Today, NZTA have lodged a notice of requirement (effectively a designation application) for the future Harbour Tunnels underneath the Waitemata. Quite interestingly, they have included both rail tunnels and road tunnels in that designation – which will effectively ‘protect’ the route from future conflicting development. Of course it’s unlikely that these tunnels will be built anytime soon, but it means the routes are protected. Here’s the full press-release, which is rather dominated by the (secondary in my opinion) story that the cost of upgrading the Harbour Bridge has “blown out”:
The NZ Transport Agency Board has moved to future proof Auckland’s transport needs by protecting the route for an additional harbour crossing and approving further funding to complete strengthening work on the Auckland Harbour Bridge.
NZTA Regional Director for Auckland and Northland Wayne McDonald said the agency was actively managing the operation and maintenance of the bridge to ensure its future viability, and at the same time looking ahead and preparing for the day when the bridge alone is no longer able to meet the city’s needs.
To that end the NZTA Board has approved $41 million in additional funding to complete strengthening work on the box girders supporting the bridge’s outer lanes and agreed to lodge notices of requirement to protect the route for an additional harbour crossing.
The notices of requirement were lodged earlier today with Auckland City Council and North Shore City Council, seeking a ‘sub strata’ (underground) designation for four separate tunnels beneath the harbour, two each for road and rail.
Mr McDonald said that protecting the route for a tunnel did not preclude consideration of a new bridge as an alternate crossing, but it was important to seek the sub-strata designation now in order to preserve the tunnel option by protecting the underground route from future development in the Wynyard Quarter.
“The Wynyard Quarter Plan Change is part of an overarching strategy for the entire Auckland waterfront, and it’s important that we ensure the route for an additional harbour crossing is protected in relation to any development associated with the plan change. If we don’t protect the route now future developments could compromise the ability to build another crossing,” he said.
The strengthening works on the Auckland Harbour Bridge began in August 2008 and are expected to be completed next year. The strengthening will bring the box girders up to current design standards and extend their service life, allowing current legal weight trucks to use the clip-on lanes for 20 years or more.
The additional funding for the strengthening (on top of an initial investment of $45 million approved last year) is needed as the project will require 43% more steel than originally estimated, and the complexity of the work has required more labour hours than anticipated.
“The scale and complexity of this project is huge. The initial funding approval was an urgent measure to address an urgent need. As the work has progressed the need for further investment to complete it to the required standard and extend the service life of the bridge has become apparent,” Mr McDonald said.
While the strengthening works would ensure that the bridge can continue to serve as a key link in the state highway network for 20 years or more, it was also important to recognise that the bridge cannot continue to carry heavy vehicles or serve as the city’s main harbour crossing indefinitely.
Mr McDonald said a new engineering report assessing the effects of future traffic growth on the bridge had confirmed that the box girders could not be strengthened any further and the bridge has a finite service life in its current configuration, emphasising the need to secure the future of an additional harbour crossing.
“In 20 years’ time the bridge will be nearing the end of its life as a state highway and the need for a viable additional harbour crossing to efficiently move increasing volumes of freight and a growing population through Auckland will be critical. The process of route protection, funding, design and construction for a new crossing is expected to take up to 20 years – the time to act is now.”
Here’s a map of what is currently planned by NZTA – the red is road links from the existing harbour bridge, the blue is the new motorways and its links with the existing CMJ, while the thin black line is a future rail tunnel:
As I have noted in previous posts, I think that we’re jumping the gun proposing that the roading tunnel (or even the rail tunnel actually) should be built anytime in the next 20 years. Traffic volumes across the harbour bridge aren’t actually increasing – with peak flows actually being quite stable since 1994 (though counter-peak flows have increased quite a lot), while the Northern Busway is also a pretty awesome piece of infrastructure that has plenty of capacity to grow. Perhaps one of the better “arguments” for needing another crossing is the limited lifespan of the clip-ons – although at the same time it seems a bit strange to spend billions of dollars on a new tunnel just so you can minimise the disruption of replacing the clip-ons. How about some innovative engineering ideas such as ‘pre-building’ the replacement clip-ons and quickly slotting them into place over a few weeks during the Xmas/New Year’s holiday period?
Also, if we really do need extra capacity across the Harbour Bridge, couldn’t we just build the railway tunnel and then utilise the extra capacity that would offer to “off-set” a reduction to 6 lanes on the bridge (surely you’d replace the clip-ons one at a time)? Of course, at some point in the future there might be an absolutely pressing need to provide another road crossing – although with peak oil around the corner I’m pretty sceptical.
Anyway, what will be interesting to see is how much detailed design NZTA have done prior to lodging this notice of requirement. Looking at the picture to the left, I certainly hope all the route within the sea area is a “below ground” tunnel, as otherwise it will have some pretty horrific effects on the Waitemata Harbour. Furthermore, even if that is the case the interchanges are going to be pretty messy (that Onewa Road one for example) in terms of their environmental effects.
I’m sure there will be plenty more details to come out in the next few days – it will be interesting to follow.
Processing...
Any day a rail NOR is lodged is a good one as far as I’m concerned…
Don’t forget the ANZAC bridge details are released tomorrow, probably not a co-incidence…
Ha ha. No, absolutely not a coincidence.
you know if any work at all has been done looking at how the railway line would make it from britomart to the tank farm, and how it would link in with the CBD loop tunnel. Can’t see there being much room at Britomart to run a train to the North Shore every few minutes at peak time. Maybe a new underground station would need to be constructed within 5mins walk of Britomart, with pedestrain tunnels connecting them, just like undergrounds overseas.
I don’t think much work has really gone into that. I think the best idea might be a separate 2 platforms below the current station – perhaps underneath Customs Street. The two tracks could link up with existing lines around where the old station is.
Luke, the current concept doesn’t actually specify where the tunnel will go in the city, they seem to be working options between Britomart or the proposed Midtown station on the CBD loop. In any case I think it would have to be a new set of platforms. In my opinion connecting anything to the existing Britomart station is a waste of time, the CBD loop and any line to the Shore should be built with new platforms adjacent to Britomart, which foot connections at the concourse level. Platforms under Quay or Customs St would easily integrate into the station complex, while the old terminal platforms could keep doing what they were designed to do, be terminal platforms for diesel trains. This is much like what occurs at Sydney central and in Brisbane and Perth.