A couple of media releases on motorway projects today show that good progress is being made on two large projects: the SH20-SH1 Manukau Connection and the SH1 Newmarket Viaduct replacement project. Looking at the Manukau Connection Project first, the following part of the media release is quite interesting:
The $220M Manukau Extension motorway project is scheduled to be opened progressively between August and December. The new 4.5 kilometre-long extension will have two lanes in each direction and connect the Southern and Southwestern motorways. It will also help ease congestion on local roads within the Manukau City Centre area, including Wiri Station and Great South Roads.
The motorway will form the southern end of the Western Ring Route. When completed, it will provide a 48 kilometre alternative to SH1 between Manukau and Albany via SH20, SH16 and SH18.
So this project will be done by the end of this year. That will mean only two projects, the Waterview Connection and the Hobsonville Deviation (currently under construction), will be needed to complete the Western Ring Route – what has been Auckland’s largest roading project in the past few years (and will be over the next few years).
There is also good progress being made on the Newmarket Viaduct project, and vehicles will be using new sections of this road by September, and that four southbound lanes will be open by early next year. The project is still a long way from eventual completion, as the second half of the new viaduct will need to be built, and of course the whole existing structure will need to be removed at some point. Here are probably the most useful bits of this media release:
Transport Minister Steven Joyce says the completion of the southern half of the Newmarket Viaduct replacement project more than six months ahead of schedule is testament to the hard work and skill of those working on the project.
The NZ Transport Agency today announced that an important milestone in the $215 million Newmarket Connection: viaduct replacement project will be achieved on September 6.
The initial opening of three lanes on the new state of the art viaduct will allow contractors to complete a fourth southbound lane by early 2011. The full capacity benefits of the new structure will thereby be realised more than six months ahead of the original schedule.
So another $435 million spent on roading projects, but that’s not my main point here.
My main point is that we’re actually getting pretty damn close to this magical “completing the motorway network” that has been talked about for so long. The necessary improvements to the central junction points of the motorways are progressing – through the Newmarket Viaduct and Victoria Park Tunnel projects (combined cost of more than $600 million), while the Western Ring Route is being completed, through the Manukau Connection project, the Manukau Harbour Crossing Project (around half a billion dollars spent between those two projects) and the Hobsonville Deviation (another couple of hundred million there). That effectively just leaves the Waterview Connection in order to ‘complete’ the system.
The reason I point this is out is that over the next while I imagine we are going to see a lot of the contractors and their various lobby groups (NZ Council for Infrastructure Development, Contractors Federation and so forth) start to freak out a bit over this issue a bit. Now there are of course other projects that many of these groups are advocating be “added onto” the list of what’s necessary to ‘complete’ the motorway network – such as Puhoi to Wellsford, the enormous widening of State Highway 16, a link between SH20 and SH1 through Onehunga, an additional harbour crossing and so forth. But these additional projects are not what was considered part of ‘completing the motorway network’
In my opinion, the Waterview Connection is the last ‘piece of the puzzle’ for Auckland’s roading system. This is recognised in the Regional Land Transport Strategy 2010-2040 which assumes that beyond 2016 spending on state highways will reduced significantly, predominantly because we’ve built them all. For years, both Labour and National governments, along with local and regional politicians from both sides of the political divide have promised that they will improve the public transport system, but that we need to ‘complete the motorway network first’.
Well everyone, we’re just about there. Let’s start thinking about what’s on the other side of a complete motorway network, not just invent new parts of the motorway system that supposedly need completion.
Processing...
Complete the arterial road network, of course! I mean there’s lots of wide footpaths and berms that aren’t really getting used enough!
Kidding aside, the answers are easy of course – more bus routes/busways and rail. More overbridges over those motorways we already have. A cycleway along the southern motorway. An upgraded Tamaki Drive that takes into account the real function of that road as a pleasure beach boulevard. Covering up the central city gullies (start thinking of good urban designs for the vent stacks, though!). Triple-tracking the eastern line for freight trains to the port. Light rail up Dom Road and Ponsonby Road, as well as along Tamaki Drive. Underground the Khyber Pass – Remuera – Manukau Road connection underneath Broadway, and pedestrianise Broadway.
We still need construction companies to build a CBD Rail Tunnel, Rail to the airport etc. They should focus on getting those contracts and building them early and ahead of schedule.
Yeah I agree Matt. Somehow they need to be talked around into becoming great advocates for big railway projects. As you say, there are billions to be spent on rail projects in the future and companies like Fletcher Construction are probably the best placed to build them…
…unless we get Chinese companies to come in and do it?
Yes the Chinese will do it both better and cheaper and lend the money too… Looking at your ideal network on the recent post it struck me that the really interesting project, after the CBD tunnel of course, in my view is the South Eastern line. It opens up a whole new population to both Britomart and Manukau and the Airport. The genius of the Highland Park Station is how central it is to this under served population and just how quick the trip to Britomart would be, it’s almost a sort of express route. Straight track and just GI and Orakei between it and Britomart. [ignoring the almost pointless Meadwbank Station- should be moved east and linked to shops and Thatcher St/Selwyn College]. Any idea on how long that journey might be? Pakuranga Highway is a sitter for a QTN to link in to this RTN running sweetly and at rightangles to it. Unfortunately each end of the route is an expensive tunnel. So continuing your thoughts on contractors above, perhaps they could be interested in moving their expertise straight from Waterview to the CBD to under the Tamaki? And lobbying for it. Also noting the falling traffic volumes on the bridge and the success of the Northern Busway, consideration should be given to to tunnelling this line before the second harbour crossing… waddayareckon?
Vincent, I have had a deeper look into this line in the past (see this post and this post).
Britomart to Glen Innes is around 9 km and the train does it in 13 minutes. Glen Innes to Botany is another 9 km, so another 13 minutes – making it 26 minutes between Botany and Britomart: pretty amazing! Botany to Manukau City is around 8 km, so conservatively let’s say a further 13 minutes, and then probably around 10 minutes from there to the airport.
Such a line would mean that all the development in southeast Auckland would actually make sense. Right now I don’t think it does.
I would put this project as a higher priority than anything to the North Shore.
Won’t the new electric kit be quicker? This line is a honey, desperately needs protecting and publicising, that first tunnel will have to be a long one though. Those Pakuranga residents with sea views won’t happily put up with trains suddenly passing in front, and there’s a lot of green space to be compromised. How transit ready is Te Irirangi Drive? Perhaps there’s even an argument for starting with the southern approach Manukau to Highland Park [And the Airport]?
Yes, I do hope that the public opinion will shift to a “motorway is complete, now what?” point of view, rather than scrambling for new motorway projects to pour money into. I’ve got no doubt the eastern motorway will rear its ugly head again. If they build the proposed expressway in the corridor from Mt Wellington to Glen Innes as per AMETI, it’s only a matter of time before we hear the words “missing link”.
Te Irirangi has a 10m median along most (but not all) of it’s length originally intended for ‘future light rail’, whatever that actually means. A rail line really needs about 12m, and naturally a bit more at stations. Luckily there is quite a lot of space on the sides of the road, so shifting the lanes 1-2m outward on each side would be pretty straightforward. There are also the three main intersections that would probably need to grade separated with over bridges, where you would probably also build stations due to the excellent bus transfer opportunities. This coincidentally would win the favour of the road lobby as it would make the route almost a motorway. I would say Te Irirangi isn’t to far off ‘transit ready’, and it would nevertheless be the easiest corridor in Auckland in which to build a rail line. Either end is a bit more trouble though.
Well I guess a cut and cover tunnel along Te Iriangi would be relatively straight forward, and would deal with the intersections….
Could you entrench the rail line? Would make it more expensive but would mean that you don’t interfere with the road.
Why would you bother trenching or tunnelling if there is room to largely build at surface level? The cost could be astronomical.
So you don’t get the car people screaming at you that you’ve stopped them turning right or about the extra danger of introducing a heap of level crossings. Personally I quite agree that surface level would be sufficient, but that’s because I see no problem with driving a few hundred metres the wrong way to get to a grade seperation.
I’m pretty sure Te Iriangi has mostly a grass median along it so wouldn’t really be any loss of right turns. Selling it as a good way to grade separate the big intersections would be a good way to keep the roading lobby happy
Is digging a trench in the grass really going to be astronomical?
Mmmh, I thought we’d talk of something beyond JUST rail here.
Well a busway along SH16 would be good, that is still a road so these contractors should be good at building it.
I understand that transport planners just itch at the thought of an “unfinished network”, as the large gap between Sandringham Road and Waterview appears to be. However, what exactly is the regional benefit of a “complete” SH20 (southwestern m’way)? Is it a regional priority to shuttle families from Te Atatu more quickly to Rainbows End or reduce the driving time from the airport to Henderson? The motorway should address actual network needs, not simply create them. I admit that if I lived near the new motorway, it would be a boon of convenience to me. However, that’s all it would be.
I guess it’s the advantage of a real alternative to travelling through spaghetti junction and the most congested parts of the southern motorway.
Yes digging a trench that long would be expensive, be that for rail, light rail or busway. 6,000m long by 12m wide by 6m deep is 432,000 cubic metres of soil to be dug out, trucked away and disposed of. To put that in perspective thats around 24,000 truck-and-trailer loads. You’d also need at least 12,000 lineal metres of precast concrete walls and a 72,000m2 reinfoced concrete floor slab about a half metre thick. Basically we are talking about six New Lynn trenches laid end to end, and six times the cost of New Lynn is about a billion dollars.
Simply rebuilding the three main intersections with overpasses would be a lot cheaper than a six kilometre trench, which would still require the same three intersections to be rebuilt. The alternative would be just to trench under those three intersections with a ground level bridge(about 700m of ramp in total and three bridge sections) but have most of the route at grade. A combination of the two would probably be most effective.
I guess the ability to do Te Irirangi Drive cheaply at grade would he offset by the greater costs involved with tunneling or bridging at either end. It wouldn’t be a cheap line by any means, but surely still cheaper than Waterview or whatever.
Another little (or not so little…) motorway project that will be on the radar within the next 5 years –
Upgrading of the little (2km) piece of the Upper Harbour Hwy that is not motorway in the vicinity of the Constellation Drive interchange. Despite the amount of open space to the North of this section of road it will more be expensive than it looks to upgrade this to full motorway standard. Access to Paul Mathews Drive and Carribean Drive will need to be maintained (very poor urban planning historically when this area was developed) – maybe an overbridge between the two? A full motorway to motorway interchange will need to be inserted into the mix as a link between SH1 and SH18, while still keeping access between Constellation Drive and SH1 and SH18 – plus leaving enough room for the busway! SH1 probably will need to be three laned northwards until the Albany Interchange (same sort of thing as the SH16 widening) – and the Albany exit isn’t that far up the motorway, which could lead to weaving issues between the interchanges. Tricky… and will probably need substantial property acquisition.
As this will be the last piece of non motorway WRR once Waterview is done, the push will be on to “tidy this bit up” – I’m guessing around 300 mil in 2010 $.
Maybe the NZTA could also do a full busway to busway interchange between the SH1 busway and a future SH18 one? That would be cool!
Good point, that will become the next “missing link”. As for a SH18 busway, I don’t think we will ever see one along here, bus lanes will be probably be the most we can expect.
That last bit of SH18 would struggle to stack up as a project with a decent cost-benefit ratio I imagine (not that that is necessarily a problem for our current transport minister). The main gain would simply be a prettier looking map. Save the hundreds of millions, widen the road a little bit and spend that money somewhere better I reckon.
I agree with you on this re cost benefit – as it is already a divided four lane expressway, and there is no proper designation in place here – $$$$$. However, I think it will happen, especially in terms of the wider push to have a seamless WRR, and I understand that a preliminary investigation is currently underway by NZTA…
Here’s a link to the FAQ’s on the Upper Harbour Motorway website:
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/projects/upperharbourmotorway/faqs/
I cut and pasted Q16 in below:
16. Once the Upper Harbour Motorway is completed, will the road between Albany Highway and the Northern Motorway be upgraded to motorway standard? Will there be a dedicated SH18-SH1 link, bypassing the intersection which is currently controlled by traffic lights?
The NZTA has investigated a new motorway-to-motorway link between the SH18 Albany Highway Interchange and the SH1 Upper Harbour Highway Interchange. Further investigation will take place through to 2011, as set out in the National Land Transport Programme. This will assess the feasibility of upgrading the SH1 Interchange and the current expressway between Albany Highway and the interchange. Access for Caribbean Drive and Paul Matthews Road will also be considered.
Perhaps I’ll do a blog post on this, go through newspaper articles and find all the references made to the ‘missing link’, past and proposed. My guess is that every motorway project for the last 20 years has been called the missing link needed to ‘complete’ a motorway.
Some other ‘missing bits and pieces’ that are on the horizon from what I have heard. Not much info available publicly on the net about any of these. I’ve thrown some wild $ figures out there based on previous and current NZTA projects and my professional experience as a planner, but I could be quite a bit out:
1. Extension of SH16 through to Tamaki Drive – Stage 3 of the Grafton Gully works. Probably some sort of trench or cut and cover. I’m pretty sure this won’t happen until there is a bit more certainty around the Waitemata crossing project, as this end of SH16 was on the shortlist as a possible connection point. $250-400 mil?
2. At the other end of SH16 – 4 laning of the new yet to be opened (2 lane) section of SH16 through to and maybe beyond Brigham Ck and maybe a bypass of Kumeu. This probably won’t happen until the SH16 widening is complete – and the six laning from Royal to Westgate isn’t forecast until 2018 onwards. $100-200mil?
3. Kirkbride Road grade separation on SH20A, plus an SH20A to SH20 east bound ramp, plus possibly a third lane in each direction on SH20 from the SH20A junction to SH1. This is all designated – but will probably wait until the airport moves a bit further on with its expansion plans – it has just put the second runway construction on hold again. $50-175 mil?
4. The big one – completion of the ‘ladder’ – a motorway between Onehunga and Mt Wellington to directly connect SH20 with the SE Highway. Not designated, and I understand that NZTA doesn’t own much land on this corridor. Big push on by NZCID and other industry groups for this one. NZTA wanted to re-do the Onehunga interchange at the same time as twinning the Mangere Bridge to accommodate a future motorway connection here, but it wasn’t approved. $1.5-2 billion plus?
Crikey rodin that’s a pretty expensive list. I think extending SH16 beyond Brigham’s Creek Road is something that won’t happen for quite some time yet, but the others seem reasonably likely in the future.
Regarding extending the Grafton Gully project, I thought the whole point of the Wiri Inland Port was to reduce the need for trucks to travel all the way into downtown and back again to collect containers.
Considering the amount of money Joyce claims they have to blow on roading projects and roading projects alone I think we’ll be seeing a shitload of new missing pieces being worked on over the next few years – or advanced enough in the planning that if they can’t get them done this term they’ll make sure they waste some more money on them when they next get back in.
Indeed, I think the only thing that might change his mind is $3 a litre petrol.
“Indeed, I think the only thing that might change his mind is $3 a litre petrol.”
Indeed, that will change a lot in that instance – i.e. they will change the justification from “projected traffic increases” to a more generic “future traffic increases” and still build it.
If C and R getinto power, I’d be certain AMETI will occupy a huge amount of resources. Extend SH16 from the Port under Orakei lagoon, nice off-ramp in Remeura, turn Panmure into a motorway junction and on to Howick, Pakuranga and Flat Bush.
Very popular in some of the right voting areas as long as property values aren’t impacted.
It’s looking to be a bit of a bad election for C&R, at most only 1-2 of their existing councillers is expected to get back in from what I’ve read. In a ‘nice’ turn of events Cristine Fletcher is standing for the C&R ticket, in the Eden ward I think, with some more people with her views on PT in C&R they may not be so bad in the future transport-wise.
Just been past Victoria Park, and it is extraordinary when you see all that ordinance and labour down there that they aren’t taking advantage off that efficiency and doing both tunnels one after the other…. and getting rid of the viaduct now instead of fixing it up, what a shame.
Vincent – two main reasons why they are leaving the existing viaduct: First one is cost – they can squeeze another 20-30 years out of the old one, and if you can stage a large project, it usually is done that way, at least in NZ.
The main reason though is a northbound tunnel on the present SH1 will sit squarely where the southbound tunnel of the planned new Waitemata crossing will emerge. If the NZTA goes ahead with the bored tunnel options (2X3 lane road, and maybe 2X1 rail) and the tunnels become SH1 then the plan is that the AHB will revert to North Shore to CBD bound traffic only and will possibly lose its clip ons, or (hopefully) that the existing clip ons are dedicated to transit – the inside clip on lanes would be part of the busway, and the outside ones are ped/cycle. The clip ons would last a very long time with that kind of use, probably as long then as the main bridge! This would also be an excellent way of staging the busway before eventual upgrade to LRT and separate bored rail tunnels.
If the new road crossing happens, the Vic Park tunnel they are currently constructing for southbound traffic will have traffic in both directions from the Cook and Wellington St north facing ramps only that are heading to the North Shore via the smaller AHB.
However, now that Steven Joyce is keen on the bridge idea again, who knows how it will all turn out…