KEY POINTS:
The future of the $51.2 million Te Wero Bridge across the Viaduct Harbour is in doubt because of growing concerns about its size, cost and transport implications.
Auckland City councillors have called for a review after former councillor Greg McKeown urged the council to rethink the project.
The National Maritime Museum, Heart of the City, the Historic Places Trust, landowners and businesses at the Viaduct and former Auckland Harbour Board chairman Harry Julian share Mr McKeown's reservations.
In a presentation to last Thursday's council meeting, Mr McKeown said plans to build a two-lane road across the bridge for buses and possibly light rail to travel to the Tank Farm development would ruin the Viaduct.
The Tank Farm, he said, should be a destination, not a through-route for buses that could otherwise travel along Customs and Fanshawe Sts.
The bridge was too big, would end up costing more than $70 million and recommissioning the historic "rolling lift" bridge should be investigated.
Mr Julian said the rolling lift bridge could be upgraded at a cost of $100,000 to $200,000 and take vessels up to a 12.8m beam through the 13.7 gap.
"If you want a bridge, it is there at a very low cost," he said.
Last month, the council announced a "twin leaves" design for Te Wero Bridge linking downtown Auckland with the Tank Farm development. It has three tall mast-like structures reflecting yacht hull and sail forms.
The judges selected the "twin leaves" design by a team from Hyder Consulting in Wellington, Denton Corker Marshall Design in Melbourne and Kenneth Grubb Associates in Britain.
The design competition set a $35 million budget for the bridge. This has risen to $51.2 million and a report last month said "substantial risks exist regarding cost estimates" as the design is developed.
It is planned to pay for the bridge from transport development contributions from the Tank Farm, Auckland Regional Council's development arm and a transport subsidy.
The New Zealand Transport Agency will be asked for a 53 per cent subsidy, but this is not guaranteed. Nor can development contributions or the ARC, be relied on to pay the bills. That would leave ratepayers carrying the can.
Faced with concerns over the bridge and the job of slashing core services to hold rates to the council rate of inflation, the council called for a peer review.
