John Tamihere's proposed Auckland Harbour Bridge Photo / supplied
John Tamihere's proposed Auckland Harbour Bridge Photo / supplied
Opinion
COMMENT
Simon Wilson's article (Weekend Herald, September 28) brought welcome sanity to the ongoing conversation about transport in Auckland. Wilson made a number of points and posed a number of questions about John Tamihere's transport plan which I address.
When Tamihere proposed the bridge replacement many inthe mainstream media thought, for whatever reason, that saying Tamihere had flipped his lid was a good story to tell their readers, viewers and listeners, many of whom believed it. That is why "everyone [thought] he had flipped his lid" when, of course, he hadn't.
A reason for the bridge replacement proposal not in the article is the NZ Transport Agency predicts the current 50 tonne heavy vehicle weight limit on the clip-ons will be reduced to 35 tonnes around 2030; it may be reduced further in the 2030s. The restrictions would greatly hinder freight transport to all points north. Another reason is Auckland Transport has predicted the Northern Busway is on track to reach full capacity by the mid-2030s when bus use of the alignment will need to be replaced with rail; other estimates are rail will be required by the mid-2020.
The new harbour crossing included in the Auckland Transport Alignment Programme is on a 25- to 30-year horizon. From ATAP 2018 "construction is not anticipated to commence until at least the late 2030s". A tunnel across the Waitemata with traffic lanes would require significant sea reclamation that may be impossible to get resource consent for in the 2030s.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The view of some beholders is that the original Auckland Harbour Bridge was an attractive spider's web of steel that stretched across the Waitemata lightly touching its piers, and then the clip-ons turned it in to an ugly mongrel. A replacement of the same design as the original would be attractive to many and would respect the history of the bridge and the thousands of men and women who worked on it including the four men who died during its construction.
The reason why the vehicles are on the bottom level of the proposed replacement bridge is that it would be difficult to fit shared paths and rail lines underneath 10 lanes of traffic at the bridgeheads, however fitting them above 10 lanes of traffic at the bridgeheads would be relatively straightforward.
Other factors include that footpaths and cyclepaths are usually exposed to the elements including paths on bridges including NZTA's proposed clip-on shared path. Covered public spaces are problematic; the covered shared path on the south side of the Mangere motorway bridge is notoriously unsafe and under-used. The views from the current level / proposed level for trains, cyclists and pedestrians are spectacular and would be wasted on drivers who should be looking at the road.
Many bridges with walkways have one on each side. The two proposed shared paths are to allow views to the west and the east and to allow shared path access to the bridge from the east and the west which is particularly helpful at the south bridge head.
The plan deliberately does not increase peak traffic capacity across the Waitemata as there is no identified short, medium or long-term need for, or way to accommodate in the approaches, more general traffic lanes. The proposed tunnel would not increase the total number of general traffic lanes either. If Tamihere is elected Mayor and gains support from the Governing Body and government, the harbour bridge could be replaced by 2025.
Any commuter street-rail built in Auckland will require passenger platforms at least 300mm in height and at least 50m2 in area to provide mobility access, at every stop. Such platforms are being built in the hundreds around Melbourne. Manchester has 900mm / bench height tram-train platforms which fit well in their streetscapes. Auckland would require 750mm / table height tram-train platforms which would fit well in our streetscapes.
Tram-trains to and from the north would travel on tracks laid on the Northern Busway alignment, which is the long-term plan for the alignment anyway. Tram-trains to and from the south, would go along Westhaven Drive, Beaumont Street, Jellicoe Street and Quay Street past Spark Arena to then join the mainlines in the railyards just as trains did right up to the 1970s. Tram-trains would supplement, not replace, the existing fleet of trains that would continue to be used for many decades.
Will McKenzie. Photo / Supplied
Wilson is right to identify the use of tram-trains as the "game-changer" in the plan. With new rail lines built in rail corridors currently not used for rail such as Avondale to the Airport and the Northern and Eastern Busways a large integrated rapid transit network could be built quickly and affordably that could accommodate 200 million, 300 million and more boardings per year, up from the current 100 million.
Such high levels of public transport use are necessary to address climate change, safety, health and community considerations. Combined with provision for active transport, a completed road network, possible congestion charging on motorways and major highways and replacing the harbour bridge, congestion would be kept to an acceptable level and Auckland would have a fit-for-purpose 21st century transport system sooner rather than later.
• Will McKenzie is a policy advisor with the John Tamihere for Mayor campaign
