Brian Rudman: Auckland's ad hoc thinking promises a bridge to nowhere

Even in the easy come, easy go atmosphere of Auckland local politics, the rise and fall of the overbridge from Eden Park to Kingsland rail station was swift.

One week it was the Eden Park Trust Board's "must have" accessory. A week later, they couldn't dump it quickly enough.

If the $6.625 million bridge gets built, a good name for it would be The Ad Hoc Bridge, a monument to the guiding principle of Auckland local government.

Actually, the plan to provide a wide pedestrian bridge from Auckland's major sports park across busy Sandringham Rd to the Kingsland railway station, seems a great idea. If you've just won Lotto. Who could argue with a scheme making it easier for patrons to stream between the park and the refurbished Kingsland station.

But the way the park trust board announced it, as a fait accompli that had to be built before the British Lions rugby tour next July, was guaranteed to get up the noses of local opponents of any expansion of park activities, and of politicians keen to prioritise scarce transport spending.

You have to concede $6.625 million - about twice the money spent on upgrading Kingsland Station - is a large sum to spend on a bridge that will only get a good work out during the odd international rugby match.

That's if Eden Park remains rugby's stadium of choice, Auckland's trains get sorted out and patrons decide to change their habits and leave their cars at home.

It's a lot of ifs that should have been debated, before anyone went looking for public funds.

True, the application to Auckland City last week didn't involve money. All the trust board wanted was an airspace licence from the council in order to build over Sandringham Rd.

However, the board signalled that it might come cap in hand and that it was seeking funding from the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) and Transfund.

It later emerged Transfund had agreed to fund the stage one design costs of $200,000 and up to $2.13 million of the construction costs.

Suddenly, late Friday, the trust board conceded there was not time to build the bridge before the Lions tour and handed the project over to the ARTA.

Sensible and appealing as this bridge is, it's hard not to think there might be higher transport priorities. New rolling stock, perhaps.

The other consideration is, will Eden Park, in 10-years time, still be Auckland's major sports stadium?

New Zealand Rugby Union chief executive Chris Moller was recently clamouring for a new stadium in Auckland so rugby could make a bid to host the 2011 World Cup. He said the options were a brand new $300 million to $400 million stadium, holding 60,000 to 80,000 people, or a rebuild and expansion of the existing 48,000 seater, Eden Park.

Mr Moller did not elaborate on just who would pay for this new stadium - or for enlarging Eden Park. But in the unlikely event a new national stadium replaces Eden Park, the planned Kingsland overbridge would suddenly become Auckland's very own bridge to nowhere.

Given the existing investment in Eden Park, and the likely ratepayers revolt if they were asked to foot the bill for something new, my bet is the most probable outcome will be an upgrade of the existing site.

But even then, do we built a massive footbridge in anticipation of the once or thrice a year peak crowd?

We don't know whether the ARTA will deliver on the trains. Or whether punters will use them.

Until we do, perhaps a cheaper solution would be a giant zebra crossing, and before and after the game, give pedestrians priority over cars on Sandringham Rd.

I'm sure $6 million would buy an awful lot of white paint and flashing traffic lights.