Auckland Harbour Crossing | Auckland Motorways

DISCLAIMER: As the information outlined on this page are preliminary concepts and proposals; they may change at any time. AucklandMotorways.co.nz will not be held responsible for any error and any plans in the proposal stage are indicative only.

Share this project with people you know on Facebook.

The Debate

Every few years we bring up the same old debate that has been around since the 1970's, the third harbour crossing. The debate is between a tunnel or a bridge, what travels on these, and where they go. The reason why this debate is so heated is because we are discussing an economic lifeline for Auckland city, it is one that is controversial because of how expensive the new crossing will be, the land is some of the most expensive in the country and the bridge is utilised by some 166,000 commuters per day.

The debate is due to the current Auckland Harbour Bridge being the only crossing from North Shore to Auckland City, meaning if something happened to the current crossing the region would be in economic turmoil. The likelihood of something happening to this bridge is more due to the clip-on's that were added in 1969. The current Harbour Bridge has no capacity for public transport, rail, cycling and pedestrian access, and will soon reach capacity.

History

The first crossings of the Waitemata Harbour were investigated as early as 1860 with a floating bridge design suggested by a Ponsonby farmer, every ten years since then basic to large scale plans for bridges were talked about but none of them went past the drawing board, mainly due to the fact that nobody thought that the North Shore would grow, and it would remain rural and as a holiday spot. Cars could access the North Shore either on the car ferry that remained until 1959 or around the back way through Riverhead and Albany that was 40km long.

Originally a five lane plan with two six foot wide footpaths and a railway crossing was proposed, but was too expensive and the four lane option was chosen. In 1954 construction commenced of the four lane Auckland Harbour Bridge. The lifeline took four years to build, took four lives, and was opened by the Governor General Charles John Lyttelton, 10th Viscount Cobham on May 30th 1959. The bridge was funded by tolling which operated from Toll Plaza on the northern side at Northcote, the tolling ran from the opening in 1959 to March 30th 1984. The removal of the tolling was due to an earlier political promise that it would only be tolled until it was paid for.

After the bridge opened the growth of the North Shore exploded causing traffic chaos and congestion on the small section of motorway between Fanshawe Street and Northcote Road. The four lane harbour bridge was unable to cope with the unpredicted demands.

This congestion proved that the original bridge was a planning mistake, so they added four new lanes, two on either side, with a new technology called clip-on's. Clip on lanes are lanes that are added to the existing structure of the bridge, they are cheaper than creating a new bridge or duplication of the bridge next to it. The clip-on's followed a box girder design. In 1966 they were installed by a Japanese heavy machinery company called Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries getting the nickname 'Nippon Clip-On's'. The clip-on's were completed and opened in 1969.


Span three over span six in 1958	Cranes positioning the new clip-on's	Auckland Harbour Bridge present day

One week before the opening of the clip-on's the Ministry of Works (existing roading ministry) found cracks and buckling in the welds of the added lanes, in 1970 more problems were found, in 1971 the problems were fixed, in 1982 these secrets were all revealed to the public. In 1985 40 cracks up to 60cm long and 2mm wide were discovered and led to trucks and buses being banned from using the outside lanes of the clip-on's. Due to the clip-on technology being relatively new they are only expected to last 50 years likely to need replacing by 2016, unless extensive work is carried out on the clip-on's (currently happening).

In 1987/88 Auckland Regional Council asked the Ministry of Works to investigate crossing options. In 1996 Transit New Zealand started investigations into a third Harbour Crossing and identified preferred options. In 1997 the Auckland Regional Council started investigations. In 2001 the Auckland Harbour Bridge Climb opened where tour groups could climb to the top of the bridge and not long after AJ Hacket bungy jump opened underneath the main deck. In 2004 the Auckland Harbour Bridge featured on The Amazing Race television show.

In 2006 more fatigue, buckling and cracks were recorded on the clip-on's which prompted local government to put pressure on government to look at solutions, Transit responded with having money set aside for current bridge maintenance and investigation in their 10 year plan.

In May 2007, Transit New Zealand proposed to put bylaws in place to stop trucks (5.5% of total traffic) from using the outside lanes of the clip-on's and to use the centre spans, for the second time in the bridges history. In October 2007, Transit New Zealand committed an 'urgent' job at strengthening the clip-on's valued at $45m. On December 3rd 2007, ARC, ARTA, Auckland City Council, North Shore City council and Transit New Zealand released new preferred proposals. An option was decided as the best, which is outlined below.

Clip on strengthening will take place on the northbound clip-on between August 2008 and February 2009, then the southbound clip on strengthening will commence.

The 19 year old barrier transfer machine was replaced on the weekend of the 28th of February 2009, the new machine takes half the time to transfer barrier, with new barriers which are narrower.

Why do we need another crossing?

Clip-On's: The life of the clip-on's have not been easy. They require constant costly maintenance which occur regularly, these repairs disrupt traffic flow. Currently the clip-on's are going through a re-strengthening project.

Public Transport: The current bridge has no capacity for rail or a bus only lane, rail could also not be added below deck due to weight issues. You cannot currently walk or cycle across the Harbour Bridge either. The northern busway project should run directly to Britomart creating a direct public transport route, but cannot have its own (dedicated) lane on the AHB.

No Alternative: There is currently no viable daily/convenient transport alternative to cross the Waitemata Harbour for vehicles.

Growth: To ensure Auckland remains as a world class city it needs to make infrastructure such as harbour crossings reliable and less susceptible.

Traffic Demands: Currently the AHB handles its traffic well, almost never being congested during peak periods (due to reasons on the bridge itself) and remains one of the freest moving sections. But future growth will change this, also with the movable barriers 3 lanes in the opposite peak direction often congests either side of the AHB. Also the bylaw against trucks using the outside lanes can have negative effects on economic growth and confidence in the region and the AHB itself.

The Chosen Option

DISCLAIMER: As the information outlined on this page are preliminary concepts and proposals they may change at any time; AucklandMotorways.co.nz will not be held responsible for any error.

Three new proposals were outlined on the 3rd of December 2007, one of these options was chosen and refined. This was option two, which is now called 2c. There were three preferred proposals which were decided on from 159 different options since investigations began in 1997. To see all of the previous proposals, click here. A more detailed image is below.

Current Estimated Cost: $3.7 billion to $4.1 billion | No construction date yet

The Tunnel Itself
The new motorway will run between Esmonde Road in the north and just south of Wellington Street in the south. The section which is a tunnel (underground & underwater) runs between Toll Plaza (Northcote) and Wellington Street.

The tunnel is made up of four tunnels, two for traffic and two for rail. It will carry 3 lanes in each direction, totaling 6 lanes. Sections that are on land or shallow water will use a cut and cover technique.

The existing Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB)
The existing Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB) will be left as it is, but with lane layouts changed, and greater priority for public transport including walking and cycling. Currently the clip-on's are undergoing a strengthening project and the barrier transfer system will be replaced.

Changes in access to interchanges and parts of Auckland
Basically the current AHB route will be used to access the CBD and the new tunnel route will be used to access the North-Western and Southern Motorway.

For the northern interchanges, Onewa Road and Esmonde Road, access is available to the new tunnel and to the existing AHB. The AHB provides access to the CBD & Ponsonby and the new tunnel provides access the North Western Motorway and Southern Motorway. Stafford Road off-ramp will only be accessible for traffic coming from the CBD and Ponsonby.
For the CBD interchanges, access is only available for traffic that is using the existing AHB route, not to the tunnel traffic heading south and west. The existing link can still operate during construction, maintenance and incidents.

The current AHB route will terminate at Cook Street for citybound traffic, and begin at Wellington Street for northbound traffic.

Public Transport and Rail Options
Buses, walking & cycling will be given access and more priority on the existing AHB. The AHB is likely to be converted to 2 bus only lanes and 6 traffic lanes with walking & cycling below deck.

Rail is included in two separate tunnels in line with the traffic tunnels, which will link in with the Northern Busway*, Wynyard Quarter, CBD rail loop and Auckland rail network.

*The northern busway is likely to be converted to light rail in this case.

Interaction with current and near-future projects
Central Motorway Junction (CMJ/Spaghetti Junction) has been designed to incorporate a project like this, where tunnels surface after Wellington Street to link in with connections that have only recently been completed.

The Victoria Viaduct Tunnel and existing Victoria Viaduct project is designed to enable easy incorporation with the project. This is why the first stage of the Victoria Park Tunnel project is only in the northbound direction.

The Northern Busway has been designed to enable the conversion to light-rail, which is incorporated in the new crossing tunnel.

The chosen option is as follows in this image in more detail:

*Northern Busway may be converted to light rail as it has the provision to do so.
The above image is © of Ben Products New Zealand. Satellite images are courtesy of Microsoft Live. www.maps.live.com

Previous Proposals

You can see which options were proposed and why they were not chosen in detail here on the Previous Proposals page.

Option One: Esmonde to Britomart, Public Transport Only. This option was not chosen because a single mode tunnel did not benefit the region economically enough to make it a good option to build.

Option Two: This option was chosen, but the chosen option is a variation of the original Option Two.

Option Three: Esmonde to Grafton Gully, Peoples Choice in Polls*. This option was not chosen due to cost. It comes in $1-2bn more than the chosen option, it also required extensive demolition in the Grafton Gully area.

A Bridge: A bridge was not chosen because of its urban design issues, despite being cheaper it also would require extensive reclamation and disruption for areas by the bridge footings.

You can see these options in more detail here on the Previous Proposals page.

*Peoples choice polls on this site do not influence decisions, this is an independent site. Although we hope it may have an effect.

Let us know what you think

Previous Poll Responses

Overwhelmingly most people believed that Tunnel option was the best option. Some die hard fans of the bridge option made their voices heard, but most of the time the tunnel option was favoured in decisions.

To see what the bridge option would have looked like have a look at the previous proposals page.

Note: Peoples choice polls on this site do not influence decisions, this is an independent site. Although we hope it may have an effect.

Most people thought that option three was the best option, a tunnel from Esmonde Road to Grafton Gully. Mainly because this option on the surface made sense, when traffic modeling and integration with existing and future services was looked at the option didn't work as well, it was also $1bn to $2bn more expensive than the chosen option. The least chosen option was the public transport only tunnel.

Note: Peoples choice polls on this site do not influence decisions, this is an independent site. Although we hope it may have an effect.

Tell us your opinion

Comments

From: Hugh | All of these proposals seem to have missed the point that North Auckland is expanding rapidly and congestion on the motorway section north of Esmonde road will only get worse. Width expansion (which God forbid) can only be achieved on the western side due to the presence of the busway. Common sense demands a further crossing that will reduce the traffic pressure on the existing highway, not increase it. Therefore the answer of a northward extension of SH20 to Highbury and beyond should be as plain as a pikestaff and infinitely cheaper!

From: Liam | This is good, but why is there only a light rail connection? If there's going to be light rail used on the Northern Busway, how will it connect to the CBD loop, when the Auckland suburban network is heavy rail? Shouldn't the North Shore rail line also be heavy rail, so that it can keep up with heavy patronage that may occur in the future?

Answer: If you look at the map the rail links in with Britomart and the proposed CBD loop. Heavy-rail is not needed in this circumstance, as heavy-rail is more expensive and mainly for freight, it can easily be upgraded to light-rail however.

Mauray: We definitely need a option which includes cycling, walking and rail for a new harbour crossing. Anything less is a waste of money!

From: Richard | I'll make it quick, overall the plan is sound. I would however prefer heavy rail or rapid rail. Reason being that light rail cars have a limited speed but more importantly capacity which might be fine for the next 20 years but what will capacity will be needed 50 or 100 years? Building a light rail [tunnel] is shortsighted as the grades required cannot be used for heavy rail at a later date. Also why cut off the Harbour Bridge connector to southern motorway? If there is a disruption in the new tunnel commuters have no other option but to cut through the city. Why?

Answer from Ben: The plan would not cancel out the Auckland Harbour Bridge to be used as an alternative if the tunnel were to be closed due to an incident etc. they would be able to connect to the Southern and North Western. The main goal of this is to lighten the traffic volume between Wellington Street and the Auckland Harbour Bridge, there are noise and aesthetic issues with the motorway through this section.

Images of the Auckland Harbour Bridge