us to form opinion, I’ve answered them accordingly and will check
them with legal.
We will release the new Phase 1 and Phase 2 reports with ASM personal details redacted
(marked up docs attached).
We still need to figure out how to answer questions 1 and 2. I&D Committee paper was
Official 
produced by transport Services and I was advised that Kathryn was instrumental in
drafting it. Kathryn, would you please be able to advise. Phase 2 report is using similar
the 
figures in section 7 (slide 52). However, the original June 2021 report (also attached) does
not have any references of 17,000 in it and we are now in an awkward position because
our previous response to s 9(2)(a) referred him to the June 2021 report. It would be great to
get some understanding re this.
 
under 
This OIA has been extended. It would be great if you could please review and provide additional
information by COB Tuesday 12 July.  If you have any questions or comments in the meantime,
please let me know ASAP.
 
Many thanks for your help.
 
Kind regards
 
Released 
 
Jurgita
 
From: s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz> 
Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2022 10:41 AM

To: Jurgita Klein <[email address]>
Cc: Norman Collier <[email address]>; James Kaye <[email address]>;
Lydia Haigh <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; Hannah
Saggs <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; s 9(2)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; 
@asm.nzta.govt.nz
(a)
s 9(2)(a)
>
Subject: Re: URGENT: follow up re OIA-10263 s 9(2)(a)
 
CAUTION: The sender of this email is from outside Waka Kotahi. Do not click links, attachments, or reply
unless you recognise the sender’s email address and know the content is safe.
Jurgita,
1982
 
Please find my responses added to the table attached.
 
Act 
s 9(2)(a)  - I will send you the Phase 1 and Phase 2 reports later today after making Graham's
suggested changes.  issuing these reports should provide info that supersedes some of the
questions being asked.
 
s 9(2)(a)  - please add to register.
 
Regards,
 
s 9(2)(a)
Information 
 
s 9(2)(a)
 / Technical Advisor Traffic Engineering and Optimisation 
Auckland System Management  

E s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz /  w www.nzta.govt.nz/asm  
 
Official 
From: s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>
Sent: 30 June 2022 08:33
the 
To: Jurgita Klein <[email address]>
Cc: Norman Collier <[email address]>; James Kaye <[email address]>;
Lydia Haigh <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; Hannah
Saggs <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>
Subject: Re: URGENT: follow up re OIA-10263 s 9(2)(a)
under 
 
Apologies Jurgita,
 
I was tied up yesterday - I will take a look at this this morning and let you know if any more
time is needed.
 
s 9(2)(a)
Released 
 
s 9(2)(a)
 / Technical Advisor Traffic Engineering and Optimisation 
Auckland System Management  

E s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz /  w www.nzta.govt.nz/asm  
 
s 9(2)(a)
 / Technical Advisor – traffic engineering and optimisation 





Auckland System Management
M s 9(2)(a)
E s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz /  w www.nzta.govt.nz/asm 
__________ _________________________________________
             
 
From: Jurgita Klein <[email address]>
Sent: 29 June 2022 11:26
To: 
1982
s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>
Cc: Norman Collier <[email address]>; James Kaye <[email address]>;
Lydia Haigh <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; Hannah
Act 
Saggs <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>
Subject: URGENT: follow up re OIA-10263 s 9(2)(a)
 
Hi s 
s 9(2)(a)  and all
Sorry to bug you again, but I really need to get these two OIAs about the traffic impact
9(2)
assessment going – I only have a couple of days until they are due. 
(a)
 The questions that need
answering are I the attached table. Could you please provide information to enable me to draft
responses to these questions.
If you need a couple of extra days – I’m happy to extend these OIAs, but please let me know how
Information 
long you need (however, given that these requests are not for a large volume of
information/documents I will only be able to extend for a short time).
Thank you. Hope to hear from you soon 
 
Kind regards
 
Official 
 
Jurgita
 
the 
 
Jurgita Klein
Principal Technical Advisor – Ministerial Services
Te Waka Kōtuia Engagement and Partnerships 
DDI s 9(2)(a)
  
under 
[email address] / w nzta.govt.nz
 
Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency
Chews Lane Office 50 Victoria Street 
Private Bag 6995, Wellington 6141, New Zealand 
 
From: Jurgita Klein 
Sent: Wednesday, 22 June 2022 2:00 PM
Released 
To: s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>
Cc: Norman Collier <[email address]>; James Kaye <[email address]>;
Lydia Haigh <[email address]>; s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>; Hannah
Saggs <[email address]>; Caitlin McInnarney <[email address]>;
s 9(2)(a)
@asm.nzta.govt.nz>

Subject: FW: OIA-10263 s 9(2)(a)
 for your advice please
Importance: High
 
Hi Andy
We have another OIA, which I have taken over from Caitlin. Also from s 9(2)(a) and it relates to the
Traffic Impact Assessment June 2021 version which s 9(2)(a) has.
 
Initially, in his previous OIA, when he asked about the basis for the calculation of "greater than
17,000 vehicles per day or a 10% reduction”, we said that this information is contained in the
Traffic Impact Assessment June 2021. Was that a correct approach? If yes, would you be able to 1982
point us to the relevant pages in the June 2021 report?
 
 
Act 
So we now have two OIAs both asking about information contained in the Traffic Assessment
Report, and it may be easier to combine the responses (if you think it is appropriate). I attach a
word doc with the table containing all questions from s 9(2)(a) about the report. It would be great
if you/your team could please help me with the required responses, which we then can discuss if
there are any questions.
 
Thank you
 
Kind regards
Information 
 
 
Jurgita
 
 
Jurgita Klein
Official 
Principal Technical Advisor – Ministerial Services
Te Waka Kōtuia Engagement and Partnerships 
DDI s 9(2)(a)
  
the 
[email address] / w nzta.govt.nz
 
Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency
Chews Lane Office 50 Victoria Street 
Private Bag 6995, Wellington 6141, New Zealand 
under 
 
From: Caitlin McInnarney 
Sent: Tuesday, 7 June 2022 3:57 PM
To: Mark Sly <[email address]>; Norman Collier <[email address]>; Lydia
Haigh <[email address]>; Marilyn Jones <[email address]>; Rosie Doherty
<[email address]>
Subject: OIA-10263 s 9(2)(a)
 for your advice please
Released 
 
Hi all,
 
s 9(2)(a)
 has sent in a follow-up OIA to OIA-9647, asking further questions to the
response to OIA-9647. I have attached the OIA responsehere for your reference. The two
documents that are referred to are the Resolve report and the AHB traffic impact assessment. I

understand that you were involved in the previous OIA response, so am hoping that you are also
please able to help with responding to this one. Please let me know if this needs to go elsewhere
 
s 9(2)(a)questions are as follows:
 
1) Unfortunately, the response to Question 2 (provide the basis for the calculation of these
figures: "greater than 17,000 vehicles per day or a 10% reduction” per page 2 of the Investment
and Delivery paper “Auckland Harbour Bridge walking and cycling event” dated 22 November
2021) is inadequate.
1982
 
Please specifically advise (on what page and actual content) of the reports provide the basis for
the figures: "greater than 17,000 vehicles per day or a 10% reduction” (per the Investment and
Act 
Delivery paper “Auckland Harbour Bridge walking and cycling event” dated 22 November 2021).
 
2) Furthermore, please advise to which pathway option, and under which level of traffic demand
reduction scenario, does the "greater than 17,000 vehicles per day or a 10% reduction” apply to?
 
3) We note this accompanying Board paper presented at the 19 August 2021 Board meeting states:
"We have therefore advised the Minister that we would wait for his feedback on the interim
options before a decision is sought from the Board.” Please provide a copy of the MInister’s
feedback. This refers to BRI-2265 which has been released as part of the Northern Pathway proactive
Information 
release – @Marilyn Jones, are you aware of any feedback that we received on BRI-2265?
 
Are you please able to advise on the above, and also if anyone else needs to see this? Please let
me know if there are any questions or concerns, thank you
 
Ngā mihi nui
Official 
Caitlin
 
Caitlin McInnarney
the 
Phone: s 9(2)(a)
 
This message, together with any attachments, may contain information that is classified
and/or subject to legal privilege. Any classification markings must be adhered to. If you
are not the intended recipient, you must not peruse, disclose, disseminate, copy or use the
under 
message in any way. If you have received this message in error, please notify us
immediately by return email and then destroy the original message. This communication
may be accessed or retained by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency for information
assurance purposes.
Released